Nestled within the prestigious confines of Cambridge, Massachusetts, I was taken aback to read reports of violent riots engulfing Nagpur. It was disturbing on two fronts. First, the riots happened in the city of Nagpur. Second, the Shudras-Atishudras-Economically marginalised formed the edifice of this populist jingoism against the minority community. The individuals engaged passionately as defenders of the Hindu faith had their chief demand of removal or destruction of the tomb of Aurangzeb, a misunderstood-misjudged historical figure. His tomb, situated in Khultabad—a town steeped in historical significance—near Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar (formerly known as Aurangabad), became a focal point for their visceral violent protest inspired by a film based on mythical dogmas. I will not elaborate on the movie or its historicity, as there are ample books to enlighten us. My only concern is that myth as history shouldn’t be accepted. These narratives have taken root since the Indian independence movement with the clash of two forces, Muslim extremists and Hindu extremists. Muslim extremists got their desired demand in the form of Pakistan, but Hindu extremists failed to get their Pitrubhumi. The influence of this Hindu extremism became entwined with corporate capitalism in the 1980s-1990s, primarily fuelled by the emergence of neoliberalism. Thus emerged a dynamic manifestation of Hindutva, which signifies the climactic culmination of a Brahmanical strategy meticulously crafted to psychologically manipulate and keep the Shudras, Atishudras and economically marginalised in a state of intellectual suspension and ignorance. This deep-rooted Brahmanical animosity—organised, inherited, and absorbed—found a stark and violent expression in Nagpur.
Nagpur is a habitus where Dr B. R. Ambedkar launched his meditative anti-thesis of Navayana Buddhism, a counter-revolution against the Brahmanical forces. Using his Rhetorical technique, he chose Nagpur, having a rich history, legacy of Naga tribes, the original inhabitants of this country, who adopted, enacted and spread Buddha’s Dhamma based on liberty, equality, and fraternity. This principled Dhamma, he hoped, would be socialised and gradually absorbed by the state apparatus. My answer to Nagpur’s performative violence will be answered using the Vitanda of Nyaya Philosophy. The anatomy of these riots using this framework shall be analysed in three paradigms: textual habitus, power and its manifestations, and Sarvajanik Enlightenment.
Textual Habitus.
Brian Stock has formulated a concept of textual community. Here, textual communities are a part of the textual habitus governed by the centripetal force of Brahmanical texts. These texts are normalised using the ideological and government-state apparatus. Using this force, the ideological apparatus of RSS in Nagpur and its mimesis in the form of State apparatus are trying to revive the spirit of Brahmanical rule, engendering gender and caste-graded inequalities masked in divinity. The empirical framework shows the commercialisation of religion, the creation of spectacle in the form of the Kumbh Mela, the Machiavellian use of Religion as a performance, its feeding as opium by Hon. Prime Minister and his coterie, the suppression of the democratic spaces for dissent of an individual, snatching her freedom and rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India, is being manufactured-normalised. This textual habitus socialises the youth in its orthodox Brahmanical discourse, whose chief purpose is resurrection, reinstituting Brahmanical hegemony. Rather than addressing the existential crisis engulfing the youth and economy, their energies are being diverted to instituting Brahamanical Hindutva, which later, as per Matsya Nyaya, shall swallow them also. To sum up, this textual habitus is a counter-revolution against the civility of the Constitution of India, taking it towards catastrophic homogeneity.
Power, its manifestations.
Steven Lukes describes power as an ideology manifesting in decision and non-decision-making. This raises a powerful question regarding power- who sets the discourse? The natural answer to these riots is the Brahmanical institution of RSS in Nagpur. Dr Ambedkar pointed out these phallocentric tactics of violence using these dogmatic texts. In the name of philosophy, he says these holy texts perpetuate and propagate war. The ideological power instituted in Nagpur sets these parochial dogmatic discourses of- othering the Muslims, segregating them as good and evil, forcing them to accept secondary citizenship, the lynching of Dalits, etc. in the name of religion. The Satyashodhak Movement and writings by Mahatma Jotirao Phule countered this power of Brahmanical textuality, which Dr. Ambedkar carried to its zenith. To cite a few instances, one can examine how these Brahmanical texts portray Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. The attempts to rescue this Janata Raja were made by Mahatma Phule, Dr Ambedkar, and Comrade Govind Pansare. Their texts help to question this hegemonic power, exposing this Brahmanical project. They question the authority and legitimacy of these texts, thus devoiding them of their sanctity and attacking their infallibility. So, the Shudras-Atishudras and Economically marginalised people need to understand the cunningness of this Brahmanical strategy, promising them moksha, satiating their masculine dignity by bestowing them the titles of defenders of Hindutva. It is a typical psychological modus-vivendi of the Manuvadi ideological hegemons of Nagpur.
Sarvajanik Enlightenment
To understand the hermeneutics of these riots, I use the principles of the Sarvajanik Enlightenment. I derive this framework from two masters- Mahatma Jotirao Phule and Bertolt Brecht. Using the Brechtian concept of Verfremdungseffekt- distancing myself emotionally and understanding the factors of production of these riots. I foreground my Brechtian epic theatre of the Sarvajan public sphere. Creating this public sphere must be a protracted effort by the intellectual class. This intellectual class, organic intellectuals, must emerge from their ivory towers and democratise intellectualism in the spirit of Satyashodhak modernity. As popularly portrayed, Enlightenment is not just empiricism or rationality, but as per Blaise Pascal, it consists of two core factors, i.e. Customs and Inspiration. Thinking on these two paradigms and their dialectics, the Shudra-Atishudra-Economically marginalised need to educate themselves, and the task falls on the shoulders of organic intellectuals. These Brahmanical hegemons initiated riots, but their children were/are never a part of these staged events. They focus on foreign education; they are dipped in luxury and head the powerful institutions of the state and non-state using their social-cultural-economic and political capital.
Whereas the Shudras-Atishudras, economically marginalised, face the backlash of the State, get entangled in court cases, face poverty, stigmatisation, and moral-psychological guilt for their entire lifetimes. The classic example of handling such an event in this Sarvajanik Enlightened paradigm was practised by Dr B. R. Ambedkar during Mahad Satyagraha in 1927. The upper caste(s) of Mahad brutally attacked the Dalits on the orders of Brahmanical hegemons. Dr Ambedkar advised the Dalits not to respond violently. He was enlightened to understand that if Dalits attacked, they would play into the trap set by the Brahmanical hegemons. The Dalits had physical strength, but the repercussions later would be catastrophic as they lacked economic-political and social capital to tackle the Brahmanical judicial system. Later, Dr Ambedkar won the court case using his intellectual might not via violent fights.
Thus, the anatomy of the riots is what I had tried to understand by its hermeneutical reading of the event of Nagpur, understanding the communal bio politics that thrives on the graded inequalities of religion, gender and caste(s). In contrast, the Shudras-Atishudras-Economically marginalised are the resources used for their discourse; when their utility is over, they too shall be disposed of. Beware!
The author is a senior research scholar, IIT-Delhi