In a period of heightened sensitivity, a series of incidents has sparked a deep national debate regarding the sanctity of the Ganga River and how its history is interpreted. This conversation follows a disturbing report involving a group of Muslim youths in Varanasi. The group was seen having "Iftar" with chicken biryani on a boat in the middle of the river. More specifically, they were accused of throwing chewed meat bones directly into the water in front of the Bindu Madhav Dharhara Temple.

This act has led to significant public outcry, as many see it as a deliberate mockery of Hindu faith. In response to this tension, the media outlet The Wire published an opinion piece that some critics argue is an attempt to "secularize" a river that holds a specific, sacred status in Hinduism.

The Conflict of Perspectives

The controversy centers on a piece written by Rakhshanda Jalil, a Delhi-based researcher and translator, titled "Who Owns the Ganga? A River of Many Faiths, Not One." In her writing, Jalil uses personal memories and Urdu poetry to suggest that the Ganga is a "secular" entity belonging to everyone, rather than being the exclusive spiritual home of the Hindu faith.

She begins her narrative with a touching memory of her husband singing a Bhojpuri folk song: "Ganga maiya tohre piyari chadhaibo… (O Mother Ganga, I offer this yellow dhoti to you…)". While the sentiment is presented as a bridge between cultures, critics point out a fundamental theological contradiction. The act of a Muslim man calling a river "Maiya" (Mother) or a deity is technically inconsistent with Islamic monotheism.

The core of the legal dispute involves 14 Muslim men who now face FIRs. Jalil describes this as a case of men being punished simply "for taking a boat out on the river and opening their fast on the Ganga; they are being accused of hurting the sentiments of the majority community."

However, local authorities and critics clarify that the legal action isn't about the act of breaking a fast (Roza). Instead, it is specifically about the consumption of non-vegetarian food on the holy river and the disposal of meat waste into waters that millions consider a living deity. Even some Muslim clerics have weighed in, noting that Iftar is a religious ritual meant for prayer, not a "picnic" involving the desecration of another's holy site.

A Question of Sentiments

In her article, Jalil poses a series of pointed questions:

“But what of their sentiments? And that of their forefathers? What of those people, such as my husband’s family, who have lived beside the Ganga for generations and have nothing but the greatest affection and regard for this special river that has nurtured civilisation for millennia? In the New India that is Bharat we have already divided up colours (saffron is Hindu, green is Muslim), food (sattvic vs halal), etc, are we also going to decide who has first rights over rivers and mountains?”

Critics argue that this line of questioning flips the roles of the "aggressor" and the "aggrieved." They suggest that while the river nurtures everyone physically, the spiritual relationship is not identical. For a Hindu, the Ganga is not just a water body or a "philosophical metaphor"; she is Maa Ganga, a goddess who provides salvation.

While access to the river is universal, many believe that the deliberate defiling of its waters is a step too far. The argument is made that if the situation were reversed—for instance, if someone ate pork within a mosque complex—the conversation about "universal ownership" would likely disappear in favor of religious exclusivity.

Poetry and Politics: The Legacy of Muhammad Iqbal

To support the idea of a shared, secular Ganga, Jalil references the work of famous Muslim poets, most notably Muhammad Iqbal. She describes him as: “the poet we are constantly being taught to hate: the much-despised Muhammad Iqbal.”

She highlights his 1904 composition, Tarana-e-Hind, which contains the famous line, “Saare jahan se achha Hindostan hamara.” However, historians point out a more complex reality. While Iqbal wrote patriotic verses in his youth, he later became a primary architect of the Two-Nation Theory, which eventually led to the Partition of India.

By 1910, Iqbal wrote Tarana-e-Milli, which shifted the focus from a shared land to a religious one, stating: “Cīn o-ʿArab hamārā, Hindūstāṉ hamārā, Muslim haiṉ ham, wat̤an hai sārā jahāṉ hamārā.” (China and Arabia are ours, Hindustan is ours; we are Muslims, the whole world is our homeland.)

Critics argue that citing Iqbal to "secularize" the Ganga ignores his later contributions to religious division. Furthermore, while poets like Suroor Barabankvi or Nida Fazli praised the river’s beauty, none revered it as a deity. In Islam, nature worship is generally forbidden, meaning their "affection" for the river is cultural or aesthetic, whereas for Hindus, it is deeply theological.

The Civilizational Truth

For thousands of years, the Ganga has been the cradle of Sanatan civilization. From the Vedas to the Puranas, the river's identity is inseparable from Hindu scripture. In the Ramayana, Maharishi Valmiki describes her divine descent from the heavens into the locks of Lord Shiva:

"gaganaat shaMkara shiraH tato dharaNim aagataa" (From the sky to the head of Shankara, and from there she came to the earth.)

Valmiki depicts the Ganga as a conscious goddess, not just a resource: "acintayaH ca saa devii gaMga parama dur.hdharaa... vishaami aham hi paataalam strotasaa gR^ihya shaMkaram." (That goddess Ganga, who is extremely difficult to sustain, even thought to herself, 'Let me enter the netherworld, whisking Shiva away with my streams.')

From the Kumbh Mela to the final rites of asthi-visarjan (immersion of ashes), the river is a witness to the most sacred moments of Hindu life. The debate concludes with a firm stance from the community: the Ganga is not a property to be owned, but she is a deity to be protected. Attempting to "secularize" her is seen by many as an erasure of thousands of years of history and a normalization of her desecration.