 |
||
|
||
|
||
Kumbh Nagar - The politics of the Shankaracharyas is getting curiouser: One whole-heartedly opposes the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, another is neutral and the third, of a lesser status, is completely with the VHP. The maha mandeleswars of various akharas also are a fractious lot. Thus, despite the Sangh Parivar's projections, the Hindu Samaj or the Sant Samaj remains as disunited as ever.
This is the season for politics, even for sadhus. Swaroopananda Saraswati, the Shankaracharya of Dwaraka and Badrinath who is close to former PM Narasimha Rao and had headed the parallel Ramalaya Trust, told The Times of India he has his own idea of a Ram temple at Ayodhya. He denounced the VHP's Dharam Sansad as nothing but politicking: There is no difference between the BJP, the VHP and the RSS. When the temple votary gets agitated, the VHP says it will build the temple, and when the people are quieter, the BJP says the Ram temple is not on its agenda, says Swaroopananda.
As the chief of two peeths, Swaroopananda carries weight and hence caused VHP working president Ashok Singhal to try and bridge the old breach between the former and the VHP. He even fixed an appointment with Swaroopananda on Wednesday at 9 pm, but then did not turn up.
Bang opposite Swaroopananda's opulent camp is that of the more modest Puri Shankaracharya, Nishchalananda. He was contacted by Singhal, VHP president V H Dalmiya and vice- president Giriraj Kishore, but Nishchalanda is non- committal. Yes, he wants the temple but will not say that he is with the VHP. He also will not condemn the VHP. His position is the temple should be built through talks with the Muslims. About his support to the VHP decision to announce the date of construction, Nishchalananda merely says, ``Let them first get the land.'' But he advises: Announce the date after serious contemplation.
Nishchalananda's curious neutrality is most evident from his stand - the Congress should, with the BJP's support, get a parliamentary resolution adopted for the temple construction. And the temple should not be constructed by force. But he will not comment on Swaroopananda's allegation that the VHP is ``political''.
Of the four Shankaracharyas of Puri, Dwaraka, Badrinath and Sringeri peeths, the Sringeri chief has traditionally avoided the Kumbh and is not expected here. He normally stays away from politics. But in Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati of Kanchi peeth, the Sangh Parivar has found a mainstay for legitimacy. But then, Kanchi is only an up- peeth (subordinate seat).
There is no clear hierarchy among the thousands of sadhus who roam the Mela ground. For instance, during the holiest of holy dips, the shahi snans, the akharas will not let even the Shankaracharyas take a dip, because they are keen to get the best slot for their own acharyas (head of the sect). In this melee, Shankaracharyas stand no chance, and keep away on the `holy dip' days.
There is an All-India Akhara Parishad that coordinates between 13 akharas, mainly during the Mela. But even this body is not representative of the Sant Samaj. Two sadhus belonging to the Parishad have made statements against the VHP, but the Parivar takes solace from the fact that the Akhara Parishad officially has not adopted any resolution against the VHP. Also, the Parivar has already roped in several acharyas who rank higher than the middle-level sadhus who have spoken out against the VHP.
This makes one thing clear: The
VHP trump card is the Ram temple, which no sadhu worth his kamandal can
oppose. Yet, divergent views do prevail among all sectors of the Hindu
congregation here.
|
||
|
||
|
||