The Diksha’s Advocate

In February 1556, a 13-year-old Akbar was proclaimed Shahenshah, the king of kings, and went on to preside over what came to be known as the Golden Era of the Mughal Empire. In 1950, Tenzin Gyatso became the 14th Dalai Lama at the age of 6. In many ancient cultures across the world, major positions of power, social, political and religious, are granted to what contemporary jurisprudence has given the term ‘minor’.

The attention brought to the case of Priyal, an 8-year-old girl child who has chosen to undertake the practice of Diksha or worldly renunciation, is a typical example of the media’s version of competitive populism; seizing a story simply because it is interesting, while ignoring larger ‘done-to-death’ issues. Nevertheless, the case has left several worrying questions unanswered. Of course, the terrain of contemporary India is nothing like the Tibet of 50 years ago, let alone ancient Egypt. But although the girl in question may not have been compelled to take Diksha by the kind of religious or political circumstances that the examples mentioned above had to undoubtedly face, the questions raised are similar. Is society failing its moral obligation in allowing young children to take decisions whose impact they can scarcely fathom? And are we in any way interfering with what could be a potentially normal, albeit extremely unconventional childhood?

“I have decided on this life. I do not say the life of other children is bad, but I feel that ultimate truth is salvation and I am happy that at such a young age, I am taking that path. This is my truth and it is not forced on me…” asserted Priyal in a recent interview. The Child Welfare Committee bemoans the loss of a minor’s childhood and the sub-human conditions she lives in, but does not appear to even consider that the child may in fact genuinely be happy, despite allegedly being brainwashed into undertaking Diksha.

There is another dimension that has not been thoroughly explored: Economic factors could also have contributed to the sequence of events that led Priyal down her chosen path. Perhaps it is far more bearable to see her become an ascetic whose basic needs, at least, will be met, than to bear her financial burden. Some may even go to the extent of declaring Priyal’s Diksha as a convenient and socially acceptable method of getting rid of a girl child. But the fact remains that the girl’s parents are reasonably well-to-do; residing in a flat in Indore, and for all practical purposes appear to be thoroughly normal. Why then, would they consent to allow their daughter to undertake what any average parent might find abhorrent?

“The stark details of their lives – their fantastic privations – terrify city people… there is absolutely no room for compromise. Its purity, its singleness, is incomprehensible to people in the city of a thousand distractions…” Four years have passed since Suketu Mehta wrote these words as a part of a chapter on Diksha in his acclaimed Bombay biopic, Maximum City. Perhaps it is time for us to start comprehending:

If a minor is incapable of making his or her own informed decision, it follows that the same rule of thumb should apply to all minors, and therefore no one under the age of 18 should be instructed in religious matters by the parents who profess a deep interest in that faith. To quote noted biologist and author Richard Dawkins in his seminal book ‘The God Delusion’: “I want everybody to flinch whenever we hear a phrase such as ‘Catholic child’ or ‘Muslim Child’. Speak of a ‘child of Catholic parents’ if you like; but if you hear anybody speak of a ‘Catholic Child’, stop them and politely point out that children are too young to know where they stand on such issues...”