The article also notes the RSS’s controversial history, including its association with communal violence—such as the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi by a former RSS member and the 1990s demolition of a 16th-century mosque in Ayodhya, which sparked significant backlash.

The post 100 yrs of RSS as seen by global media house: Power, controversy, push for Hindu-first India appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the extremely polarised era in the India that we live in, a biography of a contentious person, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (1883-1966) is bound to attract substantial attention. This is not limited to the popular domain of public history but also in the scholarly domain. Historian Janaki Bakhle (Columbia University) has intervened in this sphere, first with two of her long, well-researched essays in 2010. These essays created a temptation among academics and expectations from Bakhle that she brings out a comprehensive biography of Savarkar. The wait took long. Eventually, this large volume has come out. In terms of methodological rigour, the book is indeed an extraordinarily impressive work.

This is perhaps for the first time that Savarkar has been studied not in a hagiographic account but with extraordinary scrutiny of a multitude of sources and evidence: the thick files of police and intelligence reports and a deep engagement with the range of Marathi language sources. This awe-inspiring volume inevitably impresses a discerning student of history with the range of the facets of Savarkar: his anti-colonial revolutionary activities, his anti-Muslim hatred, his radical caste reformism, his Marathi language oeuvres in prose and poetry (creative and rhetorical), the way he looked upon and weaponised history, and the ways he adapted to fashion himself into a legend in his own time through both mythologization and sacralization. In this segment, Janaki Bakhle looks into all hagiographical accounts (around 250 tracts) on and by Savarkar, mostly in the Marathi language. Bakhle says that between 1924 and 1937 Savarkar wrote around 300 essays on various issues, in Marathi, and therefore she makes it clear (p. 423) as to why did she has looked so deeply and closely into Savarkar’s Marathi writings, hitherto untapped by historians:

In this book I have kept in mind Theodor Adorno’s aphorism that one must be steeped in a tradition to hate it properly. By hate, Adorno meant critique, which I take to mean both appreciation and analysis. I have steeped myself in the traditions that surround Savarkar so I could present a new view, scholarly and dispassionate, but also embedded in the traditions and milieu that spawned his life and his legends. I have tried to present Savarkar as a man of intense nationalist passion who was seen as extraordinarily dangerous (hence important and influential) by the colonial authorities, yet who was used (perhaps unwittingly) at the same time by them to further their own agenda.

Janaki Bakhle’s study doesn’t go beyond 1937, even though, while evaluating Savarkar’s “historical” and performable writings, his 1963 account, Six Glorious Epochs has also been subjected to scrutiny and analysis. By terminating the study in 1937, Janaki Bakhle skips the story of Savarkar’s alleged roles in plotting the assassination of Gnadhiji wherein he was acquitted owing to lack of sufficient evidence. The critics of Savarkar may argue that a further trial based on “circumstantial evidence” may have culminated into a different end result This continues to intrigue many as to why neither Nehru, Sardar Patel (who barely spoke against the RSS before January 30, 1948) and Morarji Desai (whose 1974 autobiography hints at something) and other such leaders in power pursued this case further? Was it because such a judicial pursuit may have created administratively unmanageable revulsion from the admirers of Savarkar? Did Savarkar really carry a strong charisma among a section of his fellow castes in parts of his home province?

A close reader of the last three chapters of Bakhle may get some hint/clue about the answers to the last question. In fact, just as a powerful fiction leaves readers thinking for long after having finished reading the story, Bakhle leaves her discerning readers thinking on so many aspects of Savarkar. Bakhle’s relevant chapters clearly suggest that Savarkar, the poet-politician, rhetorical essay-writer, and playwright, the “nation’s bard”, was a sort of cult among a section of the Marathi literary world (for communalisation of this segment of Marathi population, see T C A Raghavan’s 1983 essay). Thus, Savarkar’s pre-Cellular Jail life when he was fiercely anti-colonial revolutionary, and his post-1924 life when he fashioned himself first and foremost as a poet and Marathi litterateur besides a rationalist anti-caste social reformist, helped him become quite a charismatic figure for a section of the Marathi-speaking population. That he “was not sporadically or episodically anti-Muslim; he was deeply and systematically anti-Muslim” (p. 148) could be no less significant factor in his popularity among certain quarters.

The first two chapters rely much upon a critically insightful examination of intelligence reports of the colonial police. The author rightly says that Savarkar spent all his public life under state surveillance (even after independence too). Bakhle is very clear about (a specific contention around Savarkar) that his anti-Muslim hatred always existed and that it had nothing to do with the rumour that he turned anti-Muslim only after he received maltreatment at the hands of a Muslim in the Cellular Jail. However, Savarkar’s anti-Muslim hatred became much more pronounced with the start of the Khilafat Movement, and it served the colonial interest very well. He looked upon Khilafat agitation as an “international conspiracy to steal Hindu sovereignty”.

Bakhle deals with colonial motives in great detail while detailing the Savarkar-Gandhi-Khilafat issue. It provokes scholars of the field to re-look into the hitherto untold impact of the pan-Islamist Khilafat agitation upon a section of Hindus. Apprehensions of Lala Lajpat Rai (Intezar Husain’s 1999 Urdu biography of Hakim Ajmal Khan, Ajmal-e-Azam, records it) were not far different from those of Savarkar on the issue. The colonial power-play of pitting the two religious communities of India against each other is brought out very deeply and comprehensively by Bakhle. Bakhle, quite rightly, makes it a point to mention that many eminent Muslim leaders and scholars were not for the institution of Khilafat, such as, Sir Syed (1817-1898), Ashraf Ali Thanwi (1863-1943), Ahmed Riza Barelvi (1856-1921), Shibli Numani (1857-1914) and Anwar Shah Kashmiri of Deoband. Despite this, by the time the World War-I began, Indian Muslims became so agitated in favour of the Khilafat keeping themselves quite oblivious to the anti-Caliphate upsurge of the Turks at home in Turkey. This aspect needed little more detailed treatment, in order to understand the sentiments of those segments of Hindus who were apprehensive about pan-Islamist “designs” of Indian Muslims. Yet, Gandhiji extended unconditional support to them in the early 1920s.

A further engagement with Azmi Ozcan’s 1997 book, Pan Islamism: Indian Muslims, the Ottomans and Britain, 1877-1924 would have further enriched the book under review. Ozcan makes it clear that Indian Muslims turned sympathetic to the Turkish Caliphate only in the 1870s, when the Ottoman-British relations began to deteriorate. Otherwise, the Ottomans and Mughals were not on good terms. There are indications that the former remained in apprehension that Mughals might snatch away their Caliphate. Mughal princess and writer Gulbadan Begam (1570s; see Rumer Godden’s 1975 biography), Sikandar Begum of Bhopal (1861) and the Tonk State administrator (1871) faced hostilities of the Haj administrators under the Ottoman Caliphate (see Ziauddin Sardar, 2014, Mecca: The Sacred City). Janaki Bakhle however does benefit from Naeem Qureshi (2014) who explains the Ottoman anxiety and insecurity, as they were the first Caliphs to have been non-Arab and non-descendant of the Prophet Mohammad (p. 91).

Bakhle misses to note that, not only Savarkar, long before that, since 1877-1878, Indian Muslim leaders too, were under colonial surveillance for their growing sympathies with the Ottomans. Just two decades back, in 1857, the Mughal state had already been liquidated. It would be pertinent to note that Turkish Cap became a fad in the MAO College of Aligarh (which was founded in 1877). Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hameed II (1876-1909) was reclaiming the Caliphate, calling himself, Imam-ul-Muslimeen, which had receptivity across Asia, Africa, including British India. Soon after Hameed, India’s Pan Islamists would form Anjuman-e-Khuddam-e-Kaba (Society of the Servants of Kaba) in 1912-13.

The colonial intelligence reports about India’s Khilafat leaders and Savarkar’s vitriol against the same carry some degree of resemblance in tone, tenor and vocabulary. She devotes considerable number of pages on the evolution of colonial policing and surveillance, which is quite useful for evidence-based historical research.

Savarkar’s deep antipathy against the Ali Brothers is understandable. While the former looked upon Kemal Ataturk as a secular saviour, the later was agitating passionately about the preservation of Caliphate. Interestingly, Jinnah too displayed a limited, essential resemblance with Savarkar on this specific issue. Also, in the post-Tilak phase of the nationalist mass movement both Savarkar and Jinnah developed an antipathy against Gandhiji. Contrary to assertions from some circles, at least for once, by 1927, we do find Savarkar speaking against Jinnah. In Savarkar’s understanding all Muslim leaders were for enhancing Muslim numbers through conversion, and that they bargained to obtain concessions from Hindus, issuing a threat that “whatever demands Muslims make, all of them have to be immediately granted by Hindus, otherwise with the help of Afghanistan or some other Muslim country we will establish Muslim rule in India” (p. 124).

Subsequently, like Savarkar, Shaukat Ali too (in 1933) would seek clemency from the colonial state to secure his pension to be restored from 1919, rather than from 1933 (something Janaki Bakhle has ommitted). Nonetheless, with meticulous and detailed surveillance reports obtained about Savarkar from the colonial state, helps Bakhle conclude almost irrefutably that the Colonial state always looked upon Savarkar as a tool to be used for creating Hindu-Muslim hostility (p. 423) and made a greater use of him after 1937.

Janaki Bakhle brings out the merits of Savarkar’s caste reformism, something which has remained largely unacknowledged among the non-Marathi readers. She however doesn’t gloss over the limitations of Savarkar’s reformism. “[H]e never developed a critique of caste that acknowledged its deep connections to structures of power, access, and wellbeing” (p. 151). This chapter makes comprehensive engagement with the positions of Gandhi, Ambedkar and Savarkar on the issues of caste and untouchability. Savarkar’s pathologically obsessive pursuit of ethno-nationalism wanted to convert caste (jati) into Hindu ethnicity through an upper-caste Brahminic lens (p. 153). However, on this count, for a more informed critique of Ambedkar and its divergence as well as convergence (in terms of anti-Muslim utterances) with Savarkar, an engagement with Keith Meadowcroft’s works could have proven more useful.

Savarkar’s ethnonationalist project is analysed quite brilliantly in each chapter. He wanted to cure his “nation” of the “narcoleptic sleep disorder”, suggests Bakhle (p. 352). Scrutinizing him as “nationalist historian” she looks into his 1963 text, Six Glorious Epochs as a “defensive tract about the Hindu Mahasabha, which had held itself aloof from Gandhi and the INC-led Quit India Movement [of 1942]”, and where he “appears both angry and tired”.

This is a commendable work not only to know of many lesser known aspects and psyche of her subject (Savarkar) but also to learn much more about the divisive power-play of the British, the crucial decades of the nationalist movement during the 1920s and 1930s, and it unpacks new layers of Hindu anxiety around the Pan-Islamist Muslims of India. Janaki Bakhle’s historiographic rigour, insight (and beautiful prose) uncovers the genesis behind contemporary resurgence of Hindutva. A must read both for the specialists as well as popular reading which settles many contentions of public history on the subject.

Related:

The AMU Teachers’ Association (AMUTA) and Waqf Worries: Ordinary members of the Qaum are caught between a self-serving elite and a majoritarian Regime

Political History of India’s Two Muslim Universities since 1947

The Waqf Bill 2024: An Open Letter to the Joint Committee of Parliament, the Opposition, and India’s Muslim Communities

The post Savarkar and the Making of Hindutva: Book Review appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As per the details provided, over the call the police officer in Mira Road confirmed his address and said they were standing in front of his building. When Basha questioned the policeman why they had called him, the policeman inquired if he had shared a Savarkar-related meme on his social media page.

It was only when Basha enquired the police on the law under which the police had taken note of a social media meme that the police backed down. Basha also questioned the police on the law under which he was required to report to the police immediately.

It is essential to note that a multi-party delegation will be meeting the police today.

What was the post about?

The post was a humorous quote about Savarkar’s (lack of) role in India’s freedom struggle. It also included a picture of Savarkar’s notorious mercy petition which he allegedly wrote to the British administration while he was in a jail in the Andaman and Nicobar Island. 

The impugned meme posted by leader Sadique Basha is as follows:

Related:

Savarkar to Tilak to Shastri: 50 new life stories for UP students

Savarkar’s grandson calls for trade boycott of Muslims: HJS, GOA

Teaser of Film on Savarkar: Lies Galore

Decoding politics behind inauguration of new Parliament Complex on Savarkar’s Birth Anniversary

Netaji’s Secular Outlook, and Why He was Disappointed With Jinnah, Savarkar

The post Attack on freedom of speech: CPI(M) leader receives call from police over meme on Savarkar appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Class XII: Ramakrishna Paramhansa, Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi, Rajguru Rabindranath Tagore, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Rani Laxmibai, Maharana Pratap, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Adi Shankaracharya, Guru Nanak Dev, APJ Abdul Kalam, Ramanujacharya, Panini, Aryabhatta and CV Raman.

Uttar Pradesh (UP) under the second term rule of Ajay Bisht aka Adityanath will now see a fres effort to “familiarise students with the civilisation and culture of the country”, the Uttar Pradesh government has incorporated the biographies of 50 eminent leaders, including VD  Savarkar, a leading figure in the Hindu Mahasabha, to the academic curriculum of Classes IX to XII of the state board.

A spokesperson for government on June 23, on Friday, announced to the media that this is being done “to introduce students of the state to the civilisation and culture of the country, following the instructions of Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath”. This has been reported in The Indian Express.

“The students will now read about the country’s great men, revolutionaries, freedom fighters, social reformers, historians, and great personalities. Many of them sacrificed their lives for the country’s independence,” said the spokesperson.

Class IX students will read the life stories of Chandra Shekhar Azad, Birsa Munda, Begum Hazrat Mahal, Veer Kunwar Singh, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Gautam Buddha, Jyotiba Phule, Chhatrapati Shivaji, VD Savarkar, Vinoba Bhave, Srinivasa Ramanujan, and Jagadish Chandra Bose.

Class X: Mangal Pandey, Roshan Singh, Sukhdev, Lokmanya Tilak, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Mahatma Gandhi, Khudiram Bose and Swami Vivekananda.

Class XI: Ram Prasad Bismil, Bhagat Singh, Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay, Mahavir Jain, Bharat Ratna Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya, Arvind Ghosh, Raja Rammohan Roy, Sarojini Naidu, Nana Saheb, Maharishi Patanjali, Shalya Physician Sushrut and Dr Homi Jehangir Bhabha.

Class XII: Ramakrishna Paramhansa, Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi, Rajguru Rabindranath Tagore, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Rani Laxmibai, Maharana Pratap, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Adi Shankaracharya, Guru Nanak Dev, APJ Abdul Kalam, Ramanujacharya, Panini, Aryabhatta and CV Raman.

Related:

Decoding politics behind inauguration of new Parliament Complex on Savarkar’s Birth Anniversary

Goa gov’t will reprint books by Savarkar, Karnataka will teach Hedgewar’s speech

The post Savarkar to Tilak to Shastri: 50 new life stories for UP students appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The list includes former High Court judges S.N. Dhingra, M.C. Garg and R.S. Rathore, former ambassadors Niranjan Desai, O.P. Gupta, Ashok Kumar, Vidya Sagar, and former Foreign Secretary Shashank. They also praised DU’s decision to drop poet Mohammad Iqbal’s philosophy from the political science syllabus, noting that he was associated with the idea of a separate Muslim nation, which led to the “tragedy of India’s partition”.

‘Distorted history’

Stating that until now the history being taught in India was not truthfully revealing facts, the group added that a grave injustice had been done to many historical personalities who laid down their lives to help India break free from the clutches of British imperialism.

In their letter, the group maintained that the distorted history had been driven by “the Congress and some left-leaning organisations for political reasons”. Dubbing Savarkar a distinguished freedom fighter, poet and political philosopher, the group said that he had left an important and indelible mark on India’s history.

Ideology of Akhand Bharat

“Sarvarkar’s vision of India as one nation was central to his ideology— ‘Akhand Bharat.’ Savarkar’s views on freedom, social reform, and national unity make him an enduring figure in Indian history. By deepdiving into Savarkar’s political ideology, students will gain insight into the factors that shaped India’s nationalist movement and its subsequent trajectory,” the letter said.

The group also criticised the poet Iqbal, saying that it was also necessary for students to understand the impact of divisive historical figures and their contribution to partition.

“Iqbal became radicalised and as the President of the Muslim League, his ideas ran counter to democracy and Indian secularism. Many of Iqbal’s writings have been associated with the idea of a separate Muslim nation, ultimately leading to the tragedy of India’s partition. This concept of the Two Nation Theory played a significant role in the partition of India, resulting in the trauma and suffering of millions of displaced in India’s East and West,” the letter said, adding that the signatories fully endorsed the decision of the Academic Council of Delhi University.

Related:

Teaser of Film on Savarkar: Lies Galore

Decoding politics behind inauguration of new Parliament Complex on Savarkar’s Birth Anniversary

Savarkar as a diehard Casteist

The post Ex-judges, bureaucrats, diplomats support inclusion of V.D. Savarkar in DU’s political science syllabus appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In this chain one new film’s teaser, ‘Swatantraveer Savakar’s teaser was released timed with his 140th birth Anniversary on May 28 when the new parliament building was also inaugurated. The 73 second teaser makes some statements and all of them are either false or manipulated to glorify Savarkar, the patron saint of Hindu nationalism. Though he was not part of RSS, it was his book ‘Hindutva or Who is a Hindu’ which formed the ideological base of RSS. As RSS did not participate in the freedom struggle, it has been constructing icons which it thinks can be ideologically close to its political agenda. Savarkar is their major choice as in the first part of his life till he was jailed in Andman’s and was anti-British revolutionary. Harping on this part of his life the Hindu nationalists glorify him to the sky.

When Atal Bihari Vajpayee led NDA came to power in 1998, Savarkar’s portrait was unveiled in the parliament. The debate around unveiling of his portrait also projected the second part of his life when he emerged as the ideologue of Hindu nationalism, ‘two nation theory’ and his collaboration with British rule.

During his regime Vajpayee planned to give Bharat Ratna to Savarkar, but this proposal was turned down by the then President of India, Dr. K.R. Narayanan. That notwithstanding a plaque was put up in his honor in Andmans. Now during the last nine years as Modi is ruling, Savarkar anniversary is celebrated with pomp and the latest in the series of honoring him was to inaugurate the new parliament building on his birthday.

The tease states that only few people participated in the anti British struggle and the rest were there to grab power. This is a big insult to all those revolutionaries who, unlike Savarkar rotted and died in Andman jail, to all those Indians who participated in the major anti British Movements of 1920 (Non Cooperation), the Civil disobedience (1930), Dandi March, the Quit India. It is also an insult to the likes of Bhagat Singh, Chandrasekhar Azad and their colleagues who in the bravest possible fashion put their lives on their palms and stood rock solid against the British Empire. It is an insult to the efforts of Netaji’s Azad Hind Fauz.

Teaser goes on to state that had Gandhi not insisted on non-violence India would have got freedom 35 years ago, i.e. in 1912! The script writer must have been in the world of unadulterated fiction to have written this. In 1912, Savarkar himself was in Andmans, Tilak, the major leader of Congress, was in Mandalay prison and Gandhi was in South Africa. That the major role in the freedom of the country was played by non-violence is stating the obvious. The revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh, in later part of their movement, opined that non violent mass movement is the path for getting freedom.

Teaser claims that it was Savarkar, who was the source of inspiration for Khudiram Bose, Bhagat Singh and Netaji Bose. Lies should have their limits but not for those who are motivated ideologically especially in sectarian nationalism. Eighteen year old Khudiram Bose was martyred in 1908 a year before Savarkar’s book on 1857 came to light, while Savarakr himself was in London from 1906 to 1911. As far as Bhagat Singh is concerned he did mention Savarakr’s book on 1857 and ‘Hindu Padpadshi’ among many other books, not as a source of inspiration but for some quotes. Bhagat Singh was inspired by Gadar party’s Kartar Sarabha, whose photo he used to carry in his pocket. And also by Lenin, whose literature he devoured through and through.

Bhagat Singh was a total contrast to Savarkar. Savarkar pleaded for clemency, offering to serve the British in whatever way they thought fit. He did help strengthen their army in the context of the Second World War and was a recipient of a British pension of Rs 60 per month. Savarkar did not utter a single word when Bhagat Singh was hanged to death!

As far as Subhashchandra Bose, the rumor is spread through multiple mechanisms, that it was on Savakar’s advice that he formed Azad Hind Fauz. There is no truth in this. Savarakar actually was helping the British army when Bose’s army was fighting against the British. Bose was for composite nationalism, while Savarkar was the ideologue of religion based nationalism, two nation theory. Bose was equally critical of Savarakar and Jinnah whom he urged to close ranks and join the freedom movement, while this duo served the British designs of suppressing the national movement.

In his article in The Forward Bloc (his paper) Bose argued that ‘The Hindu Mahasabha has been doing incalculable harm to the idea of Indian nationhood by underlining the communal differences—by lumping all the Muslims together…We cannot oblige Mr Savarkar by ignoring the contributions of the nationalist Muslims to the cause of India.’

He wrote in the second part of his book, The Indian Struggle, that while Jinnah ‘was then thinking only of how to realise his plan of Pakistan (the division of India) with the help of the British,’ Savarkar seemed to be oblivious of the international situation and was only thinking how the Hindus could secure military training by entering Britain’s army in India.’

In response to the teaser of the film, Netaji’s daughter Pfaff told Times of India, “Like Mahatma Gandhi, Netaji was opposed to the divisiveness based on religious differences. Let Sarvarkar’s followers join Netaji in his vision for India and not hijack him for views that certainly were not his,”

We are living in times where the Hindu right wing is being well served by many in the film World, and this forthcoming film based on falsehoods will be one more example of the same.

Related:

Decoding politics behind inauguration of new Parliament Complex on Savarkar’s Birth Anniversary

https://sabrangindia.in/article/decoding-politics-behind-inauguration-new-parliament-complex-savarkars-birth-anniversary

The post Teaser of Film on Savarkar: Lies Galore appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Hence, let us know the truth as told by Savarkar himself or recorded in the Savarkar-led Hindu Mahasabha archives. 

Savarkar’s Hatred for the Tricolour Flag of India

Savarkar, like the RSS, abhorred every symbol of the Indian people’s united struggle against British rule. In a circular issued on September 22, 1941 to be followed by the Hindu Mahasabha cadres, he declared, 

“So far as the flag question is concerned, the Hindus know no flag representing Hindudom as a whole other than the ‘Kundalini Kripanankit’ Mahasabha flag with the ‘Om and the Swastik’ the most ancient symbols of the Hindu race and policy coming down from age to age and honoured throughout Hindusthan…Therefore, any place or function where this Pan-Hindu flag is not honoured should be boycotted by the Hindu Sanghatanists at any rate…The Charkha-Flag [before the present national flag spinning-wheel used to be at the centre of the Tricolour] in particular may very well represent a Khadi-Bhandar, but the Charkha can never symbolize and represent the spirit of the proud and ancient nation like the Hindus.” 

      [Bhide, A. S. (ed.), Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s Whirlwind Propaganda: Extracts from the President’s Diary of his Propagandist Tours Interviews from December 1937 to October 1941, na, Bombay, 1940, p. 470-73.]

Savarkar preceded Jinnah in propounding the two-nation theory

Muslim league under M.A. Jinnah demanded Pakistan in March 1940. Long before it, Savarkar had laid down his two-nation theory. Savarkar became the President of Hindu Mahasabha [HM] in 1937. While addressing the 19th Session of Hindu Mahasabha at Ahmedabad in the same year he stated: 

“As it is, there are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India, several infantile politicians commit the serious mistake in supposing that India is already welded into a harmonious nation, or that it could be welded thus for the mere wish to do so…India cannot be assumed today to be a Unitarian and homogenous nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Moslems, in India.”[i]

[Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya:Hindu Rashtra Darshan (Collected works of Savarkar in English), Hindu Mahasabha, Pune, 1963, p. 296.]

This shameless collusion between Savarkar and Jinnah was described by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar in the following words:

“Strange as it may appear, Mr. Savarkar and Mr. Jinnah instead of being opposed to each other on the one nation versus two nations issue are in complete agreement about it. Both not only agree, but insist that there are two nations in India – one the Muslim nation and the other Hindu nation.”

 [Ambedkar, BR, Pakistan or the Partition of India, Government of Maharashtra, Bombay, (reprint of 1940 edition), p. 142.]

Hindu Mahasabha led by Savarkar declared unconditional support to the British government during Quit India Movement

The Quit India Movement began on August 9, 1942 as per Mahatma Gandhi’s call to ‘Do or Die’ in order to expel the British from India. The British rulers swiftly responded with mass detentions on August 8th itself. Over 100,000 arrests were made which included the entire top leadership of Congress including Gandhi; mass fines were levied and demonstrators were subjected to public flogging. Hundreds of civilians were killed in state-sponsored violence, many shot by the police and the army. Congress was banned. During these critical times of repression, Savarkar announced full support to the British rulers in line with the Muslim League. 

Addressing the 24th session of the Hindu Mahasabha at Kanpur in 1942, Savarkar outlined the strategy of the Hindu Mahasabha of co-operating with the rulers in the following words:

“The Hindu Mahasabha holds that the leading principle of all practical politics is the policy of Responsive Co-operation [with the British].” He called upon HM councillors, ministers, legislators and conducting any municipal or any public bodies to offer “Responsive Co-operation which covers the whole gamut of patriotic activities from unconditional co-operation right up to active and even armed resistance…” 

[V. D. Savarkar, Hindu Rashtra Darshan, Vol. 6, Maharashtra Prantik Hindusabha, Poona, 1963, p. 112.]

Savarkar led Hindu Mahasabha (HM) and formed coalition governments with Muslim League (ML) during Quit India Movement

Hindu Mahasabha (HM) and Jinnah-led Muslim League (ML) joined hands in running coalition governments in Bengal and Sind (and later in NWFP) in 1942. Defending this collusion between HM and ML against Congress, Savarkar stated, 

“In practical politics also the Mahasabha knows that we must advance through reasonable compromises. Witness the fact that only recently in Sind, the Sind-Hindu-Sabha on invitation had taken the responsibility of joining hands with the League itself in running a coalition Government. The case of Bengal is well known. Leaguers whom even the Congress with all its submissiveness could not placate grew quite reasonably compromising and sociable [sic] as soon as they came in contact with the Hindu Mahasabha and the Coalition Government, under the premiership of Mr. Fazlul Huq and the able leadership of our esteemed Mahasabha leader Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerji, functioned successfully for a year or so to the benefit of both the communities.

Savarkar was a great defender of molestation and rape as a political tool against the women of adversaries. In his important work of Hindu history, Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History, originally written in Marathi and translated in English in 1971 he included a chapter titled ‘Perverted Conception of Virtues’ (Chapter VIII). He criticized Shivaji and Chimaji Appa for restoring back to the families of the women of defeated Muslim and Portuguese governors. Since Shivaji did not allow molestation of captured women Savarkar complained: “Did not the plaintive screams and pitiful lamentations of the millions of molested Hindu women, which reverberated throughout the length and breadth of the country, reach the ears of Shivaji Maharaj and Chimaji Appa?”

He went on to lament that “It was the suicidal Hindu idea of chivalry to women which saved the Muslim women (simply because they were women) from the heavy punishments of committing indescribable sins and crimes against the Hindu women. Their womanhood became their shield quite sufficient to protect them”.

[‘Perverted conception of virtues’ in V. D. Savarkar (tr. By S. T. Godbole), Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History, Bal Savarkar India, Delhi, 1971, pp. 147-159.]

Epilogue

These irrefutable facts about Savarkar notwithstanding, the Hon’ble PM Modi is going to honour him on May 28, 2023 when he inaugurates the new Parliament Complex. This is bound to accelerate the dismantling of the Constitutional dream of democratic-secular India evolved under the leadership of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar along with the inspiring anti-Caste and anti-Patriarchy gains made during India’s historic renaissance of 19^th and 20^thCenturies in defiance of the Brahmanical hegemony of Varna Ashram through Chaturvarna as ordained in Rig Veda’s Purusha Suktam and later shaped as a Law in Manusmriti.

Undoubtedly, the aforesaid retrogressive message emerging from the inauguration of the New Parliament Complex on Savarkar’s 140th birth anniversary will act against the revolutionary struggle for social transformation for equality and social justice that the ancient Indian civilization has deeply engaged with since 6th and 5th Century B.C. respectively under the pioneering leadership, to name a few, of Gautam Buddha through Baudh Philosophy; Mahavir (24^th Jain Tirthankar) through Jain Philosophy; Srimanta Sankardev (Assam); Basaveshwara (Karnataka); Pandit Iyothee Thass, Singaravelar and Periyar (Tamilnadu); Narayan Guru and Ayyankali (Kerala); Gurujada Apparao and Kundukuri Veersalingam (Andhra Pradesh); Sant Tukaram, Savitribai Phule, Fatima Sheikh and Mahatma Jotirao Phule, Shahuji Maharaj and Babasaheb Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (Maharashtra); Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Rabindranath Tagore, Swami Vivekanand and Rokeya Begum (West Bengal); and Swami Dayanand Saraswati (Gujarat & Punjab); Sant Kabirdas & Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia (Uttar Pradesh); and the Great Sikh Gurus & Shaheed Bhagat Singh (Punjab). This retrogressive impact of Savarkar’s ideology is precisely what the RSS has been dreaming for since its inception in 1925 by promoting selective re-writing and distortion of the history of ancient, medieval and contemporary India. Yet, history shall never forgive us for the irreparable damage being done to India’s socio-cultural fabric by the grandiose event on May 28, 2023 scheduled on Savarkar’s 140th birth anniversary! 

Researched & Authored (May 24, 2023) by Shamsul Islam, former Associate Professor of Political Science, Delhi University Edited & Epilogue (May 26, 2023) by Anil Sadgopal, Former Professor and Dean, Faculty of Education, Delhi University, & Former Member, CABE

The post Decoding politics behind inauguration of new Parliament Complex on Savarkar’s Birth Anniversary appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Among staunch opposition from the political opposition, the ruling BJP in Karnataka on December 19, unveiled the portrait of Hindutva ideologue, Veer Savarkar in the Assembly hall of the Suvarna Vidhana Soudha here, even as the opposition Congress staged a protest against the move. Savarkar author of several books including The Indian War of Independence, Hindutva and Hindu Rashtra Darshan. 

Ironically, Savarkar’s portrait is now among pictures of seven freedom fighters that are installed in the Assembly hall. The ceremony was carried out in the absence of the Congress leaders and legislators. Karnataka chief minister Basavaraj Bommai, speaker of the assembly, Vishveshwara Hegde Kageri, state law Minister, J. Madhuswamy and state minister for water resources, Govind Karjol and others were present on the occasion.

Apprehending protests to the mar the unveiling, sources told the media that all the four doors of the Assembly were closed during the unveiling ceremony to avoid any eventualities.

Meanwhile, Congress MLAs staged strong protests with leader of the opposition, Siddaramaiah speaking up vocally against the installation of the portrait. They have also written to the Speaker of the assembly to install portraits of personalities like Valmiki, Basavanna, Kanaka Dasa, BR Ambedkar, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and many others.

Meanwhile, BJP MLC N. Ravikumar objected to the Congress opposition saying, “The freedom struggle was not only carried out by the Congress leaders and Nehru. “Veer Savarkar inspired a whole generation of revolutionaries in the country. If not in the Legislative Assembly, Parliament and public places, where else would his picture be installed? Ravikumar questioned.

On the rebuttal from the Congress saying that, if Vikram Savarkar’s portrait is installed, they will get the photo of Mysuru ruler Tipu Sultan installed in the Assembly, Ravikumar said, “Tipu Sultan was a fanatic, destroyer of temples. He attempted to replace Kannada by Persian language, he is against the principles of Kempe Gowda (Bengaluru founder) and Kuvempu (celebrated litterateur). “Let alone Vidhana Soudha, we will not allow his photo to come up anywhere,” he asserted.

Basanagouda Patil Yatnal, BJP MLA, said that Congress leaders have forgotten that Indira Gandhi released the postal stamp of Veer Savarkar and the party is protesting now. “We will not allow Tipu Sultan’s photo to come up. He was a fanatic,” he said.

Responding to Congress state president D.K. Shivakumar’s statement that there is no connection between Veer Savarkar and Karnataka, BJP MLA K.S. Eshwarappa questioned the connection between Rahul Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi and Karnataka. “Shivakumar only knows about Tihar Jail and Bengaluru Central jail. He needs to study about cellular jail and cruel punishment given to freedom fighters in Andamans,” Eshwarappa stated.

The issue of installation of Savarkar’s portrait is now likely to result in a rocky winter session.

Related:

Portrait as Mirror, unveiling of Vinayak Savarkar’s portrait in Parliament, then and now

A historicity of Savarkar’s rehabilitation project

Hindutva’s fascist heritage

The post Savarkar’s statue now hangs among freedom fighter gallery in BJP-ruled Karnataka assembly appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Kannada language author of the path-breaking novella Kusumabale, and writer of several short stories, Devanura Mahadeva, one of Karnataka’s most prominent public intellectuals has now brought us The RSS-The Long and Short of It, a work endorsed by renowned author, Geetanjali Sree with an introduction and afterward by Ramchandra Guha and Yogendra Yadav respectively. This book, translated by S.R. Ramakrishna into English is now available.

[Devanur Mahadeva, The RSS- The Long & Short of It– available in English; Price Rs 199; to obtain a copy of the book, contact publishers Abhiruchi Prakashan Mysore -99 80 56 00 13]

Respected for his work with not just Dalits and Adivasis, but forging links with seminal struggles for democratic and minority rights, the publication of this pamphlet in July first drew the predictable abuse from the trolls and their mentors, in a failed attempt to discredit the author and the book. Devanur Mahadeva is a particular sore eye for the right because of his vocal advocacy of inter-faith harmony. Recently, when a socio economic boycott of Muslims selling halal meet was sought to be incited, Mahadeva displayed his public commitment to constitutional values by going to a market in Mysuru to buy halal meat!

How the RSS and HMS endorse caste

The text begins with quotations from MS Golwalkar and VD Savarkar, two major ideologues who have shaped political Hinduism, Hindutva. The quotations, earlir analysed by Sabrangindia, show Golwalkar not just justifying the caste system and its in-built hierarchies, on the grounds that they have scriptural sanction, but uncritically rooting for a society based on this brazen inequity. There is also Savarkar urging worship of the Manusmriti, notwithstanding the fact that its endorsement of caste and gender inequalities is so antithetical to the Indian Constitution. The Savarkar quote chosen by Mahadeva is revealing:

“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.”

Golwalkar, the RSS’ major ideologue –with publications like We Or Our Nationhood Defined (the first, 1947 edition is available on Sabrangindia) and Bunch of Thoughts, calls the federal system of a union of states “poisonous”, urging instead a unitary political system based on the homogenising principle of “One Country, One State, One Legislature, One Executive’’.

Read Sabrangindia’s Exlusive, In Defence of Caste & against Cross-Breeding, 2016 in which, Golwalkar is defending Caste. In the course of a speech given in Gujarat, he then said:
 
 “Today we try to run down the Varna system through ignorance. But it was through this system that a great effort to control possessiveness could be made…In society some people are intellectuals, some are expert in production and earning of wealth and some have the capacity to labour. Our ancestors saw these four broad divisions in the society. The Varna systemmeans nothing else but a proper co-ordination of these divisions and an enabling of the individual to serve the society to the best of his ability through a hereditary development of the functions for which he is best suited. If this system continues a means of livelihood is already reserved for every individual from his birth.”

[M. S. Golwalkar cited in Organizer, January 2, 1961, pp. 5 & 16. He had been invited in 1960 to address the students of the School of Social Science of Gujarat University on December 17, 1960]  

While none of this is unknown, per se, the political coming of age and to power of the Sangh,  has dimmed its wider dissemination, of late. Timely as this work then is, is the fact that Devanura Mahadeva draws our attention to the banality of what passes for thinking in the RSS. While the seminal political text to guide the re-organisation of the Indian state is We Or Our Nationhood Defined, efforts by the RSS to post facto “disown” it when they own up in toto to Golwalkar, takes is to his second work, Bunch of Thoughts. This is a book of Golwalkar’s entitled Bunch of Thoughts. Mahedeva writes, “If you look inside this book for anything that could be considered a ‘thought’, or ‘chintane’, you will find absolutely nothing. What it offers is only a set of random, dangerous beliefs, and that too from a bygone time.” (Having read the book several times myself, I entirely concur with this judgment). The RSS’s ideology is so narrow-minded that, as Mahadeva remarks, “forget about anyone else, no sensible Brahmin even can accept this devilish view of the past that the RSS presents”.

Mahadeva is a self-proclaimed defender of the Indian Constitution. For all the lip service leaders of the RSS and BJP pay to that document, in truth they are deeply averse to its core tenets such as pluralism, caste and gender equality, freedom of speech, and federalism. Mahadeva goes so far as to suggest that “the more they damage the Indian Constitution, the more victorious they feel.”

He continues: “To destroy the Constitution, the RSS and its affiliates are committing unspeakable acts. They are playing games they shouldn’t be playing. And not just one or two! They are waging a war to overturn the federalism that binds the states and the union government, and that constitutes the bedrock of the Constitution.”

Mahadeva acidly remarks that since coming to power in 2014, “the BJP has offered Golwalkar its guru dakshina by burying federalism, by stifling to death the federal system that constitutes a critical part of the Constitution”.

Distortion and manipulation of history and fact, peddling stereotype, while using violence to generate a climate of perpetual insecurity and fear are their credos, the author states that “Falsehood is their family deity.” He de-constructs and analyses many distortions propagated in textbooks published by BJP Governments controlled by the RSS, which seek to prejudice the minds of our children with hatred for fellow citizens who do not happen to be Hindus.

Political Critique

Mahadeva also analyses how a degeneration of political parties and politics have allowed the RSS and the BJP to foster roots and grow: “When you look at India’s political parties, these are the facets you see: 1) single-person led party (2) family-controlled party (3) a party led by an anti-Constitution organisation. All three are detrimental to democracy.”

Coming to contemporary times, since the RSS-led BJP government came to power at the centre in 2014, Mahadeva also talks of the promises made by the RSS pracharak Narendra Modi when he came to power, such as the return of black money, the doubling of farm incomes, the generation of millions of jobs. These promises have remained wholly unfulfilled. Instead, economic inequalities and disparities of wealth have grown alarmingly. Burgeoning crony capitalism spiralled by de-monetization that killed India’s informal sector and medium scale enterprises (MSMEs), only two corporate lords have benefitted this decimation during Modi’s prime ministership: Gautam Adani and Mukesh Ambani (both incidentally from the prime minister’s home state, Gujarat).

The ideological critique of the RSS and the BJP that constitutes the heart of the exercise… In the space of a few thousand words, Mahadeva lays bare the intrinsic authoritarianism, its casteism, and its majoritarianism of the RSS, BJP and its affiliates, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VJP) and Bajrang Dal (BD). Mahadeva’s work, easily readable is a much needed text to counter the political hegemonising by the RSS-BJP. Before assuming political power, the infiltration of men and women of this ideology into positions of governance enabled them to assume power; now they enable these forces to retain it.

Karnataka, Mahadeva’s home state has seen violent polarisation, hate politics and even attacks on minority cultural sites and places of worship, under the BJP. This state goes to the polls next year. If this politics of caste hegemony and majoritarianism is not checked, this would signal the decline or end of the region’s pluralist and humanist traditions. It is this imminent, lurking danger that leads Devanura Mahadeva to give out a gentle call to action, a plea to all those who oppose the RSS and the BJP to come together on a common platform to restore the foundations of the Republic and rescue it from being further ravaged by the fanatics on the Right. It is worth quoting his call at some length:

  “At least now, forward looking groups, organisations and parties should rise above being just little streams; they should flow collectively as one river. To be able to do that, they must abandon the unhealthy attitude of being pure and superior to others. They must give up their ego, and develop the humility to accept that hundreds of paths might exist for attaining an aim. They must put an end to their leadership squabbles. Rather than insist narrow-mindedly that they lead, or that their party lead, they must join a broad alliance to save federalism and the Indian Constitution and the diversity that is the life breath of India. They must come together to build a participatory democracy, where all citizens and communities participate, to create a culture that is tolerant, loving and free of distinctions of high and low.”

Related:

The Sangh’s Hypocrisy on Dalits, It’s Time to Read ‘Bunch of Thoughts’, Again!

Kerala Science Centre to be named after Golwalkar

The Ideology of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is both Hate-Ridden and Supremacist – Part 1

The post How the RSS’, Golwalkar, HMS’ Savarkar glorified caste: Devanur Mahadevan appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bengaluru: Sri Ram Sena leader Pramod Mutalik has declared that he would observe Savarkar Utsav during the Gauri Ganesh festival. Addressing a press conference at the state capital on Friday, he referred to Hindu Mahasabha leader Vinayak Damodar Savarkar as a revolutionary. He criticised Congress and the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) for repeatedly insulting him.

The question of Savarkar popped up on August 15 when the SDPI cadre removed banners of Savarkar in Shivamogga city and attempted to replace them with posters of Tipu Sultan. The act resulted in clashes between SDPI and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) workers. Ultimately, the police resorted to lathi-charge to disperse the crowd and put restrictions in the city under section 144.

Starting with the ban on hijab in colleges, BJP and various Hindu groups have taken turns to stoke controversy and communal unrest in the state of Karnataka. In February of this year, the murder of Bajrang Dal worker Harsha in Shivamogga was seen as an outcome of the toxic, communal rhetoric brewing in the state for quite some time. Five Muslim men were arrested in connection with the case.

Sri Ram Sena Karnataka State working President, Gangadhar Kulkarni and Pramod Mutalik address media persons

Weeks later, the Karnataka High Court ruled in favour of a ban on the hijab, emboldening Hindu groups to initiate a campaign against Muslim cultural and economic rights. Hindu groups attempted to enforce a boycott on Halal meat in the state. Following this, the Sri Ram Sena members in Dharwad attacked a watermelon seller for doing business outside a temple premises. Sri Ram Sena and Mutalik are based out of Dharwad. Meanwhile, Nupur Sharma’s statements incensed Muslims, further adding fuel to the fire.

On July 26, Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha member Praveen Nettaru was murdered by two bike-borne men in Bellare town of Dakshina Kannada district. Hindu groups, including BJP workers, were incensed at the murder and blamed the top leadership of the BJP for using workers as cannon fodder. They blamed the Popular Front of India (PFI) and SDPI for Nettaru’s murder. So far, five Muslim men have been arrested by police in connection with the case, and the investigation has been transferred to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

In retaliation for Nettaru’s murder, Hindu extremists murdered a man called Mohammed Fazil at Suratkal on July 28. Six Hindu men were arrested in connection with Fazil’s murder. Mutalik was barred from entering Dakshina Kannada district when he attempted to travel to Bellare to meet Nettaru’s parents. The Mangaluru City Police briefly detained him and sent him back.

Meanwhile, in Bengaluru, a dispute raked up over ownership of a two-acre maidan at Chamrajpet. The Karnataka Waqf Board claims the property, whereas the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) also claims the site. Muslims offer prayers at the site twice a year. Children use the site for the rest of the year as a playground. Hindu groups have been demanding that the site be opened up for the celebration of Hindu festivals as well.

Mutalik referred to Savarkar as a patriot and said that no Congress leader spent as much time in jail as he had. Addressing a press conference, he said, “Savarkar was the first person to refer to the 1857 rebellion as a war of independence. He wrote a book on this (The Indian War of Independence). Before that book was even published, it was banned in three countries. They feared that if such a book came out, it would bring a revolution to India. The British wanted to stem the feeling of patriotism and hence, jailed him for 11 years at the Kala Pani jail in Andaman. Today, Congress and Islamists are openly insulting Savarkar. For this reason, this year, at the Ganeshotsava festival, we will observe Savarkar Utsav.”

The Hindu organisation mentioned that in the context of celebrating Savarkar, they would screen a film, organise plays, quiz competitions, story competitions, and singing competitions based on the songs penned by Savarkar.

The organisation chief clashed with a few journalists when he stated that Kesari is the colour of patriotism. Journalist Ashik Mulki of News 18 challenged Mutalik on this point and asked him to explain how only Kesari could be the colour of patriotism. Mutalik replied, “When the British left India in 1947, a committee was set up to decide what should be the colour of the national flag. Nehru and Patel were also a part of this committee. It was decided that the national flag would be in Kesari colour. This decision was changed later. The flag colour of this nation’s religion is Kesari. The flag that sits atop the forts and temples of this land is Kesari. I never said that the national flag is Kesari; I said that the colour of patriotism is Kesari.”

When pushed to name the source of the claim regarding the Kesari flag in 1947, the working President of Sri Ram Sena, Gangadhar Kulkarni, said that the source is a book called, The Tragic Story of Partition written by Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) leader HV Seshadri.

Later in the day, the organisation members met with Revenue Department officials and requested permission to hold a three-day celebration of the Gauri Ganesh festival at the disputed Chamrajpet Eidgah maidan. The proposed celebrations will begin on August 31 and culminate with Ganesh visarjan on September 2. Permission has not yet been granted.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Karnataka: Sri Ram Sena Chief Vows to Observe Savarkar Utsav During Gauri Ganesh Festival appeared first on SabrangIndia.