Should public celebrations or expression of devotion be avoided?

Has India always been so demonstrative about religion?

Tanika Sarkar: India has always been fairly demonstrative. This is especially where Hindu festivals and ceremonies are concerned because they are more numerous and varied than the religious festivals of other communities. But this phenomenon has grown. For instance, during the latter half of the year, we start with Navratri, followed by Dussehra, Karwa Chauth, Deepavali, Govardhan Puja, Chhath Puja, and so on. During this entire time, the atmosphere is noisy and traffic comes to a standstill. Festivals were always there, but they are now increasing in number.

Isn’t this a celebration of life and positivity?

Tanika Sarkar: Yes, but this brings civic life to a standstill and takes over public places. Ambulances carrying patients can’t proceed an inch. I don’t think that is a celebration of positivity. I am also thinking of the crackers and the restrictions removed this year. Delhi, where I live, hasn’t been the same since then.

The examples you gave are essentially of Hindu festivals. But the minorities are not above board. Post-2020, most mosques have started having multiple service sessions on Fridays to avoid worshippers spilling onto the road outside. But why did community leaders need COVID-19 to practise what should have been done earlier?

Tanika Sarkar: That is true. When the azaan is being chanted in the morning, loudspeakers broadcast bhajans. It has become competitive.

Sanjay Hegde: On this mosque and azaan question, I understand that the call to prayer has to be made, but it is a cacophony when several mosques within a few meters of each other start at different times. Community leaders should intervene so that the azaan can be broadcast once from one central place. Today, nothing prevents a mosque from broadcasting, say, on a WhatsApp group. And this is true of all communities. We need to take into account the old proverb that an Englishman’s freedom ends where a Frenchman’s nose begins. Be careful of your neighbours’ welfare and their sensitivities.

The Constitution allows us to follow our religion and practice it. But where does one draw a line, legally speaking?

Sanjay Hegde: Legally speaking, your religious practices are protected, but it is only those practices which are essential to the religion, and not necessarily everything which is of a religious nature. For instance, if I were to take the example of a Hindu temple, the performance of a puja is essential — that cannot be stopped. However, if the government directs the administration to ensure that the ghee and oil used for the lamps are of good quality, that is certainly a matter that can be regulated. Equally, you can regulate religious practices on grounds of public order. There was the Anand Margi case from Calcutta [early 1980s]. The Anand Margis said it was an essential religious practice to take out a public procession with a skull, a dagger, etc. The Supreme Court said, no, you are not a separate religion; you are a sect of Hinduism. It was claimed that the Tandava dance was an essential religious practice. And the judges said you have not shown any proof that this started with the foundation of your sect; this is a later innovation. So the test that the courts adopt is that of an essential religious practice.

If you are talking of Islam, I don’t think anyone can regulate the prayer itself, or even the call to prayer. But if you were to regulate the noise regarding the prayer call, or say that in an area, only one mosque will broadcast the azaan, I don’t think a court would interfere or say that every mosque could have a separate call.

In recent years, there seems to be greater display of religion in public places. How far removed is that from Holi, Deepavali or even Ram Navami celebrations during the age of the Mughals and the British?

Tanika Sarkar: Do I dare say that greater licence is given to Hindu religious festivals? I’m talking not about daily religious practices, but festivals now seem to take place throughout the entire year. Karwa Chauth used to be a domestic festival. Now there are melas and processions being carried out with even the Prime Minister giving messages.

That is politicisation of religion…

Tanika Sarkar: It is politicisation of religion when you display it in public relentlessly, with noise, fanfare, psychedelic lights, and crowds. Delhi is just saturated.

Not just Delhi. We have visuals from Ahmedabad where people are dancing on Navaratri at the airport and the airlines staff are joining them. How does one handle that?

Tanika Sarkar: I don’t think anyone is going to handle that. They have a licence — not a formal legal licence, but a political licence.

What you are effectively saying is what the Constitution grants us as freedom has now been turned into a licence.

TanikaSarkar: I would say that.

People now have stickers of an angry Hanuman on their cars. Is that kind of public display of religion about religiosity or is it about sending a message to others?

Sanjay Hegde: I don’t think this is religiosity. Religiosity, spiritualism, and one’s personal quest towards the almighty is a different thing altogether. This is religious consolidation. It is a display of ‘I am on this team’ and ‘I am not on that team’. Is it more apparent in society? Yes. If you read E.M. Foster’s Passage to India, he speaks of the British administration’s problem when there were competing processions of Moharram and Ganesh Chaturthi. Our society has been consolidating around religious identity.

Is the celebration of Prophet Muhammad’s birthday through a procession part of the reaction of minorities to demonstrative celebrations of Ganesh Chaturthi and so on?

Tanika Sarkar: It is competitive. It is also a question of hurt sentiments. You can shout ‘Jai Shri Ram’ during any procession, but you can’t hold up a poster saying, ‘I love Muhammad’; that could lead to violence. So, there is a feeling of discrimination. That leads to, on the Muslim part, I suppose, stepping up the religious ostentation. This conflict was evident from the 1920s — playing music in front of mosques at prayer time, taking a procession outside them with loud bhajans, etc. often led to riots.

People enjoy immunity no matter what they do?

Tanika Sarkar: Yes. And there is no immunity to minorities. People are being prevented from going to church or even from holding prayer meetings in their own homes in places such as Chhattisgarh. Religion is increasingly becoming a means of everyday intimidation.

What does this say about our polity?

Sanjay Hegde: Our political leaders have followed the same principle of divide and rule that our previous rulers followed. As long as you can convince the majority that they are actually a hurt minority, or you can convince the minority that but for the protection of one set of people, they would be at the mercy of the majority, you consolidate your camps. And the great mass who are actually apolitical tend to get pushed into respective corners.

So, is it time for rational religiosity?

Tanika Sarkar: That has been eroded substantially.

Listen to the conversation