They go on to quote Ambedkar that Swami Shraddhanand was the “the greatest and most sincere champion of the Untouchables”. They ignore the fact that that same Swami was involved in Shuddhi, ‘Conversion of Muslims to Hinduism’. This is what annoyed the Muslim clerics.

On this Shuddhi, Ambedkar responded, “If the Hindu society desires to survive, it must think not of adding to its numbers but increasing its solidarity and that means the abolition of caste. The abolition of castes is the real sangathan of the Hindus, and when sangathan is achieved by abolishing castes, shuddhi will be unnecessary.” This was parallel and opposite to Tanzim by Tablighi Jamaat, which was trying to convert Hindus into Islam. Though Shraddhanand later became part of the Indian National Congress, he was also part of Hindu Sangthan, a part of the revitalised Hindu Mahasabha committed to establishing a Hindu Nation.

New constructs are now being floated that Ambedkar and Savarkar are two sides of the same coin. True that Savarkar started the Patit Pavan temple that allows entry of Dalits into temples. As per Babasaheb, this will create a separate temple where only Dalits will visit. “An editorial in the April 12, 1929 issue of “Bahishkrit Bharat” states that Ambedkar had opposed the construction of the Patit Pawan temple from the very beginning. He believed that these temples would later be called temples for the untouchables.” However, Ambedkar did appreciate Savarkar’s efforts. Though he felt they were irrelevant.

These are some points that are being raised by Hindutva ideologues. They go hyper while describing Ambedkar’s relations with Congress. Some of them argue that after the death of Gandhi and Patel, Nehru became authoritarian and ignored the Opposition. BJP leader and Union Home Minister Amit Shah said that Ambedkar resigned from the Nehru cabinet due to “differences” with Nehru on the issue of Article 370, foreign policy and on the condition of SC/STs (Scheduled Castes/Tribes).

The crux of the issue is that the major reason for Ambedkar resigning from the cabinet was his disappointment with the shabby treatment given to the Hindu Code Bill. A huge opposition and meetings against the Bill were organised by RSS. Their volunteers demonstrated in front of Parliament. The peak of this was the massive protest in Ramlila Maidan on December 11, 1949, in which effigies of Ambedkar and Nehru were burnt.

Opposing the Hindu Code Bill, The Organiser (mouthpiece of the RSS), December 7, 1949, wrote: “We oppose the Hindu Code Bill. We oppose it because it is a derogatory measure based on alien and immoral principles. It is not a Hindu Code Bill. It is anything but Hindu.” The result of this aggressive campaign by RSS on the Hindu Code Bill was that it had to be delayed and diluted. This was the painful moment for Babasaheb, that led him to resign.

The question of Manusmriti, the Chaturvarnya, was a crucial part of the differences between Ambedkar and Savarkar to BJP. While on December 25, 1927, Babasaheb burnt the Manusmriti, the second sarsanghchalak of RSS, M.S. Golwalkar went on to write eulogies on Manusmriti.

Savarakar also detailed his support to Chaturvarnya and praised Manusmiriti: “Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worshipable after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law. That is fundamental.” And “The worst [thing] about the new Constitution of Bharat is that there is nothing Bharatiya about it… [T]here is no trace of ancient Bharatiya constitutional laws, institutions, nomenclature and phraseology in it”.

The central point of difference that Ambedkar had with the Hindutva ideology is being pushed under the carpet. On October 13, 1935, Ambedkar spoke in a meeting in Yeola near Nasik, dropping a ‘bombshell’ when he said, “I will not die as a person who calls himself a Hindu!” As per him, this religion has no place for liberty, compassion and equality. In the revised edition of his book, Thoughts on Pakistan, he opposed the formation of Islamic Pakistan as that may pave the way for Hindu Raj or Rashtra and that will be a “big calamity” for its people.

As he declared this, there were many pressures on him to embrace Sikhism or Islam. Dr. Moonje from Hindu Mahasabha struck a pact with Ambedkar that if he avoided conversion to Islam, Hindu Mahasabha would not oppose his move. Babasaheb’s own deeper studies led him to choose Buddhism.

Today, the BJP is trying to project that they have “honoured” Babasaheb by erecting his statues, raising an International Museum in his memory and other symbolic things. These are identity-related issues, while the crux of Babasaheb’s values remains undermined. When the Mandal Commission (on reservations) was implemented, the BJP resorted to kamandal (Hindutva) politics. As veteran BJP leader L K Advani was arrested during his Rath Yatra (as a part of kamandal politics), BJP, which was part of the parties supporting V P Singh’s government, withdrew its support and the government fell.

Congress, along with Hindu Mahasabha, opposed Ambedkar in Lok Sabha elections. Yet, it was Congress again that ensured that he was made a Rajya Sabha member. He was made a member of the Interim Government and also Chairman of the drafting committee of the Indian Constitution.

BJP’s anxiety to prove that Ambedkar was part of Hindutva politics is, therefore, a pure concoction to derive legitimacy from the memory of a person who stood totally against their very ideology of a Hindu Nation.

What an irony, that those who stood/stand for a Hindu Nation are today trying to project Ambedkar, who was opposed to Hindu Rashtra and wanted to have democratic, secular republic, as a part of their ideological parivar!

The writer is a human rights activist, who taught at IIT Bombay. The views are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Does Babasaheb’s Ideology Match With Hindu Nationalist Politics? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

For Cow vigilantes Modi had given a statement that murder in the name of cow is not acceptable, and just a few hours later a Muslim man was done to death on this issue. Apart from the phenomenon which is continuing. “Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday said that the significance of love, harmony, and brotherhood is central to the teachings of Lord Christ. He also urged people to strengthen these values.” Just a couple of days later the vigilante groups and even Bajrang Dal groups attacked a person in Ahmedabad who had dressed as Santa Clause and was distributing gifts. A video is going viral where two men dressed as Santa Claus being beaten up by hooligans at the Kankaria Carnival in Ahmedabad. This probably is the first year where people dressed as Santa Clause are being hauled up.

Already we had seen that Carol Singers were beaten up and since BJP came to power Carol singing has been stopped in Rashtrapati Bhavan. Bajrang Dal has also issued warnings to Hindus for their attending Christmas parties. How come these acts at the time of Christmas are seeing a new low currently?

Recently we also saw the claims on mosques that there was such a temple so it must be dug up a la Babri Masjid style. Seeing the spate of such made up claims, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat himself said that we should not keep looking for Shivling under every mosque. It is amazing that the claim is made, and dispute created in Kashi where a fountain looking structure is claimed to be a Shivling and demand for converting the mosque into a temple boosted. After the Sambhal claims, the violence followed.

Probably shaken by this and the feeling that the Supreme Leader of the supra political outfit felt it will bring loss of face for ‘RSS Combine’ and so he gave a sane looking call, “The Ram Temple was about faith, and Hindus wanted it built. But raising disputes about new sites out of hate is unacceptable,” he said. “Some people think they can become leaders of Hindus by creating new controversies. How is this allowed?”

And lo and behold most of the fringe organizations of Hindutva politics are coming forward to oppose it. One knows that RSS is a strict disciplinarian organization, and its members do not violate the commands of its leader. So who are these Senas, Dharma Sansads springing up by a dozen and going against the appeal of Bhagwat?

To cap it all, RSS’s unofficial mouth piece Organizer itself came forward to articulate the fringe elements’ demands and wrote that “Temple restorations are a quest for our identity! (TOI Dec 27, 2024). It also claims that temple restorations are for our national identity and to seek civilizational justice.

How come the hate is so pervasive that it is crossing the limits set by its own leaders? Is it that the leaders like Prime Minister Modi want the actions leading to hate to continue, as it strengthens their politics? If not then why are the perpetrators of violence are enjoying impunity? Why does the whole system from spreaders of hate speech, to those responsible for maintaining law and order and even to some extent even the judiciary have a soft corner for these criminal elements.

Having enjoyed the impunity for destroying Babri Mosques and lynching in the name of cow/beef or on killings and torture on the charge of ‘love-jihad’, now they know they can get away with their illegal acts. They feel that law may be bent to ensure that they are exonerated.

The phenomenon of Organiser opposing Bhagwat arouses curiosity. Is there a split within RSS on the issue? Bhagawat trying to talk peace and harmony and the managers of Organiser feeling that the path of Hate and violence should be pursued to its fullest depth.

There is another aspect which needs to be understood. When such phenomenon’s are unleashed for political benefits, initially the leaders congratulate themselves for their success in the electoral arena. From top to bottom diverse elements spring up and as Mr. Bhagawat said some of them ape for higher political position and influence. They are the one’s continuing their earlier political roots of which were sown by their leaders. One recalls that previous top RSS leader K. Sudarshan, who later became RSS Chief, was on the stage when Babri mosque was being demolished. This has been a classical case of crime and no punishment.

All the guilty of this dastardly crime of Babri demolition were finally given ‘not guilty’ chit and the judge who did this for the communal politics, got a plum job after his retirement.

As they say, ‘as you sow, so you reap’, the demolition of Babri process as a whole tells us that it was not just a spreading of fake narratives of temple destructions, and many myths against Muslims. The result is there for us to see, where even the Supreme authority of RSS is not being listened to. The anti-Christian campaign is just a continuation of the decade’s old propaganda against Christians that they are converting by force, fraud and allurement.

The likes of Bhagwat and Modi are witnessing right in front of their eyes that the Genie can be unleashed from the bottle, but to put it back is a task, which is close to impossible.

Related:

75 Years Down the Line, Whither Indian Constitution?

Promoting love or instilling hate and fear

Restating the agenda of Hindu Rashtra: RSS chief sets the tone for BJP politics

The post Hate transcending the boundaries: Whither dictates by Supreme Leaders appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The ruling dispensation, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), leaders within Parliament and its ideologues outside Parliament, argued that all the ills of society and violation of constitutional values began with Jawaharlal Nehru (amendment to stop hate speech), via Indira Gandhi (the Emergency), via Rajiv Gandhi (the Shah Bano Bill) to Rahul Gandhi (tearing the Bill) have been the violators of the values of Constitution.

BJP leaders and Hindu nationalist ideologues are stating that the Indian Constitution has been based on Western values, a colonial imprint on our society; it is a break from India’s civilisation and culture. They also argue that the Constitution and its application is the appeasement of Muslim minorities for vote bank purposes that has been done by the Congress party.

As we know, the Constitution was the outcome of the values that emerged during the freedom movement. It also kept in mind the long tradition of our civilisation. The understanding of our civilisation is very different for those who participated in the freedom movement, those who stand for its ideology, and those who kept aloof from the anti-colonial movement and bowed to the British rulers.

While the freedom movement saw India as a plural nation with rich diversities, those who stood aloof saw the civilisation as Hindu civilisation. For them, pluralism is a diversion and imposition by the educated, modern leaders.

Even the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) combine forgets that what they call as Hindu civilisation is undermining the contributions of Jainism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and Sikhism to our civilisation. Even the interpretation of Lord Ram, their major icon, is so diverse for Kabir, who saw the Lord as a Universal spirit, for Gandhi, who saw Him as protector of all the people, irrespective of their religion in his famous: Ishawar Allah Tero Naam (Allah and Ishwar are same).

Jawaharlal Nehru saw India, Bharat Mata, in his book, The Discovery of India, as an “ancient palimpsest on which layer upon layer of thought and reverie had been inscribed, and yet no succeeding layer had completely hidden or erased what had been written previously.” With great pride, he recalled the rule of Emperor Ashok, who in many edicts etched on stones, talked of equal treatment for Vedic Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Ajivikas.

This is the core difference between the RSS combine and its ideologues who see India as exclusively Brahmanical Hindu, and those like Gandhi and Nehru, as a country belonging to all the people.

The Indian Constituent Assembly mainly represented the stream that struggled against the British, the national stream, while RSS was a marginal stream sticking to “India as Brahmanical Hindu nation”. This started getting reflected immediately after the draft of the Indian Constitution. B.R Ambedkar and Nehru were cautious and stated  that the implementation of its basic structure should be ensured by those ruling the country.

Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee of BJP, in 1998, formed the Venkatachaliah Commission to review the Constitution. K.R. Narayanan, the then President of India, aptly remarked: “It is not the Constitution that has failed us; it is we who have failed the Constitution!”

This is so true, particularly after the rule of the Narendra Modi government (2014 onward). It is during this period that though the Constitution has not been changed as such, though many from the RSS camp have expressed their wish to do so, without getting reprimanded from the top leadership. This was most blatantly stated to back up their slogan of ‘400 Paar’ (More than 400 seats in Parliament in the 2024 elections), meaning that ‘we want so many seats so that we can change the Constitution.’

The blatant rise of hate speech, lately most clearly stated by a sitting Judge of Allahabad High Court, Shekhar Kumar Yadav, when participating in a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event, saying: “The country will run as per the wishes of its majority.”

Justice Yadav made the remarks while delivering an address on “Constitutional Necessity of Uniform Civil Code”. “Only what benefits the welfare and happiness of the majority will be accepted,” Yadav said.

Worse than his stating so, has been the statement of BJP’s Yogi Adityanath, the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister, who supported Yadav’ utterances. Mercifully, the Supreme Court has taken cognizance of Yadav’s communal hate speech. But, who will take cognizance of Yogi supporting him?

Commenting on the current state of affairs, Justice Aspi Chinoy made a very apt comment. He said, “The BJP being the government at the Centre and having an absolute and overwhelming majority in Parliament, sees no need to alter the de jure status of India as a secular country and Constitution. Being in control of the state and its diverse instrumentalities it has been able to achieve its goal of undermining India’s secular constitution and introduce a Hindutva based ethnocracy, even without amending and altering the de jure secular status.”

This sectarianism of the ruling BJP goes back to the time when the draft of Constitution was released. A couple of days’ later, the RSS mouthpiece (unofficial) Organiser stated on November 30, 1949. “The worst [thing] about the new Constitution of Bharat is that there is nothing Bharatiya about it… [T]here is no trace of ancient Bharatiya constitutional laws, institutions, nomenclature and phraseology in it”. Meaning that Manusmriti has been ignored by makers of the Indian Constitution!

The father of Hindu nationalist politics, V D Savarkar, was quoted by Rahul Gandhi while participating in debate, “The worst thing about the Constitution of India is that there is nothing Indian about it. Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worshippable after Vedas for our Hindu nation and from which our ancient times have become the basis for our culture, customs, thought and practice.”

The crux of the matter comes to the surface when we compare the chief of the drafting committee of Indian Constitution, Ambedkar, and one of the RSS sarsanghchalak, K. Sudarshan. Ambedkar burnt the Manusmiriti and drafted the Indian Constitution. The RSS chief went on to label the Indian Constitution as being “based on Western values” and called for the need to draft the Indian Constitution based on the Hindu Holy book!

The writer is a human rights activist, who taught at IIT Bombay. The views are personal.

The post 75 Years Down the Line, Whither Indian Constitution? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It is true that the degree of intensity of the policies of these two, Hindu Nationalism and Taliban, are very different but if one digs deep into the issue one can see the basic similarities in these types of politics. The Taliban policies towards women, the attitude of many Gulf countries and Iran are similar but not exactly the same. No two countries express their policies on ditto lines. Still one can discern the similarities at the level of principles. This phenomenon, fundamentalism in these countries has come up mainly from the decade of 1980s, with Ayatollah Khomeini coming to power in Iran; he changed the social landscape drastically. While at superficial level fundamentalism means going to the fundamentals, it is not just that. Fundamentalism is an imposition of selected parts of religious traditions on the society through state power. Many times this is done even not by the government which is ruling; but by dominant political tendencies.

These impositions are most conservative, backward looking and oppressive not only to women but also to the other weaker sections of society. Fundamentalism always strengthens itself by creating an internal or external enemy. In most of the Gulf countries it is women which are the main target. At places “Satan” (devil) America is so presented as the main. To this enemy all the ills of society are attributed to. In that way the Fascism which developed in Germany in particular shares this trait with fundamentalism, where Jews were labeled as cause of Germany’s ills and were targeted to the extent of Genocide, to strengthen the power of the leader, who was supreme in the state.

The traits of fundamentalism and fascism are also seeing some overlap. In Germany, women were dictated to be the beings whose role is in ‘Kitchen, Church and Children’. Depending on different countries these roles are patterned on similar lines, even in fundamentalism.

Hindu Nationalists’ most overt attack is on the Muslims (and lately Christians also). We have witnessed horrific communal violence increasing in quality and quantity over the last few decades. Beginning from the ghastly tragedy of demolishing a Mosque in Ayodhya and the consequent violence now questioning the existence of mosque is proliferating like a malignant cancer. In addition there is cow-beef lynching becoming the order of the day. Cow vigilantes are proliferating dime a dozen. The word Jihad to target the Muslim minorities has picked up and starting from love jihad, corona jihad to now land jihad has been added to the ever proliferating list!

No doubt compared to the targeting of Muslims the other implications of this fundamentalism get dwarfed in India, though they are very much similar. As far as women are concerned the Sati system has been prohibited, the last one being that of Roopkawar in the 1980s. In the Bhavari Devi case the upper caste rapist were released with the honorable Court opining that how can the upper caste accused be raping a low caste women! That’s the reflection of prevalence of caste system.

If we analyze the attitude of Hindu nationalist policies, the very notion of love jihad is very much anti women. This gives the handle to the male members of the family, to keep a watch on ‘their’ girls. The Same tendency which has been opposing the love jihad is opposed to the wearing of jeans by girls. The attitude regarding violence is best reflected in the Bilkis Bano case, where those found guilty of rape and murder were honored once they got relapsed. Mercifully they are back in jail to serve the sentence. A woman professor from Goa who wrote that Mangal Sutra is like a chain for women was hounded badly. To cap it all at theoretical level Manu Smiriti is eulogized as the ideal to be followed.

Calling all this as Hindu religiosity as she calls the present offensive of Hindu nationalists is very much off the mark. She herself cites the example of three Muslims being beaten with slippers to shout Jai Shree Ram. Here labeling all this in the category of religiosity hides the commonality of all this as having its similarity with fundamentalism. Calling Muslim fundamentalism as jihadi Islam falls too short and away from the commonalities, which is prevailing in many countries. It prevails in Egypt and many other countries as Muslim Brotherhood. Then there is the Ayatollah regime in Iran.

Hindu religiosity is practiced by millions of Hindus, who have been living with people of other religions for centuries, making India a really plural, diverse country. What began as an ideology articulated by Savarkar and Golwalkar is the base on which the present actions and policies of Hindu nationalism stand. These were totally opposed to Indian Nationalism which emerged as the part of anti colonial struggle. The greatest Hindu of the twentieth century, Mahatma Gandhi had to take three bullets on his chest for standing as a Hindu standing for plural India.

Singh is right in detesting this ‘religiosity’ but she needs to delve deep to understand this is the same pattern which ‘Jihadi Islam’ and Islamic Fundamentalists followed. Here politics derives its legitimacy from religion and mauls the society under the clothing of religion. And that is precisely what is going on in India today, be it the claim over most of the mosques, or use of bulldozers or to beat the Muslim Children in the class a la Tripta Tyagi of locking the child in the store for bringing non vegetarian food in the school, or beating the girls coming out from a pub in Mangalore!

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia

Also Read:

Sambhal Mosque, Ajmer Dargah: how deep do we plunge into the abyss?

Promoting love or instilling hate and fear

Restating the agenda of Hindu Rashtra: RSS chief sets the tone for BJP politics

The post Taliban, Women’s Equality and Hindutva Nationalism appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court judgment on the Babri mosque dispute case upheld this law, even directing that its sections must be seen as part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. The PWA is and was an important legislative measure for ensuring lasting peace then, now and in future. The act of demolition of Babri was declared as a crime in the November 2019 judgement which also opined that there was no evidence of a temple below the mosque.

An  article in SabrangIndia  says “A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there “no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

At the time of demolition led by the extreme Hindu right wing, slogans were violent and threatening. The mob that climbed on to the mosque shouted “Yeh to kewal Jhanki hai, Kashi Mathura Baaki Hai” (This is just the beginning, Kashi; Mathura will be next). Some years ago the issue of both Kashi (Gyan Vapi Masjid) and Mathura (Idgah) was brought to the fore for “surveying”, despite the Places of Religious Worship Act, 1991 being in place. Ironically, Justice Chandrachud, himself one of the autthors of the Babri-Ayodhya judgement, opened the floodgates for future “disputes” by opining that the mere prayer of a survey below an existing place of worship is not prevented by the Act!! He added that Hindus have the “right to know the ancestry of the place.” Through this cynical wordplay, the Supreme Court itself allowed those perpetrating a distorted history, to gain legitimacy.

These forces, which had previously claimed that if the three shrines at Ajodhya, Kashi and Mathura are given to them, they will close their demands for other places of Hindu worship (lying under mosques) were not to be deterred by their own assurances. Currently, over 12 cases for survey are pending in the courts. Other issues like Kamaal Maula moque, Baba Budan Giri Dargah, Haji Malang Dargah and many more mosques areal so being pursued for claims by Hindus. There is a long list. As Sambhal Jama Masjid came under hammer, the centuries old Ajmer Dargah is also being claimed by Hindu Sena, which has sprung up to claim more and more sites to be given over to Hindus.

In these cases some doubtful documents are highlighted. In many of these the role of British officials is notorious, for example Mrs. Beevridge in translation of Babarnama,puts a footnote stating without any evidence that there might have been a temple underneath the mosque. There have been numerous examples of distorting history and multiple reasons for destroying temples, plundering wealth, humiliating the rival king being the main.

If we go a bit back in history the major cause of destroying Buddhist Vihars was religion. Swami Vivekananda shared the fact that, “The temple of Jagannath is an old Buddhistic temple. We took this and others over and re-Hinduised them…”. Swami Dayanand Saraswati while describing the contribution of Shankaracharya in his tome, Satyarth Prakash wrote: “For ten years he toured all over the country, refuted Jainism and advocated the Vedic religion. All the broken images that are now-a-days dug out of the earth were broken in the time of Shankar, whilst those that are found whole here and there under the ground had been buried by the Jainis for fear of their being broken.”

According to the Buddhist narrative of ancient Indian history the last of Maurya dynasty’s Buddhist king (Ashoka being one), Brihadratha was assassinated by Pushyamitra Shunga, a Brahmin in 184 BCE thus ending the rule of a renowned Buddhist dynasty and establishing the rule of Shunga dynasty. DN Jha, outstanding ancient Indian historian, referred to Divyavadana, a Buddhist Sanskrit work from the early centuries which described how Buddhist and Jain religious places were destroyed by Pushyamitra Shunga, a great persecutor of Buddhists.

“He is said to have marched out with a large army, destroying stupas, burning monasteries and killing monks as far as Sakala, now known as Sialkot, where he announced a prize of one hundred dinars for every head of a Shramana (opposed to Vedas).”

Jha tells us that at Mathura, a flourishing town in western Uttar Pradesh during the Kushana period, some present-day Brahminical temples, such as those of Bhuteshwar and Gokarneshwar, were Buddhist sites in the ancient period.

History which has today been made the part of popular common sense is the one propagated by Hindu nationalist forces, simply because of the force of their organisation and resources. The roots of this lie in the British policy of ‘divide and rule’ which promoted Communal Historiography. In this the kings are presented as representatives of their religion. The focus is mainly on the medieval period where many Muslim kings ruled. During this period many temples were plundered for wealth and many others were demolished to humiliate the defeated kings.

What is forgotten and erased from memory is that even a ruler like Aurangzeb gave donations to Hindu temples (Kamakhaya Devi temple and Mahakal temple in Ujjain, being few of them) and Hindu Kings like Raja Harshdev appointed a special officer (Devottapatan Nayak) to plunder the wealth of temples (Kalhan, Rajtarangini). Maratha kings destroying a temple in Srirangpanam are ignored, this narrative swept under the carpet. During this period religion had very little role to play unlike the post Mauryan Period when to wipe out Buddhism, Buddha Viharas were destroyed.

Indian polity and judiciary have opened a Pandora’s Box which is deepening religious divides in the society. What is the need of the hour? To search for temple underneath every mosque or to build the ‘temples of Modern India’ as defined by Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, “while starting the construction of the Bhakra Nangal Dam to describe scientific research institutes, steel plants, power plants, dams being launched in India after independence to jumpstart scientific and industrial progress.”

The direction that India chooses will define its destiny.

Related:

Rising Tensions: Muslim Religious Sites face renewed attacks, demand for survey in Delhi’s Jama Masjid and Hanuman Chalisa

Safeguarding our shrines

How the Ajmer Shrine Brings Alive the Spirit of Ramzan & Islam

The post Sambhal Mosque, Ajmer Dargah: how deep do we plunge into the abyss? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In contrast to this the streams basing their nationalism under the mask of religion not only kept aloof from anti colonial struggle but also sowed the seeds and nurtured the plants of Hate and divisiveness. Golwalkar, the second Sarsanghchalak of RSS, wrote, “German race pride has now become the topic of the day. To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races—the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.” – We, or Our Nationhood Defined (Bharat Publications, Nagpur, 1939). This set the tone for RSS to propagate hate against Muslims and Christians in India.

This Hate was the marginal tendency for decades but has emerged as the dominating ‘social common sense’ leading to series of anti-Muslim violence, their intimidation, lynching and what not leading to the phenomenon of ghettoisation, and relegating them to secondary position in society. The process is still on and different RSS-BJP leaders have used all their ‘innovation’ to create more hatred, they have kept adding on to the catchy slogans to demonize the Muslims. ‘They can be identified by their clothes’, ‘Shamshan-Kabristhan’, series of Jihads ‘Vote jihad’ being probably the latest among them. There is a long list of these. To cap it all two of their top leaders have peaked this phenomenon in recent times.

One of them is Giriraj Singh who is amongst those leading the pack of Hate promoters. Recently he stated, “If a Muslim/Ghuspetiya (infiltrator) slaps you once, everyone should come together and slap him 100 times….Keep a sword, spear and trident in the house, worship it and if someone comes, protect yourself from him…”

Immediately, this reminds us of the father of the nation who went on to say that if someone slaps you on one Cheek put forward the other cheek. The two ideologies of Gandhi’s Indian nationalism, amity and love are being totally countered by the ideology of Hindu Nationalism by provoking violence, and hate. The downslide of amity and rise of Hate have run parallel with the divisive politics of sectarian nationalism, particularly after demolition of Babri mosque, followed by series of divisive campaigns. With BJP coming to power at center, the various wings of RSS and foot soldiers of divisive nationalism have felt that now they can enjoy impunity to the fullest extent.

Around this time another divisive leader Yogi Adityanath, the introducer of bulldozer (in)justice has also thrown up a phrase ‘Batenge to Katenge’, i.e. Hindus should remain united else they will be slaughtered. This slogan has various dimensions, and the peak organization of Hindu nationalism has approved it. “The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on Saturday (October 26, 2024) backed Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s controversial remark — ‘*batenge to katenge*’, claiming that Hindus ‘will be slaughtered if divided’ — with RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale saying that the slogan, calling for unity among Hindus, is the lifetime pledge of the Sangh.”

This has multiple dimensions. One is that RSS strategists feel that the decline of BJP fortunes in last Lok Sabha elections was due to shift of dalit votes to the INDIA coalition which stood solidly with the concept of social justice and demanding the caste based census. The threat that if dalit-OBC go to INDIA coalition Hindus will be slaughtered! By whom? As per this slogan it will be by the Muslims. On the contrary they have been left in the lurch during the last 75 years. RSS combine may even prop up the non-applicable example of plight of Hindus in Bangladesh after the uprising (2024). Pakistan is always an evergreen (pun intended) example of the worsening plight of Hindus there.

We must unite as Indians were the central plank of the freedom movement. Indian was the core theme of our unity during anti colonial struggle and it gets reflected in our Constitution. Gandhi, the greatest Hindu of 20^th Century, never called for unity as Hindus. Neither the likes of Maulana Azad, Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan called for unity as Muslims.

For the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is not concerned about the welfare of ‘person standing last in line’, all its ideology, actions and utterances are contrary to what united India. It ridicules Rahul Gandhi’s (RG) call for ‘Mohabbat ki dukan’ (Shop of love) and questions as to why Rahul Gandhi does not meet RSS. Counter question is, why RSS wants to meet RG? RSS knows its politics is based on Hate (Muslims, Christians and those opposed to Hindu Nationalism), while RG is trying to put life back into the Indian National ethos of love and amity as underlined in our Constitution. Why should RG be interested in ideologues against whose ideology he is trying to raise his voice?

If the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) RSS wants to RG to meet RSS, it has to drastically change its ideology of division and adopt the values of Indian Constitution, the core of which is unity as Indians and fraternity between people irrespective of their religion. It is precisely for this reason that Nehru, Gandhi’s disciple, never gave importance to RSS, it is for this reason that Indira Gandhi refused to concede RSS Chief Balasaheb Deoras’s request to meet her. RSS as per its character wants to derive its legitimacy even from those who oppose its politics.

Related:

Restating the agenda of Hindu Rashtra: RSS chief sets the tone for BJP politics

Combating Islamophobia: A task overdue

Caste Imbroglio: Changing Narrative of Hindu Right

The post Promoting love or instilling hate and fear appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bhagwat’s speech served to humble Modi’s rising arrogance. The RSS (collectively known as the Sangh Parivar) became more active in the Haryana elections, and with favorable support from the Election Commission, the BJP defied expectations and returned to power, despite predictions of a Congress victory.

In his Dussehra speech, Bhagwat reaffirmed BJP policies, criticized non-BJP-ruled states, and laid out the deeper goals of the RSS and Hindutva politics. He claimed that terms like ‘Deep State,’ ‘Wokeism,’ and ‘Cultural Marxism’ are enemies of cultural traditions. According to Bhagwat, these ideologies infiltrate educational institutions, destroy societal values, create artificial problems, and instill a sense of victimhood, leading to aggression and anarchy. He warned that such movements aim to undermine governance and establish dominance over nations.

The term ‘wokeism,’ used derisively by right-wing groups, generally refers to an awareness of social and political injustice. Bhagwat’s critique of wokeism highlights the tension between progressive ideals and the conservative, hierarchical values promoted by the RSS. Through its network of shakhas, schools like Saraswati Shishu Mandir and Ekal Vidyalayas, and its influence over media—thanks to sympathetic corporations and BJP’s IT cells—the RSS has shaped a conservative social consensus in India.

Wokeism, in contrast, advocates for a just society, opposing discrimination based on caste, religion, color, and sexual orientation. It also supports LGBTQ+ rights. These principles challenge the Brahminical values central to Hindutva politics. Hindu nationalists, like other fundamentalist movements globally—whether the Taliban, the Muslim Brotherhood, or Christian fundamentalists—oppose equality and justice. Their goal is to maintain traditional hierarchies, as evidenced by the RSS’s historical admiration for the Manusmriti, a text that subjugates Dalits and women.

The RSS’s disdain for wokeism is part of its broader rejection of movements for equality. In India, Hindu nationalists look down on Dalit, women’s, and LGBTQ+ rights movements, just as fundamentalist forces in Muslim-majority countries target women’s rights. The RSS seeks to replace democratic values with those of an imagined “Golden Age” of inequality.

The RSS’s disdain for wokeism is part of its broader rejection of movements for equality

Though there may be internal tensions between the RSS and the BJP, their core values remain aligned, despite occasional clashes of ego. Bhagwat’s speech mirrored much of BJP’s current policies. He criticized non-BJP-ruled states, singling out Punjab, Jammu-Kashmir, Ladakh, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and the entire northeastern region, from Bihar to Manipur, as areas of concern. Notably, he lumped Ladakh and Manipur together, despite the stark differences between the two regions.

Manipur has witnessed horrific violence, particularly against the Kuki community and women, with the BJP government showing disturbing apathy. Ladakh, on the other hand, has seen peaceful environmental and citizenship movements, led by figures like Sonam Wangchuk. The BJP’s neglect of Ladakh’s peaceful struggle is a dark chapter in India’s recent history.

Bhagwat’s selective outrage was also evident in his mention of the R.G. Kar Medical College tragedy, while remaining silent on the rising atrocities against women wrestlers and Dalit girls. His earlier statement that rape happens in “India” (urban areas) but not in “Bharat” (villages) is contradicted by the reality: most cases of sexual violence in BJP-ruled states occur in villages and small towns. A report from the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment shows that Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh had the highest numbers of atrocities against Dalits in 2022, revealing a disturbing trend.

Perhaps the most telling moment of Bhagwat’s speech came when he urged Hindus to unite and become strong, as “the weak cannot defend themselves.” But aren’t we already united as Indians? Is there any issue with unity as outlined in the Indian Constitution? Bhagwat’s remarks betray the RSS’s superficial adherence to constitutional values, which they invoke primarily for electoral gains.

Author is Political commentator 

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Restating the agenda of Hindu Rashtra: RSS chief sets the tone for BJP politics appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This is a great example to emulate in our country where this and many other misconceptions and biases rule the roost. How did Islam spread? By citing the examples of some Hindu kings being killed by Muslim Kings for political reasons, it has been popularized and instilled the myth that Islam spread by sword. The reality of the spread of Islam in India is very different.

The Arab traders had been frequently coming to Malabar Coast of Kerala and Islam was adopted by the locals through social interaction with these traders. The manifestation of this phenomenon is perceivable through Cheraman Jumma Mosque in Malabar region of Kerala which was built in the seventh century itself.

Swami Vivekananda points out “The Mohammedan conquest of India came as a salvation of the downtrodden, to the poor. That is why one fifth of our people have become Mohammedans. It was not the sword that did it all. It would be the height of madness to think that it was all the work of sword and fire. It was to gain their liberty from the… zamindars (landlords) and from the – Priest, and as a consequence you find in Bengal there are more Mohammedans than Hindus amongst cultivators, because there were so many zamindars there.” As such none of the kings spread their religion, barring Emperor Ashok, who sent his emissaries to spread the message of Lord Gautama Buddha.

Today in India the misconceptions against Muslims and Christians are abound and form the base of violence. The misconceptions are becoming stronger over the period of time and have become a part of ‘social common sense’. The process of spreading misconception began with the formulation that Muslim Kings destroyed Hindu temples. The intensification of the propaganda led to the demolition of Babri mosque on December6, 1992, the guilty of which have not been punished till date. The Babri Mosque issue has been added, Kashi and Mathura. Even Taj Mahal is being propagated as Shiva Temple converted into the tomb of Noorjahan, queen of Jahangir.

Lately misconceptions about the ‘Cow being a holy animal and Muslims are killing the cows’ is at the forefront. This is one of the main grounds for propagating vegetarianism on one hand and lynching on the other. As per the IndiaSpend “IndiaSpend has reported that Muslims were the target of 51% of violence cantered on bovine issues from 2010 to 2017 and comprised 86% of the 28 Indian citizens killed in 63 incidents. Only 3% of these attacks had been reported before Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government came to power in May 2014. IndiaSpend also recorded that about half the cow-related violence—32 of 63 cases—occurred in BJP-ruled States.”

Human rights activist Harsh Mander, the founder of Karwan-e-Mohabbat, visits the families of lynching victims to soothe the wounds of the families and residents. The impact of lynching is very powerful and frightening. All this came to mind when Cow Vigilantes’ killed a Hindu student Aryan Mishra on the suspicion of cow smuggling. His mother stated “In her statement, Aryan’s mother questioned the reasons behind the killing, saying, “The accused mistook him as a Muslim and killed him. Why? Aren’t Muslims human? Why you need to kill Muslims”. We do recall Akhlaq, Junaid, Rakbar Khan and many others who have been done to death on suspicion of killing the cows. Recently while travelling from Amritsar to Palampur by road, my young colleague was repeatedly shocked to see the plight of stray cows, their menace on the road and frequency of road accidents related to cows and plight of farmers due to stray cows.

On parallel lines the non-vegetarian food in the Tiffin is becoming another cause for tormenting Muslim students. In an incident a third standard Muslim boy in a prominent school in Amroha had brought Biryani in his lunch box. The principal of Hilton school, Amrish Kumar Sharma locked him up in the store room, commenting that “I won’t teach children who will demolish temples after growing up…”

The major problem being faced by the country is Hate speech. We have mechanisms to control and punish those indulging in Hate speech but on ground; those indulging in hate speech are generally enjoying impunity, rather they are promoted in the party hierarchy. The Assam Chief Minister on a regular basis spreads such hate, like I will not let Miya Muslims to take over Assam. And uses words like flood jihad, electricity jihad and naukari (jobs) Jihad. On a regular basis he and other BJP leaders state things like this to polarize the community along religious lines.

UP Chief Minister, Yogi Adityanath began demolishing the houses and property of Muslims by bulldozers. Other BJP Chief Ministers have been following this example. On Bulldozer menace Justice B.R. Gavai stated “How can homes of people be demolished only because he is an accused? Even if he is a convict, it can’t be done without following the procedure as prescribed by law”.  He was hearing a petition against the Jahangirpuri demolition drive in Delhi after the 2022 riots. “But the question is will the Chief Ministers listen?

Is it not time for the state to set up a committee like the one in the UK to ensure the implementation of norms which combat misconceptions? In India many misconceptions are prevailing and no impactful effort has been undertaken to counter these. These misconceptions have spread very dangerously in society. The civil society groups and political parties committed to inclusive, peaceful society need to come forward need to undertake promotion of harmony by countering misconceptions, it is overdue to prevent communal violence in society!

Author is Political commentator

The post Combating Islamophobia: A task overdue appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Historical figures like Jotirao Phule and Bhimrao Ambedkar have highlighted the exploitation experiences of marginalized groups, which led to upper-caste organizations promoting ideas of a glorious Hindu past and the concept of a Hindu nation, drawing from the values propagated in the Manusmriti.

In recent years, particularly under the influence of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a narrative has emerged portraying all castes as equal. RSS ideologues have produced numerous publications that assert an egalitarian history among different castes.

Nevertheless, some RSS leaders attribute the emergence of Dalits and tribal communities to “Muslim invasion” during medieval history. Bhaiyyaji Joshi, a prominent figure within the RSS, argues that the category of ‘shudras’ was never synonymous with untouchables in Hindu scriptures, claiming that so-called “Islamic atrocities” gave rise to this social stratification. He elaborates that historical foreign invaders forced Hindu communities into degrading labor, perpetuating a caste engaged in tasks like skinning animals as a punitive measure.

Amidst the rising calls for a caste census, there is an orchestrated effort to recast the caste system in a favorable light, portraying it as a protective structure of Hindu society. An article in the RSS publication Panchjanya, penned by Hitesh Shankar on August 5, 2024, asserts that foreign aggressors failed to dismantle the caste system and that it has been integral to maintaining the well-being of the nation. The piece even references former Bombay Bishop Louis George Milne, suggesting that caste is inherently tied to both social structure and religious identity.

Shankar’s article posits that just as missionaries once criticized caste, the Indian National Congress (INC) – likened to the colonial East India Company – similarly perceives it as a societal impediment. It suggests that those invaders could not breach the “caste fortress,” instead relegating upper-caste individuals to menial tasks, an assertion the author argues lacks historical grounding.

Ambedkar famously denounced the Manusmriti, while the RSS promotes its values of caste inequality

However, this perspective is rife with inaccuracies. The caste system, as delineated in the Manusmriti, predates foreign invasions and laid the groundwork for practices of untouchability and manual scavenging, steeped in notions of purity and pollution. Works like the Narada Samhita and the Vajasaneyi Samhita explicitly describe roles and duties tied to caste hierarchies, including tasks involving sanitation.

Dr. Ambedkar, a key advocate for the rights of the oppressed, viewed caste as a Brahminical constriction on society and called for its complete eradication. In stark contrast to the pro-caste sentiments expressed in the RSS’s narrative, many radical Dalit scholars and activists identify the caste system as a grave ailment of Hindu society.

While the call for proportionate representation and a caste census is viewed as a threat by Hindu nationalists led by the RSS, its roots can be traced back to the historic Poona Pact between Gandhi and Ambedkar. The caste census eventually found its place within the Indian Constitution, even as opposition efforts have historically manifested through violence, such as the riots in Ahmedabad in the 1980s.

The claim is that the INC is merely a vestige of the East India Company and its founder, A.O. Hume, is a distortion of history. Key figures in the INC, from Lokmanya Tilak to Gandhi, actively resisted British colonial rule. Grassroots organizations, such as the Madras Mahajan Sabha and the Bombay Association, sought platforms to voice their demands, eventually aligning with the INC to champion the aspirations of a burgeoning national consciousness.

The INC evolved to call for ‘Total Independence’ and the ‘Quit India’ movement. Its agenda included social justice principles championed by Ambedkar, a stark contrast to the RSS’s hierarchy-defending ideology.

In conclusion, the divergence between Ambedkar, who fought for the equitable ideals embedded in the Indian Constitution, and the RSS, which advocates for Hindu nationalism and caste hierarchy, remains profound. Ambedkar famously denounced the Manusmriti, while the RSS promotes its values of caste inequality.

Ambedkar’s role in drafting the Indian Constitution stands in opposition to the long-standing resistance from the RSS, reflecting deep ideological divides in contemporary Indian society.

Author is Political commentator

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Seeking caste census? Sharp rise in move to portray caste as Hindu protective shield appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The RSS leaders claimed that these castes had come into existence due to atrocities by foreign invaders and did not exist in Hindu religion earlier. “Three top RSS leaders have sought to attribute the genesis of Dalits, tribals and many other groups to “Muslim invasion” in medieval times.” According to Bhaiyyaji Joshi, a top leader in RSS hierarchy, ‘shudras’ were never untouchables in Hindu scriptures. ‘Islamic atrocities’ during the medieval age resulted in the emergence of untouchables, Dalits. Joshi further elaborated, “To violate Hindu swabhiman (dignity) of Chanwarvanshiya kshatriyas (a caste in Hinduism), foreign invaders from Arab, Muslim rulers and beef-eaters, forced them to do abominable works like killing cows, skinning them and throwing their carcasses in deserted places. Foreign invaders thus created a caste of charma-karma (dealing with skin) by giving such works as punishment to proud Hindu prisoners.”

Now carrying on from here there is a renewed attempt to present the caste system in a positive light and as a saviour of this nation (Hindu). As the demand for caste census is picking up RSS’s mouthpiece Panchjanya in its August 5 (2024) has published an article by Hitesh Shankar (HS), “A Netaji: Kaun jaat ho” (Oh Leader, to which caste you belong). This article argues that the foreign aggressors could not break the caste curtains and so could not do the conversions. The caste has the major basis of Hindu society and has kept the nation in the pink of health despite the foreign aggressors. This article approvingly quotes an earlier ex-Bishop of Bombay, Louis George Milne’s book, ‘Mission to Hindus: A contribution to the study of Missionary methods’. The quote is “…then it (caste, added) is necessarily a part of social structure. Still for all practical purposes it constructs religion for millions…It acts as a link between one’s nature and Religion.” (Translated from Hindi Article).

As per the author what was pinching the Missionaries then is pinching the Indian National Congress (INC) which is the inheritor of East India Company and Lord A O Hume. Further it points out that as the aggressors could not break the caste fortress they (Muslims) forced the uptight castes for manual scavenging; as such there is no mention of this system in earlier society. As per the missionaries they attribute backwardness of society to the caste system. As per the HS, like British, INC also looks at the caste as a thorn in the system.

This article is a compilation of a bundle of the lies. To begin with the caste system was articulated strongly in Manusmriti (2^nd Century AD, much before foreign aggressors came) and many Holy books stated that the low caste should remain away from the upper caste and this was the root of untouchability, and manual scavenging is the expression of the same. This is inherent in purity-pollution practices and also in the theories of rebirth. Earlier references of this are found in Narada Samhita and Vajasaneyi Samhita. In Narada Samhita 15 duties listed for untouchables, one is the removal of human excreta. In Vajasaneyi Samhita, Chandals are referred to as slaves engaged in disposal of Human excreta.

Dr. Ambedkar viewed caste as a Brahminical imposition on society. While the whole article of RSS mouthpiece is singing praise for the caste system. Radical Dalit intellectuals and activists have seen this as a major ill of Hindu society. It is here that Ambedkar in several of his writings calls for ‘annihilation of caste’.

While proportionate representation and caste census is an eyesore for Hindu Nationalists, led by RSS, its beginnings are in Poona Pact between Gandhi and Ambedkar and later it found its place in Indian Constitution. To oppose this in subtle and direct forms there were riots in Ahmedabad in 1980 and then 1985. Ram Temple movement became more aggressive when Mandal Commission recommendations were implemented in 1990.

As far as INC being an inheritor of East India Company and Hume’s legacy is concerned, this is a concoction which only those can formulate who were away from Freedom Movement and now are opposed to the idea of India as a plural; diverse country. INC from Tilak to Gandhi was totally against the British rule of which Hume was a part. Hume conceived of it as a safety valve, it is alleged. Going deeper one will see that emerging India National organizations like, Madras Mahajan Sabha (founder Panapakkam Anandacharlu), Bombay Association (founder Jagannath Shankarshet) and Poona Sarvajanik Sabha  (founder M.G. Ranade) were looking for a political platform to reach their demands for British rule. They responded to this call of INC as they saw and did actualize to make it a national platform to put forward demands of emerging India. This initially called for opening centres of ICS in India, INC called for restrictions of landlords so that the captive labour power is released and demanded more facilities for rising industrialization.

The same organization (INC) in due course called for ‘Total Independence’ and ‘British Quit India’! The same Congress whom Panchjanya is targeting led the national movement, taking along the issue of social justice, which was strongly put forward by Ambedkar.

As such the contrast between Ambedkar, who represents the values of Indian Constitution, and RSS, which represents Hindu Nationalism, are stark. Ambedkar burnt Manusmriti; RSS upholds the values of caste inequality given in this holy book. Ambedkar drafted the Indian Constitution and RSS opposed it directly for a long time and indirectly at present!

Ram Puniyani is president of the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism.

The post Caste Imbroglio: Changing Narrative of Hindu Right appeared first on SabrangIndia.