Notes: Christophe Jaffrelot - Religious Reforms vs Political Entrepreneurship | Sociology Mains Optional for UPSC 2024 PDF Download

 Page 1


 
www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
www.SleepyClasses.com 
 
Summaries of Christophe Jaffrelot's 3 important articles on Religion 
 
No room for liberal doubt 
https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/sabarimala-temple-women-en
try-protests-bjp-5454465/ 
The choice in Sabarimala is clear :  
It's ethno-religious political entrepreneurs vs Social reform. 
Three historical-constitutional variables in order to look at present situation with a 
clearer perspective: 
1.  Reformers are lonely figures - reformers have always had to face opposition 
when they stood against socio-religious traditions. 
Ex - Rammohan Roy (sati), Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar (widow remarriage), 
Mahatma Gandhi (untouchability). 
2.  Some liberals who are uncertain about the right attitude in the Sabarimala case 
assume that the people's opposition is spontaneous. 
But one needs to distinguish between PURE CONSERVATIVES, who believed in 
Sanaatan Dharma like Madan Mohan Malaviya, from traditionalists who defended 
ancient practices in terms of identity politics like Bal Gangadhar Tilak.  
(Excerpt:  
Tilak’s worldview is well reflected in the controversy around the Age of Consent 
Bill — a bone of contention similar to the Sabarimala affair. At the end of the 19th 
century, western India debated the issue of legislating on the age of consent for 
consummation of marriages.  
While reformers including Jyotirao Phule were in favour of a law to abolish child 
marriage, Vishwanath Narayan Mandlik and Tilak were not — for two different 
reasons. The former, like the Sanatanists, considered that child marriage should 
continue because the shastras allowed such practices. Tilak offered a different 
perspective.  
Page 2


 
www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
www.SleepyClasses.com 
 
Summaries of Christophe Jaffrelot's 3 important articles on Religion 
 
No room for liberal doubt 
https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/sabarimala-temple-women-en
try-protests-bjp-5454465/ 
The choice in Sabarimala is clear :  
It's ethno-religious political entrepreneurs vs Social reform. 
Three historical-constitutional variables in order to look at present situation with a 
clearer perspective: 
1.  Reformers are lonely figures - reformers have always had to face opposition 
when they stood against socio-religious traditions. 
Ex - Rammohan Roy (sati), Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar (widow remarriage), 
Mahatma Gandhi (untouchability). 
2.  Some liberals who are uncertain about the right attitude in the Sabarimala case 
assume that the people's opposition is spontaneous. 
But one needs to distinguish between PURE CONSERVATIVES, who believed in 
Sanaatan Dharma like Madan Mohan Malaviya, from traditionalists who defended 
ancient practices in terms of identity politics like Bal Gangadhar Tilak.  
(Excerpt:  
Tilak’s worldview is well reflected in the controversy around the Age of Consent 
Bill — a bone of contention similar to the Sabarimala affair. At the end of the 19th 
century, western India debated the issue of legislating on the age of consent for 
consummation of marriages.  
While reformers including Jyotirao Phule were in favour of a law to abolish child 
marriage, Vishwanath Narayan Mandlik and Tilak were not — for two different 
reasons. The former, like the Sanatanists, considered that child marriage should 
continue because the shastras allowed such practices. Tilak offered a different 
perspective.  
 
www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
www.SleepyClasses.com 
 
On one hand, he argued in 1881 that “every son of Aryavarta must toil hard to see 
this custom eradicated”; on the other, he refused any change to tradition:  
“We would not like that Government should have anything to do with regulating 
our social customs or ways of living, even supposing that the Act of Government 
will be a very beneficial and suitable measure.” 
(Tilak preferred to mobilise the people against the reforms he approved of, in order 
to promote his political agenda.) 
Today, it is apparent that the same was being done by various Hindu organisations 
in Sabarimala affair. 
3.  Besides politicising a religious issue, Hindutva forces have openly opposed a 
decision of Supreme Court , same thing is happening in Ayodhya case (demand of 
law to build ram temple). 
In both the Sabarimala and Ayodhya cases, what is at stake is prestige and authority 
of the SC vis -a-vis entrepreneurs in identity politics who use traditions in order to 
mobilise and polarise people.