At the Express Dialogues-A Mini Conclave, organised by The New Indian Express (TNIE), Karnataka, recently, author-historian Vikram Sampath discussed his latest book “Waiting For Shiva: Unearthing The Truth of Kashi’s Gyan Vapi”, and how History needs to be viewed, at a session, ‘Waiting for Shiva...A Hindutva Narrative’, with Editor of The New Indian Express and The Morning Standard, Santwana Bhattacharya, and Deputy Resident Editor, Karnataka, Nirad Mudur.
Excerpts:
Santwana Bhattacharya: How did you specifically come to the pursuit of writing history? What was that journey like for you?
Vikram Sampath: It was serendipity. I never planned to take up history. My interest grew despite a disdain for the subject in school, spurred by Mr Sanjay Khan's portrayal of the Mysore Royal family in the show The Sword of Tipu Sultan. After a dull corporate job post-MBA, my life changed course with my second book Gauhar Jaan, leading me to leave my job for four years of academic research in Brisbane. I believe the more you surrender and become a willing instrument to the universal forces, the more fulfilling your path becomes. This philosophy even applies to my current book. I was in the midst of writing a serious biography of Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan, which is nearly finished and by chance I met Mr Vishnu Shankar Jain, an advocate in the Kashi Gyanvapi case, at a literature festival. He shared with me a wealth of historical information unknown to the masses and suggested I write a series of articles. However, after reviewing the material, I realised it deserved more than a series of articles - it needed a full-length book with serious study. The case itself has been a matter of contestation, not just 20 or 30 years back, but right from the 19th century, around 1810 onwards. There were bloody riots in Varanasi that shook the city, and British courts are filled with documents detailing how both communities were constantly jostling and fighting with each other.
SB: In Hinduism, everyday worship involves a deep personal connection with deities, like Shiva in Kashi, which often transcends being just a symbol in rituals. Do you think there's a risk that this intimate, comfortable, and enchanting relationship could be jeopardised by the Hindutva narrative?
VS: The question presupposes two things. Firstly, it assumes that this reclamation is a recent phenomenon, as if suddenly a group of people gathered in one room, conspiring to stir up hatred and enmity. Interpreting what you said, it's as though they are deliberately boiling this cauldron of hatred. In my book, I've highlighted the continuous efforts of reclaiming significant sites, dating back to the 12th century. For instance, when the Vishwanath Mandir was demolished by Aurangzeb in 1669, Jijabai (Chatrapathi Shivaji’s mother) reportedly told Shivaji that his life's goal should be to reclaim this site at any cost. This became a central theme for the Maratha Samrajya throughout the 18th century. In my book, I discuss how they constantly negotiated with various powers — the Mughals, the Nawab of Awadh, the East India Company, figures like Warren Hastings and even Lord Cornwallis. This leads to questions: Is this Hindutva? Is it a rupture? Or is it a part of our history, something ingrained in us? This isn't a recent conflict; it's a story that's been unfolding for generations. Politicians and media might exploit it, but as a historian, my focus is on presenting facts in an engaging, relatable narrative. Regarding your second assumption about personal spirituality: The notion that Hinduism is non-congregational and desegregated is being challenged. Hinduism does not follow a one-size-fits-all approach. For some, it might be an internal journey or personal prayer, while for others, it involves participating in congregational events like the Char Dham Yatra, the 51 Shakti Peethas, the 12 Jyotirlingas, Kumbh Mela, or Maha Maga. These are all examples of collective religious expression. Why then do we perceive this as a new phenomenon?
SB: For many, Kashi's significance extends beyond the Gyan Vapi Temple, encompassing its ghats, each uniquely symbolic of Hindu life, and the flow of the Ganga. Kashi evokes diverse sentiments, not just as a site of conflict but as a continuum of history and tradition….
VS: Are they mutually exclusive? We can still reclaim the Kashi Vishwanath temple and feel passionately for the ghats. If there had been such passion for the ghats over these 75 years, the Ganga would not be in the state it's in today. The ghats have only now been beautified. All those people who said, 'What's the point of building a temple in Ayodhya; build a hospital, build a school’, where is the development? Today, just a few months after its inauguration, over one crore people have visited. For the first time, an airport and a railway station have been built there. So, setting aside religion, ritual, and all that, even from an economic perspective, from a spiritual tourism perspective, why were these places left to deteriorate, especially in the northern belt, in utter squalor and dirt? Nobody recognised that this was our soft power, that we have important sites which could attract pilgrims not only from all over India but potentially from abroad. And the same governments that claim we are a very secular nation have no qualms in controlling Hindu temples and educational institutions. So, if we are truly secular, then the government should not be involved in running any religious institution. They should get out of it. Yet, in our own state, there are taxes — which I think the Governor has refused to sign into law — on temples with revenue of more than one crore. In Tamil Nadu, there are more than 40,000 temples and mutts under government control. How does that align with our broader image of secularism? If you claim to be truly secular and don't want to interfere - keeping the church and state separate - then how can you explain this control? Here, every political party - including the BJP in Karnataka when they were in power - has spoken grandly about liberating all the temples. But no one wants to give up control because of the revenue it brings, their ministers, their families on trust boards, and so on. Hindu temples can have non-Hindus on their Trust Board. These are larger issues, rooted in history but also flowing into contemporary society and politics, unfortunately.
Nirad Mudur: As a historian, how do you purport to provide an accurate version of history? This question arises especially given the recent revisions we have seen in history textbooks and syllabi, part of an overarching effort to correct historical interpretations.
VS: I wouldn't be so arrogant as to claim that I am correcting something. A famous historian once said, "Every work of history is an interim report." It is always a work in progress; new evidence comes up. So, I might have written the most well-researched, well-written book on a particular subject. Suppose you find something new and discover something new, which I have either intentionally ignored or didn't have the capacity to research thoroughly. My thesis could be completely overturned, and my book might end up in the dustbin. Your book might become the new narrative on that subject. So, it's not 'correcting'. What I'd like to say is, it's presenting an alternative version of history.
NM: Doesn't bias work in the background?
VS: It does. Every person, whether we are in media, writing, in the public domain, artists, none of us is free from any bias. We can say we are independent, but an element of bias about what we hold very true to ourselves naturally creeps in. That is especially true for writers of non-fiction and history. How to cut off that emotional cord and keep the distance from a subject in which you're so emotionally invested becomes a huge challenge. About the history books, yeah, these will become (political) playgrounds all the time. Every time, depending on whether the Congress or BJP comes to power, Rana Pratap will either win or lose the Haldighati battle; Tipu Sultan will be in the textbook or he'll be out of it. So I think this nonsense will keep continuing. And I think that is where a lot of us in civil society also need to tell there has to be some pressure groups. We need to create pressure groups. This subject is so fundamental to our understanding of who we are as a nation. It's a mirror in which we can identify ourselves. So it is much more than just that, and that is why politicians use it.
NM: History does have the potential to become a political tool for parties to achieve their objectives. We often say, 'the victor writes the history'. And if that's the starting point, then aren't you at the risk of repeating that mistake?
VS: Right from the times of Royals, Kings used to commission biographies and works, and people wrote to please the ruler. History has always been the handmaiden of the ruler. And so, the version of history that has been fed to us so far has been the ruler's version. Today's alternative version is actually the so-called subaltern version, which suggests there is another lens to it. And as I said, invariably, these issues do get politicised. So, for that sake, does it mean we shouldn't be writing anything? That is probably unfortunate, but inevitable.
NM: Places of worship under dispute in Jerusalem and those in India have had very different intensities, but also some echoes. Historians have drawn parallels, and you too have written about it. It has often been said that the Hindutva narrative is actually inspired by the Abrahamic narrative, suggesting that it 'semite-ises' Hinduism. Do you realise the danger and the irony in that?
VS: I may not completely agree with that assertion. I believe the dichotomy between Hinduism and Hindutva is a more recent phenomenon. First, there's debate over whether something called Hinduism even exists. We need to define it. Sanatana Dharma encompasses a broad spectrum, including atheism. In Hinduism, you can be an atheist without the fear of blasphemy or hellfire for denouncing a deity. It's also probably the only surviving pagan faith with a divine feminine aspect. We have these grandstanding principles of Ekam Sat Vipra Bahudha Vadanti, meaning there's one truth, multiple paths to it, and all of that. These are very esoteric, high principles. But, while the esoteric nature of that is on one side, we also live in a real world. This highly evolved worldview may come into conflict or contact with worldviews which say there is only one path to the truth, no multiple paths. If you do not belong to this, it's our bounden duty to either destroy you or bring you to our fold, destroying your sites, your everything. This continues even now; it's not a mediaeval project that's over, but a continuing narrative worldwide. Historically, Hindutva has served two roles. First, as a form of Hinduism providing resistance and protection without being the aggressor. Second, as a force for reform. Contrary to beliefs that Hindutva is rigid and regressive, it contradicts its very logic. Few of us would associate Savarkar's call for a casteless society with Hindutva, for instance. He advocated inter-caste dining in the 1930s, inter-caste marriages, and a ban on untouchability in schools. This was limited to Ratnagiri, where he was interned, but it was a project worthy of exploration. Hindutva naturally translates to reform and a casteless society, which it has always been. That also is a very misunderstood idea, that it's some upper caste project run by a few people.
FROM THE AUDIENCE
[Ricky Kej, Three-time Grammy award-winning musician]: Vikram, you said that history is an interim report and what is going on is constantly evolving. So, in such a book, when did you realise, 'Okay, it’s done now, and it can go out into the world'?
VS: I was actually waiting until the ASI report came out… and the ASI report just didn’t come out for the longest period of time. It was 800 pages. I would urge people to go and read it. I literally had to understand what it was to put it out in the appendix. They have used all the modern technology, ground-penetrating radar, handheld X-ray spectrometer, differential global positioning systems, to show what all the sub-structures were, and what the dating of the organic objects which were there. That too was dubbed as Hindutva by some political parties. I mean, radar cannot be Hindutva or Islamist; it is science, it has to speak the truth. So, I was waiting only for that. Recently, the Supreme Court, including the honourable Chief Justice of India himself, refused to stay the puja in the cellar of the mosque. So, it’s an evolving story. I think, when the final verdict of the case comes, which gets cleared in June, maybe then there should be another edition, depending on whichever way the case goes – pro-temple, anti-temple, whatever. But it will be a document of the closure of this entire story. The last word is never said until it is over.
Q: How old is Kashi as we see it today? Is it the16th century, or further down?
VS: The temple per se is 18th century. So, most of Kashi that we see today is the Maratha construction, all the ghats, all the structures, even the temple that was built there is off by a hillock by Volker in 1777. And the best part is, it was gold plated by Maharaja Ranjit Singh, in 1839 or so. And today, people say Hindus and Sikhs are different, and so many things, but even the greatest Punjab ruler, Sikh Maharaja Ranjit Singh, showed his reverence and gold-plated the Kashi Vishwanath Mandir. A lot of the structure today of Kashi is 18th century. But then you have all the paths of the Sanatana Dharma — Shaivism, Vaishnavism, all of those. But at the centre of all of that, there is an epicenter, just as you have in an atom you have electrons and protons, but at the center, you do have the nucleus, and that nucleus in Kashi Vishwanath as all the other things are good, but the primordial importance of that place comes from Vishwanath, and all others revolve around this centripetal force of that place. It is probably the oldest surviving city in the world, which has everyone including Mark Twain, and others have said it is 'older than legend'. So the ethos is timeless, but the physical structures are probably not older than the 18th century. Everything is post-Aurangzeb, which is after 1707.
Q: History is science, which tells you exactly if you want to look back, honestly, who you are and from where you came. So why is it becoming such an emotional and divided issue? Why can’t it be a scientific interpretation of who we are?
VS: There’s a small effort I have taken in this regard to establish a private organisation called the Foundation for Indian Historical and Cultural Research. And the idea there is multifold. Like you said … let the evidence speak for itself. Now, what is evidence in the case of history writing? You go to, of course, not just archaeology but also literary sources. Now, when you go to literary sources, we've had celebrated historians of ancient India who proudly claim, "I don't know anything of Sanskrit. I don't know Pali. I don't know Prakrit. I don't know Tamil, I don't know all the classical languages." So, our history is hidden in those languages, in those texts, if you're looking at literary evidence, other than archaeology. Similarly, people who are celebrated mediaeval Indian historians proudly say, "I don't know Arabic and Persian." So, what is my window? I'm looking at a pinhole, to a 5000 years of civilization through this pinhole of English translations done by somebody, mostly Westerners, with their blinkered views or inadequate understanding of language, especially Sanskrit. One word can mean multiple meanings, depending on the context. So even here, like we had the discussion Linga, Shivalinga. Oh, it is ‘phallus worship’. It is the worship of the male organ. No, it's not the male organ. It is actually the word in Sanskrit which says it is a signifier of something else. The actual Sanskrit word for the male organ is Shishna. The Westerners looked at it as a fertility god. Nobody who's going to a Kashi Vishwanath or putting water on a Shivlinga is saying, "I'm doing this to bear children," and fertility ideas come into anybody's mind. So, you need to access the literature of the times in the original languages. So, me as a modern historian, for me to learn Sanskrit, Prakrit, Pali, Persian, Arabic, it may take me a couple of lifetimes. And Sanskrit pundits have never used their Sanskrit knowledge for historical research. They've used it for grammar fights, philosophy and all of that. So, I thought of this idea: why don't we create multidisciplinary groups where a modern historian collaborates with a Sanskrit pundit, with a Pali-Prakrit scholar, or a geologist and archaeologist, whatever, a portion on specific projects, which we would investigate. These would be historical themes which are of broad, contemporary relevance, like some of these not just academic research for the sake of academic research, but also define a lot of contemporary themes. And then the outputs could be multiple; it could be popular books, it could be journal articles, it could be through the larger social media network. Now, you can disseminate information in multiple ways, but the hard work of actually cooking the dish, vegetables, cutting them, chopping them, and cooking them is the tough part, then that could be garnished and served in multiple ways to different people. So, this is something which we just started. And we hope that we'll incubate these specific projects in educational institutions, with scholars of various fields and have this multidisciplinary talk. An archaeologist seldom talks to a historian; there is so much of an ego battle between the two, though they're so allied. Science, as you said, it's also a social science; you need other elements of social studies to come into the fray for the complete picture to the extent possible. And so, that is why I've started this and from May or June of this year, we hope to operationalize it in a small way.