At the heart of the row over the appointment of a non-Hindu teacher to the Sanskrit Department of the Banaras Hindu University (BHU) is a plaque that prohibits the entry of non-Hindus into the building that houses the Faculty. The marble plaque reads that the building must only be used by Hindus, including Sanatanis, Arya Samajis, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs for cultural and religious purposes, for the recitation of religious accounts, discussion on Shastras and for the expositions of leaders from within the country and outside.
Chakrapani Ojha, the student leader who has led a bunch of about 20 students to stage a sit in protest against the appointment of Firoze Khan to the Faculty, says that he is only following what the university founder Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya had ordained. “We are not protesting the teaching of Sanskrit by a Muslim. But it should not be allowed in this building where Hindu mantras are chanted and rituals performed,” he told THE WEEK.
On the home page of the website of the BHU is a quote by its founder which reads, “India is not a country of the Hindus only. It is a country of the Muslims, the Christians and the Parsees, too. The country can gain strength and develop itself only when the people of the different communities in India live in mutual goodwill and harmony”.
The Sanskrit Faculty, officially called the Sanskrit Vidya Dharma Vijnan Sankaya, has eight departments. These are Veda, Vyakaran, Sahitya, Jyotish, Vaidic Darshan, Dharmagam, Dharmashastra and Mimansa and Jain-Bauddha Darshan. Khan’s appointment is to the Sahitya (Literature) department which does not involve teaching of any rituals. On the Faculty homepage on the BHU website, its objective is stated to be “…to remove the pervading misconceptions about religion, spirituality, Astrology and Tantras in society and reinstate the paramount values of ethics and religion for the upliftment of society and nation in general and individuals in particular”.
While the protests against Khan—in the form of a sit in across the Vice Chancellor’s residence— have been on for more than two weeks, whispers of political interference and the role of conspiracy in the appointment have grown.
However, faculty members—though not of the Sanskrit department—involved in the appointment process at the BHU say that the procedure is transparent and above board. Anil Maurya, an Assistant Professor of the BHU’s Law Department told THE WEEK, “The allegation of conspiracy holds no water. Every appointment is as per rules”.
Khan’s appointment was made after a stringent screening process. His was one of the 29 applications received for the post. Of these, 10 were shortlisted, keeping with the university’s criteria that there should be 10 final applicants for each post or 20 per cent of the total number of applicants—whichever is higher. One candidate did not turn up for the interview in which Khan was finally chosen.
On Wednesday, representatives from the Joint Action Committee—a group of student political bodies other than the Akhil Bharitya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP)—took out a march in support of Khan. Shashwat Upadhyay, a member of the JAC, said though the protesters were not taken seriously by the university, there had been no crackdown on them either. “They (those protesting against appointment of Khan) are sending out a very wrong message about the BHU. When they argue that there is no Hindu teacher to teach Islam in universities such as Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), they forget that while AMU is a minority institution, BHU is a central university,” he told THE WEEK.
Committee members say that they were monitoring the situation but there is no plan for further action currently.
Khan, who has left for his hometown in Rajasthan, refused to comment on the issue.