Google Kumbh Mela and the images that pop up are of naked Naga sadhus coated in ash, long matted locks flying as they rush headlong into the river. The accompanying text is invariably “the largest Hindu pilgrimage of faith”. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, addressing a gathering of academics, activists and politicians at the Ujjain Simhastha Kumbh 2016, put it in another context altogether.
The Kumbh, he said, is not so much a religious adventure as a social review. Traditionally, saints and intellectuals – the thought leaders of society – would gather on the riverbank on the sidelines of the Kumbh to discuss social progress and changes over the past 12 years and to set a sort of agenda for the next 12 years. Over time, the tradition was undermined and the Kumbh reduced to a set of rituals. The Vichar Mahakumbh at the Ujjain Simhastha, he said, is a modern edition of an old tradition. A forum where new ideas could be debated and the general direction of social welfare efforts discussed. An agenda had emerged in the form of a 51-point Simhastha Declaration, which the saints would hopefully disseminate to their followers.
IS the PM seeking to move beyond identity politics? More likely, he is simply implying that the Left-liberal tendency to dismiss tradition as fundamentally obscurantist betrays a lack of understanding of the Indian ethos. The idea of India, modern yet rooted in tradition, must be presented to the world in terms that it understands.
The takeaway from the discourse is that Modi’s idea of India is one in which tradition and modernity are not necessarily polar opposites. At a time when liberalism, capitalism and democracy are a given, the dialectical approach to tradition and modernity must emphasise synthesis over conflict. Tradition, after all, is not inflexible and cannot be allowed to stand in the way of progress. For example, Modi observed, tradition once declared overseas travel taboo; now, Indians traverse the world in search of new ideas and in the pursuit of economic progress.
Modi’s approach appeared to be a departure from the revivalism that has been attributed to the RSS narrative so far. He does not hark back to a golden age of Hindu culture, nor does he expect one to materialise anytime soon. The past stabilises the present, but the present alone determines the future. Tradition is useful when it can be fashioned to suit modern context and jettisoned if it does not. For instance, sacrifice of individual needs for the greater good of the collective is part of everday dhamma, or code of conduct. Former PM Lal Bahadur Shastri tapped into that tradition when he asked people to sacrifice one meal a day at a time when food was scarce. Similarly, Modi pointed out, he had asked the well-off to surrender their cooking gas subsidy. One crore Indians obliged, enabling him to launch the Ujjwala Yojana, which provides free cooking gas for three crore rural households and liberates women from the highly polluting wood-fired chullahs.
Is the PM seeking to move beyond identity politics? More likely, he is simply implying that the Left-liberal tendency to dismiss tradition as fundamentally obscurantist betrays a lack of understanding of the Indian ethos. The idea of India, modern yet rooted in tradition, must be presented to the world in terms that it understands. The Kumbh, generally regarded as a concourse of Hindu exotica, should be seen rather as a managerial exercise par excellence – a case study in organising mass gatherings of 60 million people or more (in other words, the entire population of several small countries put together). Certainly, the exemplary management of waste and garbage disposal and traffic at Ujjain must be acknowledged (in keeping with the Indian tradition, however, chief organiser Anil Madhav Dave castigated the invitees for “wasting 200 kg of food!”).
In sum, said the PM, India must market itself in ways that appeal to the modern world. That Modi addressed his call for developing scientific temper to a gathering of spiritual leaders is significant. He emphasised that they must call upon all sections of society to implement an ecologically sound development agenda, irrespective of caste and community and reach out “even to those who are not religious”.
Two interesting developments are worth mentioning. First, the obvious effort to engage with the Buddhist world. Hence, the presence of Buddhist representatives from south and south-east Asia, who were given prominence on the dais. It was an exercise in cultural diplomacy, aligning India with Buddhists across nations, but perhaps the objective was also to counter “Ambedkar-ite Buddhism”, which is opposed to the Right. The proposed Buddhist University at Sanchi, staffed by monks from Sri Lanka, Thailand, etc is doubtless part of that effort.
Second, the importance given to social activists from the field; not your page three brigade, but youngsters working in far-flung villages across the country who presented their experiences through discussions on climate change, agriculture, etc. Naturally, there was a session on women’s empowerment. In Modi’s view, liberating women from old-style, polluting chullahs was empowerment in itself. On the other hand, the ratio of women present was less than 1:7, arguing a skewed approach to gender parity. The next Vichar Kumbh or “social review”, must take note.
