To start with I shall narrate a recent incident which throws a good deal of light in our reflection on religions in the context of the aspirations of the people.
Many of you may have read in the newspapers that the Dalits of Kerala organised a pilgrim march last month, from Trivandrum to the historic Temple at Guruvayur to protest against an age-old temple custom there—namely, the exclusive feeding of Brahmins as part of the temple ritual. This old custom is believed to be instituted by Adi Sankara. According to the codes laid down in the temple, the *Nivedyam* at the *Namaskara* puja should be offered to Lord Krishna only after a share of it is given to a Brahmin. The supposition is that the Brahmin is a representative of the Lord. The Dalit castes protest against this as they believe that these type of practices in their religion go against their aspiration to equal social status in society. They are religious practices of the old hierarchical feudal society, presided over by the Brahmin priests. They argue that such customs are carriers of caste consciousness. They maintain caste consciousness in the society and mediate it from generation to generation. They believe that it is more appropriate to the times to consider a poor Dalit as representative of the Lord. In any case a Dalit who had been called 'Harijan', son of God, by Gandhiji should not be excluded from the meals given to the Brahmins. Hence their demand that they should be seated with the Brahmins in the dining hall of the temple of this ritual meal.
The Dalits started their procession from the sacred Sri Padmanabha Swamy temple in Trivandrum on Feb. 1, 1983 with the blessings of Swami Anandathirtha, a disciple of Sri Narayana Guru. The marchers wore pilgrim garb. They worshipped in 52 temples *en route* before they reached the sacred temple of Guruvayur. The orthodox Hindus were faced with a serious problem. How could they abandon the age-old sacred custom of their temple? On the other hand, organisations such as Vishala Hindu Sammelan, Sarvodaya, supported the movement of the Dalits. In the end the parties agreed to a temporary measure to diffuse the situation. When the procession arrived at the portals of the Guruvayur temple, singing, 'Hare Rama, Hare Krishna', they were welcomed into the temple by the Devaswom authorities. They were served a meal in the dining hall but not the meal associated with *Namaskara puja* in the temple exclusively reserved for the Brahmins. But the temple authorities agreed to bring the demand of the Dalits before the managing committee in due course. The Chief Minister, Mr. Karunakaran, who was present on the occasion, made a statement. He said: 'The Government will not interfere in the sacred ritual traditions of the temple. As long as I am the Chief Minister it will not be allowed. The practice in dispute is part of the mode of worship in the temple. Whatever freedom I have the Harijans also should have. But I do not have certain freedom such as offering the flowers at the sacred feet of Guruvayurappan. It is simply not allowed.'
### Religion Aligned with Conflicting Social Interests
In this incident we have a clear instance of the aspirations of the Dalits to equal social status. They object to the exclusive feeding of Brahmins as they believe that these religious practices perpetuate caste consciousness among the people and prevent them from attaining social equality. But why is it that Mr. Karunakaran looks at it as a sacred religious tradition? He does not object to the ritual practice. He is happy with it. It is because the religious ritual in question in no way clashes with the interests and the social power of the upper castes to which he and the temple belong. In fact symbolic practices like Brahmin feeding in upper castes temples and homes
1 help them maintain a higher ritual status which in turn helps them to control all the major, rich and socially powerful temples all over the state. So here we have an instance of a religious institution in perfect harmony with the established order of power in society. On the other hand this religious institution, the consequent higher ritual status, and the social power are challenged by a community which aspires to equal social status and a share in social power. But we should note here that their protest also had taken a religious form. It was all started in the first place by Swami Anandathirtha, a disciple of Narayana Guru. The protest march was organised as a pilgrimage. The participants wore saffron clothes. It started from Sri Padmanabha Swamy Temple in Trivandrum. They worshipped in 52 temples on the way.
What do we find here? On one side we find an instance of the established religion in perfect alignment with the needs, interests and the power of the dominant group. On the other side we find an oppressed group using the same religion to protest against the dominant power and to express their needs and aspirations. Now this phenomenon of religion being in perfect alignment with the needs, interests and the power of the dominant group, and at the same time used by an oppressed group to protest against that dominance and express their aspirations, is not an isolated incident. Let us look at the history of the same region in the last hundred years. The movement under Sri Narayana Guru was essentially a movement of the backward classes to express their needs, interests and aspirations. It was a religious movement and was very much against the established interests and power of the upper castes in society aligned with the established religion. When Sri Narayana Guru was challenged on his authority to install the idols of Siva without the traditional *mantras* and *pujas* and the services of the Brahmin priests, he replied that he was installing Izhava Siva and not Brahmin Siva. Izhava Siva stood for the aspirations of the backward class people while Brahmin Siva with *mantra* and Brahmin priesthood stood for the established power of the upper castes in society.
The Dalit movement which started in Kerala in the middle of the 19th century, aspiring for freedom and economic justice was very much a religious movement supported by Christian missionaries against the established religions of Hinduism and Christianity aligned with the dominant power of the upper castes. The movement remained religious upto the middle of this century under the leadership of great Dalit leaders like K. P. Karuppan, Ayyaswami, Poyakayil Appachan, Subhananda Swamy and Ayyankali.
Another instance would be *Channer lahala* in the 19th century, among the Nadars in South Travancore. In the rest of India also we can find a number of religious movements aligning with the aspirations of the poor and the oppressed people in situations where the established religion had aligned with the dominant power. The Bhakti movement in Punjab and the peasant struggle against Muslim feudalists, the role of Tukaram and Ramdas in the liberation movement in Maharashtra under Shivaji; Sikhism's origin as an ideology of the anti-feudal struggle; Kabirpanthis, Wahabi movement, the Farazi sect, are just a few examples from recent Indian history.
2 These considerations bring us to the realisation of a historical truth about religions as socio-cultural historical realities: namely, they are *bi-polar in nature. Religious forces can get aligned with conflicting social interests in society.* When a religion attaches itself to concrete power interests in a society either to maintain the status quo or to change it, we say that religion is ideologised, that is, that religion plays the role of an ideology to promote the power interests of a particular section. A religion can be ideologised in favour of the rich and powerful sections of the people or it can be ideologised in favour of the poor and marginalised. For instance, when all the religious leadership in Kerala—Hindu, Muslim and Christian—joined together in 1959 with the Congress and the landlords to throw out the government of E.M.S. Namboodiripad, it was a manifestation of their ideological alignment in favour of the rich and powerful sections of the people of Kerala.
### Hope From a Noble Tradition
Here comes the big question. What is the present situation in India? Are our religions as socio-cultural realities ideologised in favour of the *status quo* situation? Or are they ideologised in favour of the aspirations of the poor, marginalised and oppressed sections of the people? Whose power interests do the religions serve? What is the nature of relationship between economic and political power on the one hand and the religious power on the other hand?
As far as I know there is no systematic study in this area, though all of us know of situations and incidents which tell their own story about which interest the religions are aligned with in this country.
Here I would say research institutions like CISRS could make an important contribution. Studies have to be done on each religious tradition with its regional complexities to find out whose social interests they promote. Such studies have to critically look into the meaning-producing symbolic universe of each particular religion and its institutional structure in the context of the aspirations of the people.
In the absence of any systematic study I have taken here a short cut to make an impressionistic assessment of religions in the context of the aspirations of the poor and the marginalised. In this connection let me draw your attention to another social phenomenon in our country. You may have come across people, particularly among the young, who stand for social change, who work for social justice and who get beaten up or even killed in the struggle of the Dalits and the poor working-class in our country. These people who are socially committed often do not appear to us to be very religious. Very often they themselves proclaim that they are not interested in religion if they are not openly hostile to religions. On the other hand we find that people who are religious—and this applies to the young also—are socially conservative, and they are less aware of the injustices in our society, less inclined to come out to support the struggles of the Dalits and the working class. How do we explain this social phenomenon? It goes to suggest that the established religions in our country tend to produce a type of religious consciousness among the masses which is socially conservative and which supports the *status quo*. The people who come out of such a consciousness do so on two grounds:
1. They feel that the type of religious consciousness generated by the symbolic universe of the established religions among the masses is helpful to the rich and powerful sections to conceal the economic and political realities in this country. Religion is an additional arm of their domination. One can bring in a lot of empirical data to support this assessment of theirs.
2. They feel that the social and institutional structures of the established religions are aligned to the interests and power of the dominant and rich sections of the people. In other words, the institutional structures of the established religions are ideologised in favour of the established power in the society. Here too we have substantial empirical evidence to corroborate this view.
If these two charges are true we can expect very little from the established religions in the context of the aspirations of the poor and the marginalised people.
However I do not want you to forget the other side of the picture. It tells of the presence of people like Swami Anandathirtha in religions. Their number may not be in millions but they constitute a small but significant minority in our religions. They have an ancestry as old as religions themselves. They form a long line of men and women who sang for the poor, who lived and died for the poor. And even today a significant minority in all religions is inspired and encouraged by this noble tradition in religions which is the hope religions hold out to the poor in the context of their aspirations.
Moreover I would argue that even in the case of our religious youngsters who have committed themselves to the cause of the poor, their deep concern for the cause of the poor is culturally produced by religious myths, stories and symbols, while their anger against established religions have come to them from the social analysis of the society and their disappointment with the so called religious people.
### Problem of Social Power Among Religions
Now I come to the third point of my paper. Here I would like to draw your attention to a problem. I have earlier talked about the possibility of religions being ideologised in favour of the aspirations of the poor. But in a country where a plurality of religions confront one another it poses the additional complex problem of social power among the religions themselves. The ideological commitment in favour of the poor practised through the symbolic medium of any one particular religion should be detached from the power interests of that religion. The suspicion created by liberation theology and the recent conversion of some Dalits to Islam make us aware of the possibility of manipulating even genuine steps within religions by the vested interests.
3
In the context of India this problem deserves serious attention; failure to understand this problem might result in the aspirations of the poor being sacrificed on the altars of religions as it is already happening in parts of the country.
Let me now come to the fourth point of my paper. The religious person struggles for the poor without the interest of power. In this context I would like to bring to your attention a recently published little book. Its author is Sr. Vandana and it is entitled *Social Justice and Ashrams*. To people who have a religious definition of reality and whose commitment to the poor is genuine, this book has something important to say: namely, that the struggle for the poor and the oppressed cannot be sustained without contemplation of God. Religious contemplation alone can help the people to make the necessary self-criticism without which all movements to create a better society tend to dehumanise the humanisers.
This agrees with what we have said earlier that a struggle for the poor remains religious so long as it is detached from interests of power for oneself or one's group. The moment it is attached to power it plays the role of ideology. The supreme example in history of a deliberate option for the poor and the marginalised without the reward of power is Jesus Christ. A recent example would be the religio-cultural revolution brought about by Sri Narayana Guru in favour of the backward classes in Kerala. A religious revolution attached to power produces figures like Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran which is the reason we are against religion playing the role of an ideology.
In conclusion, I would say that a religious person has to be continuously critical of religions in the context of the aspirations of the poor and the oppressed because established religions tend to play the role of ideologies and conform to the established power. On the other hand, we should remember that it is difficult to imagine the possibility of sustaining an argument or a human enterprise for the dignity of man and his inviolable nature in history without a religious vision of man. And religion alone gives man the courage to struggle for others without the reward of power.