Most Indians were gratified to hear that J.M. Lyngdoh had been awarded the Magsaysay Prize. But should that mean that the (doubtless overworked) Chief Election Commissioner should rest on his laurels, ignoring his primary responsibility — namely the duty to conduct polls in a timely manner? Yet that is just what is happening in Kerala. A by-election became necessary to the Ernakulam Lok Sabha seat following the death of George Eden. Voting was scheduled for September 23. Yet, astonishingly, the counting of votes will not be taken up until September 29. This would have been unacceptable even in the days when paper ballots had to be counted by hand, but we are now in the age of the electronic voting machine. (Unlike the United States, which judging by the ongoing shenanigans in California, has learned nothing after the fiasco in Florida three years ago!) Even more surprising, however, is the equanimity with which all the parties concerned have accepted this snail-like behaviour. (Truly amazing in a state so politicised that hiring a contractor to build an annexe to your own house requires complex negotiations!) Kerala, it seems, is far too busy playing host to a bevy of VVIPs attending the birthday celebrations of Mata Amritanandmayi to spare too much attention to a mere by-election. So, what if the event is drawing dignitaries from the president and the deputy prime minister down to Kerala? They are all coming to pay tribute to Mata Amritanandmayi on her jubilee. While I have no sympathy for godmen — or godwomen — per se, honesty compels me to admit that the accolades are truly deserved. Whatever the truth of her spiritual prowess — and there are several people whom I respect who revere her — her work in education, health, and housing should command respect from everyone. So, while I am by no means a devotee, I count myself as an admirer. Rather surprisingly, one of the least noticed facets of Mata Amritanandmayi’s career is her attitude to caste, that bane of Indian society. I use ‘Indian’ rather than Hindu after due thought; whatever the claims made by missionaries from other faiths, caste is as much a fact of life in the Christian and Muslim communities as in the majority community. Why else would so many leaders — even Mother Teresa at one point — demand reservation for “the backward castes” amongst themselves? But to better appreciate what Mata Amritanandmayi is doing one must look at the most recent attempts to tackle caste. The first approach — certainly the best known if not the earliest or most effective — was preached by Mahatma Gandhi. Putting the onus of reform almost exclusively on the upper castes, he called on them to redeem the sins of their fathers. The Mahatma drew a distinction, however, between individual efforts to give such communities a helping hand and efforts to do so by the power of the state. An attempt by the British to provide separate seats for various elements of the larger Hindu community provoked his famous fast in 1932. The second approach — and by far the least known outside Kerala — was that of Sree Narayana Guru. He preached the doctrine of self-upliftment to the depressed classes. When the Ezhavas complained that they were not allowed to worship in the Shiva temples, the Guru calmly replied, “Then let us build a temple to an Ezhava Shiva!” Being a Sanskrit scholar, he then proceeded to consecrate a temple at Aruvipuram with Vedic hymns to Rudra. If there was any motif to Sree Narayana Guru’s career, it would be his emphasis on education — including his insistence on teaching both English and Sanskrit. Incidentally, Sree Narayana Guru was not easily fazed even by the most famous in the land. In 1925, he met Mahatma Gandhi who, somewhat facetiously, asked, “Would you be comfortable conversing in English?” “No,” was the response, “Is the Mahatma fluent in Sanskrit?” Both Mahatma Gandhi and Sree Narayana Guru were alike in working within the Hindu community itself and in a certain ambivalence to legal remedies. It is this which distinguished the third of the great 20th century reformers — Dr B.R. Ambedkar. But he could claim that bitter experience had taught him better. Following the supposed victory of the “Temple Entry Movement”, Ambedkar himself had led a satyagrahi struggle outside the famed Kala Rama temple in Nasik in 1930. It was spectacularly unsuccessful, with the conservative temple guardians keeping their gates shut to dalits until after Independence. Small wonder if he put his faith in legal guarantees rather than in the assurances of the well-meaning! Mata Amritanandamayi’s response is different from that of all these three men. It is best summed by the experience of one of her devotees, an Iyer Brahmin, educated abroad and someone who took up American citizenship. He had long since given up wearing the sacred thread, not a decision that he was forced to take but of his own volition. After he became Mata Amritanandamayi’s disciple, she gently persuaded him to resume wearing the Yagnopavita, restoring him to Brahmin-hood as it were. Her approach to caste is utterly non-confrontational, embracing Brahmins rather than berating them. She recognises the existence of caste but ignores the shibboleths while encouraging disciples to be true to the finest heritage of their ancestors. It is something that must be experienced rather than explained in words — best done in one of the schools or hospitals she has set up. Mother Teresa, we know, tried to give dignity to the dying; Mata Amritanandamayi tries to do the same for the living. We are a fortunate generation to have known both these great women.
