Vivek Mishra works as an Assistant Editor with Eastern Eye and has over 13 years of experience in journalism. His areas of interest include politics, international affairs, current events, and sports. With a background in newsroom operations and editorial planning, he has reported and edited stories on major national and global developments.
THE MAHA KUMBH MELA, one of the largest religious gatherings in the world, began on Monday in Prayagraj in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, with millions of Hindu devotees taking a ritual dip at the confluence of the Ganges, Yamuna, and the mythical Saraswati rivers.
Organisers expect around 400 million people to attend the six-week festival, which will continue until 26 February.
Pilgrims began arriving in the early hours to bathe in the sacred waters, a ritual believed to cleanse sins and bring salvation. "I feel great joy. For me, it's like bathing in nectar," said 45-year-old Surmila Devi. Reena Rai, a businesswoman from Madhya Pradesh who travelled nearly 1,000 kilometres, said, "As a Hindu, this is an unmissable occasion."
The Kumbh Mela is deeply rooted in Hindu mythology, symbolising the celestial battle between gods and demons over a pitcher of the nectar of immortality. The festival rotates among four cities—Prayagraj, Haridwar, Ujjain, and Nashik—every three years. The Maha Kumbh Mela, held once every 12 years in Prayagraj, is considered the most auspicious.
The scale of the event is immense, comparable to the combined populations of the United States and Canada. (Photo: Getty Images)
On Monday, over 2.5 million pilgrims were expected to bathe, followed by the "royal bath" on Tuesday, reserved for ascetics.
Saffron-clad monks, ash-smeared ascetics, and devotees chanting "Har Har Mahadev" and "Jai Ganga Maiyya" filled the riverbanks.
Indian prime minister Narendra Modi described the event as a "divine occasion" bringing together "countless people in a sacred confluence of faith, devotion and culture."
Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath invited people to "experience unity in diversity" at the "world's largest spiritual and cultural gathering."
Massive security and infrastructure for the festival
The scale of the event is immense, comparable to the combined populations of the United States and Canada.
Festival spokesperson Vivek Chaturvedi said, "Some 350 to 400 million devotees are going to visit the mela, so you can imagine the scale of preparations."
Security measures include 40,000 police officers on duty and AI-equipped surveillance cameras for continuous monitoring.
Authorities have set up multiple "lost and found" centres and a mobile app to help reunite lost pilgrims with their families.
A temporary city covering over 4,000 hectares has been constructed along the riverbanks. It includes 150,000 tents, 145,000 restrooms, and 3,000 community kitchens, each capable of feeding up to 50,000 people simultaneously.
Additionally, 68,000 LED light poles have been installed, making the site visible from space.
A Hindu devotee smeared with ash dances during a religious procession ahead of the Maha Kumbh Mela in Prayagraj on January 10. (Photo: Getty Images)
Indian Railways has added 98 trains making 3,300 trips to manage the influx of visitors. About 450,000 new electricity connections have been set up, and the festival is expected to consume more power than 100,000 urban apartments do in a month.
Pilgrims endure long journeys and cold weather
Pilgrims travelled from across India to take part. Jaishree Ben Shahtilal from Gujarat took three days to arrive with her neighbours in a convoy of 11 buses. "I have great faith in God. I have waited for so long to bathe in the holy river," she said.
Temperatures dropped to around 15 degrees Celsius overnight, but devotees remained undeterred. "Once you are in the water, you don't even feel cold," said 56-year-old Chandrakant Nagve Patel. "I felt like I was one with God."
Many first-time visitors expressed mixed feelings of excitement and apprehension. Priyanka Rajput, a fashion model from Delhi, said, "I am excited but now scared because I didn't expect this crowd. This is my first Kumbh, and I came only because my mother is very spiritual."
Pilgrims carrying their belongings walk over floating pontoon bridges to go to Sangam, the confluence of the Ganges, Yamuna and mythical Saraswati rivers, in Prayagraj on January 12. (Photo: Getty Images)
A blend of devotion and government showcase
The festival also serves as an opportunity for the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to showcase its focus on religious and cultural heritage.
"The Maha Kumbh embodies India’s timeless spiritual heritage and celebrates faith and harmony," Modi stated on social media.
The previous "ardh" or half Kumbh Mela in 2019 attracted 240 million pilgrims. In comparison, the annual Hajj pilgrimage in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, draws about 1.8 million participants.
As the Kumbh Mela progresses, authorities continue to manage crowd safety while maintaining the sanctity of the event.
"It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity," said Savita Venkat, a teacher from Bengaluru. Government employee Bhawani Baneree from Maharashtra added, "The vibrant atmosphere made my long journey worthwhile."
"If liberty means anything at all, it is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”. George Orwell’s quote is emblazoned by his statue outside BBC Broadcasting House. Last week, the question inside was this: has Britain given up on free speech?
That is the free speech debate which American populist right wants to project onto Britain. US vice-president JD Vance has declared a free speech crisis here. Universities often find themselves at the epicentre of cultural clashes over free speech too. So, I also took part this week in the Oxford vice-chancellor’s Sheldonian Series debate on “cancel culture”, an exercise in promoting free speech via an open inquiry into its scope and limits.
How Americans think about free speech is enshrined in the very first amendment of their Constitution, pledging “no law abridging the freedom of speech”. Toby Young of the Free Speech Union told the Oxford audience he champions the American model for Britain too. “I would draw the line where the framers of the American constitution drew it, which is everything is acceptable within the law providing it is not a direct incitement to violence”.
My counter-proposal was that we could find more common ground on free speech in Britain by taking a different approach to America.
How far do we need to draw a line between free speech and hate speech? The US doctrine tries to duck that. It is not what you say; just whether how you say it involves violent threats. That US standard offers constitutional protection for racist, homophobic and misogynistic slurs. Research shows that most people in Britain would strike a different balance to that.
The most inarticulate form of speech I have heard was ‘monkey chanting’ at black footballers. Using ape noises as a racist caricature did not directly advocate violence, but fans of my generation also benefited from its cancellation. Young felt it was over the top to ban monkey chanting by law, suggesting racist fans were often persuaded to desist before they risked the sanction of being thrown out. My own recollection is that much of the culture shift followed a couple of years after those legal changes of 1991. But was any worthwhile free expression really curtailed?
In the UK, directing slurs at individuals is racially aggravated abuse. Yet racist statements into the ether are generally lawful speech, unless their specific context means they stir up hatred, harass, or unlawfully discriminate. Contested practical debates about policing - over asylum or abortion, Israeli and Palestine – are often about conditions on where and when protest happens and can protect legitimate protest rights alongside those of others to study, work or worship without intimidation.
I feel little interest in the police debate over whether or how to record ‘non-crime incidents’ - but much more in the failure to effectively police or regulate incessant unlawful racial hatred. A new culture of impunity for racist abuse is having toxic cultural consequences, online and offline. That curbs the speech of those targeted too.
The Office for Students’ will not protect holocaust denial under any circumstances. The Free Speech Union supports that. This shows how holocaust denial is often treated as a one-off case, conceded, perhaps tactically, by those who habitually argue for protecting all lawful speech. Yet this example could be used more productively to illuminate key broader principles about boundaries. The European Court of Human Rights allows states to outlaw holocaust denial. The UK has not passed similar laws to Germany and Austria, though institutions have legitimate reasons to exclude it. The Free Speech Union explained that holocaust denial is excluded from ECHR protection “because it runs counter to the values of the Convention itself”. This is to defend free speech as a qualified right: protected for those who respect the rights of others. That is clearly incompatible with the US constitutional approach, but aligns much better with British social norms.
Where next on free speech? Young worried that the politicised weaponisation of institutional processes can often feel punitive, whatever the final decision. But how far will new laws and processes alleviate or exacerbate those risks? Guardian columnist Zoe Williams emphasised how rife inconsistency can be in free speech debates. The US administration stretches free speech hypocrisy to new heights, lecturing the British even while cleansing library shelves and websites of any mention of inclusion or diversity.
Helen Mountfield KC, principal of Mansfield College, argued for consistency too - “free speech for me and thee”. She proposed that demonstrating that academic freedom and free speech were alive and well in universities should also enable a shift of focus: to pay more attention to equal opportunities to speak freely, and the value of listening to a plurality of views. ‘Cancel culture’ debates have provided the sharp edges of the so-called culture wars. It may now be time to put as much energy into ‘calling in’ as ‘calling out’ - to model how to actively promote practical cultures of free speech in polarising times.
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.