Have Hindus passed the test by letting Droupadi Murmu enter Ram temple? Not yet

Have Hindus passed the test by letting Droupadi Murmu enter Ram temple? Not yet

President Droupadi Murmu’s visit to the sanctum sanctorum of the Ram temple in Ayodhya on 29 April might seem like another move on the colossal chessboard of electoral politics. One may argue that this action has been orchestrated by the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Vishwa Hindu Parishad, and close allies of the Bharatiya Janata Party to silence critics, particularly after Congress leader Rahul Gandhi alleged that the ruling party did not allow the President to go to the temple’s pran pratishtha function.

But to me, this is more than politics. This is a historic moment, with a larger impact on Indian society, especially the Hindu community. Rahul Gandhi’s allegation was unfound—there is ample evidence, both digital and otherwise, that the trust did extend an invitation to Murmu, who couldn’t attend the event for unspecified reasons. Nevertheless, the impression that she was not invited persisted.

Her visit to the inner core of the temple, which is accessible only to male Brahmin priests, was, undoubtedly, a political statement, but I see it in a larger frame. Historically, Hindu temples have upheld notions of purity and profanity on the basis of caste, with certain groups restricted from touching the deity. There are Agama rules that command communities on what they can and can’t do.

There was a time, not in the distant past, when even roads leading to temples had restricted access as in the case of Vaikom in Kerala. A significant agitation, Vaikom Satyagraha (1924-25), involving figures like Periyar and MK Gandhi, arose to tackle the issue.

The Jagannath Temple in Puri presented a curious case in this regard. Many lowered castes, including Pirali Brahmins, were denied entry into the temple. Incidentally, Rabindranath Tagore, a Pirali and thus considered a member of a degraded community within Bengal’s caste hierarchy, was also denied entry. BR Ambedkar faced a similar situation in July 1945.

However, this rule was eventually changed after India became independent, with figures like Gandhi playing a significant role in this reform. In her paper, Aarti Kumari Panda wrote: “Though during this lifetime in next few months, Gandhi could not see the Harijans entering the Jagannath temple, but after his death on the memorable day of the immersion of Gandhi’s ashes in the ocean at Puri (Swargadwara), the Jagannath temple was thrown open to the Harijans under the pressure of public opinion. That day no priest of the temple dare to oppose the move. Thus the long cherished dream and desire of Gandhi was fulfilled.”

Now, Murmu’s entry into the inner core of the Ram Temple was celebrated and made a spectacle by the entire Hindu establishment and broadcast live on media platforms for the nation to witness.

Reform in the ’30s

Let’s rewind to 1930 when Ambedkar led a movement in Nashik, fighting for Dalits’ rights to enter Kalaram Temple. Despite fierce clampdowns, this movement persisted for five long years, eventually leading to a breakthrough and marking a significant shift in societal norms.

Similarly, before the success of the Kalaram Temple entry movement, VD Savarkar took a remarkable step by building the Patit Pavan Temple in Ratnagiri in 1931. Unlike traditional temples that restricted entry based on caste, this one welcomed all Hindus, including Dalits. It was a radical move that broke down barriers and created a more inclusive religious space. Savarkar stressed the urgency of ending untouchability among Hindus, asking the community to see its eradication as their foremost moral duty.

Now, the question is, how does one make sense of these events that are separated by decades? To me, this has indeed been a spectacular journey from the Hindu orthodoxy throwing stones at the lowered caste devotees to Hindutva politicians welcoming Dalits and tribals in temples.

Political Hinduism or Hindutva is more liberal than orthodox sanskari Hinduism, and it’s easy to accelerate the reform process in the latter through negotiations with political Hindus.

In Annihilation of Caste (1935), Ambedkar proposed reforms within Hinduism, including abolishing hereditary priesthood. He emphasised the importance of democratising temples as well.

During the Kalaram temple entry movement, Ambedkar asked whether high-caste Hindus were willing to grant Dalits their long-denied rights, and if they saw them as equals. He stated that the success of the satyagraha depended on their willingness to embrace equality. “Our real problem is not going to be solved by the entry into the Ram Temple. It will not bring about any radical change in our life. But this is a test to judge the high caste Hindu mind,” he said.

Passing the test

Should we now say that Hindus have passed the test? Not yet, actually.

Until priesthood is opened for all castes, and birth-based endogamous caste system withers away, reform will remain incomplete. But I am not a pessimist—I think reform is a process. Ambedkar almost hinted that revolution is a historical impossibility in India. Hindu society must change, reform, and evolve. Savarkar knew this much before other Hindu leaders. Building the Patit Pavan Temple was an effort directed toward this process.

What is the possibility that the BJP and RSS will succeed in their endeavour to mitigate the fault lines of the Hindu social order? They know that it is important politically, as there is the least possibility that Muslims will vote for it. There are 101 seats where Muslim population is more than 20 per cent. So, the BJP needs Hindu unity to overcome this shortfall. That too in a caste-ridden religious society.

That makes Hindutva politicians more likely to go for reform, reconciliation, and samarasata. The BJP-RSS approach isn’t a complete break from the old Brahminical Hindu social order. Instead, it represents a continuum of reform within Hindu society. While caste and hierarchy persist at a broader level, there’s a shift toward allowing participation in common spaces without overt exclusion.

When Prime Minister Narendra Modi set out to inaugurate the Ram Temple, the Hindu orthodoxy, including some Shankaracharyas, criticised it, citing concerns about him touching the idols. Interestingly, secular parties and leaders supported orthodox leaders, reflecting a global trend where liberals use religion to oppose the Right, making the reform agenda of the RSS more difficult.

The Ram Temple trust invited many lowered caste Jajmans to the ceremony, but it hasn’t appointed a Dalit priest yet. Now it has welcomed a tribal woman inside the sanctum sanctorum of the Ram Temple.

I wish the RSS good luck if it genuinely aims to purge the scripturally ordained Hindu social order.

Dilip Mandal is the former managing editor of India Today Hindi Magazine, and has authored books on media and sociology. He tweets @Profdilipmandal. Views are personal.

(Edited by Humra Laeeq)