Saturday, December 18, 2021

DEAR PM MODI, AURANGZEB RULE WAS ALSO THE RULE OF HINDU HIGH CASTES!

DEAR PM MODI, AURANGZEB RULE WAS ALSO THE RULE OF HINDU HIGH CASTES!

Narendra Modi, a senior swayamsevak (member) of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, long back in 2013 when he occupied the office of chief minister of Gujarat, declared himself to be a ‘Hindu nationalist’.[i] As the PM of the largest democratic-secular polity in the world; India, he misses no opportunity to stress the favourite Hindutva binary of putting Hindus and Muslims as two communities at war in the country. He resorted to this favourite polarizing theme of his while speaking at the inauguration of the renovated and expanded Kashi Vishwanath Dham [Kashi Vishwanath Temple] in his Varanasi parliamentary constituency on December 13, 2021. Digging into past of Benares now Varanasi (Kashi) he stated:

“Tyrants attacked this city, tried to destroy it. History is witness to Aurangzeb’s atrocities, his terror. He tried to change civilisation with the sword. He tried to crush culture with fanaticism. But the soil of this country is different from that of the rest of the world. Here if an Aurangzeb comes, a Shivaji also rises.” [ii]

For PM, the story of repression and persecution by Aurangzeb, a Mughal king is not the story of some individual tyrant ruler but a bigoted Muslim who hated Hindus and Hinduism. Aurangzeb personified all Muslims of India and the religion Islam. Unfortunately our PM as a Hindutva bigot brazenly discards some very crucial historical facts even stated in the contemporary ‘Hindu’ narratives about the rule of Aurangzeb [1658-1707].

These records prove that Aurangzeb rule was also the rule of Rajputs or Kshatriyas [members of the second of the four Hindu Castes in order of precedence after Brahmins] and other members of high Castes. Aurangzeb never faced Shivaji in the battle-field. It was his commander-in-chief, a Rajput ruler of Amer (Rajasthan), Jay Singh II (1688– 1743) who was sent to subjugate Shivaji. He was conferred the title of ‘Sawai' [one and a quarter times superior to his contemporaries] chief by Aurangzeb in 1699 and thus came to be known as Maharaja Sawai Jai Singh. He was also given the title of Mirza Raja [a Persian title for a royal prince] by Aurangzeb. The other titles bestowed on him by other Mughal rulers were ‘Sarmad-i-Rajaha-i-Hind’ [eternal ruler of India], ‘Raj Rajeshvar’ [lord of kings] and ‘Shri Shantanu ji’ [wholesome king]. These titles are displayed by his descendants even today.[iii]

This Rajput chief also gave his daughter in marriage to the son of Aurangzeb who became Mughal emperor after Aurangzeb. To know how Jay Singh II worked as a main hit-man of Aurangzeb, we must read the letter which Shivaji wrote to Jay Singh II condemning his subservience to Aurangzeb. A part of it read:

“I have heard that thou [sic] hast [sic] come to make battle upon me and to subjugate the Deccan. Thou desirest [sic] in this world to make thy face glow with blood drawn from the hearts and eyes of Hindus. But thou knowest [sic] not that thy face is painted in black, because owing to it, this country and religion are in danger…thou hast in fact come to conquer at the instance of Aurangzib [sic] and under the instigation of those who desire to destroy the Hindus”[iv] [text as per the original translation]

Interestingly, we have first-hand account of Raja Rughnath Bahadur, a Kayasth who functioned as Deewan Ala (prime minister) of both the Mughal emperors Shahjahan, and Aurangzeb. According to a diary of one of his direct descendants, Rai Lala Maharaja Lal (son of Rai Bahadur Munshi Jeewan Lal who was one of the main traitors who facilitated capture of Delhi by the British rulers in September 1857 during the 1857 Rebellion) despite Aurangzeb being the Emperor,    

“Raja Rughnath Bahadur having attained to the most exalted rank of Diwan Ala (prime minister) was not unmindful of the interests of his caste-fellows. As the Kayasths were the only class amongst the Hindoos who could read and write the court language, i.e., Persian, the Raja appointed every one of them to posts of honor and emoluments, according to their individual merits; while many of them were granted titles of honor and valuable jagirs for their services. Not a single Kayasth remained unemployed or in needy circumstances. The Raja procured them everything they wanted, and tried his best to please them in every way he could.”[v]

This account shows that despite the rule of Aurangzeb, a ‘bigoted Muslim’ a Kayasth prime minister of his was able to patronize his Caste fellows; all Hindus. 

The Hindutva zealots must know that Mughal rule survived due to the Hindu high Castes joining the ‘Muslim’ rulers in running the Mughal Empire. How solid this unity was can be gauged by the fact that after Akbar no Mughal emperor was born of a Muslim mother. The Hindu high Castes provided brain and muscles to the Mughal rulers continuously. Thus, Mughal rule was the rule of Hindu high Castes also. Even Savarkar, before converting into a protagonist of Hindutva, did not subscribe to the religious exclusiveness of ‘Muslim’ rule. He was never shy of sharing the fact that though

“The ruling prince of Oudh was a Mahomedan [sic]; most of the big land-owners under him were Hindus. Jhagirs [sic] and Talukdari rights had continued from father to son in the families of these zamindars for generations. Hundreds of villages were administered under the single authority of each of these proprietors. They possessed forts and had small armies under them to protect these Jhagirs [sic].”[vi]

Aurobindo Ghose who played a prominent role in providing Hindu philosophical direction to the Indian nationalism confessed that Mughal rule continued for centuries due to the fact that Mughal rulers gave Hindus, “positions of power and responsibility, used their brain and arm to preserve” their kingdom.[vii] Renowned historian Tara Chand after studying the primary source material of the medieval period concluded that the from the end of 16th century to the middle of 19th century, “it may reasonably be concluded that in the whole of India, excepting the western Punjab, superior rights in land had come to vest in the hands of Hindus” most of whom happened to be Rajputs.[viii]

Maasir-ul Umra a biographical dictionary of the officers in the Mughal Empire beginning from 1556 to 1780 [Akbar to Shah Alam] is regarded as the most authentic record of the high rank officials employed by the Mughal kings. This work was compiled by Shahnawaz Khan and his son Abdul Hai between 1741 and 1747. According to it Mughal rulers in this period employed around 100 high-ranking officials most of them “Rajputs from Rajputana, the midlands, Bundelkhand and Maharashtra”. Brahmins followed Rajputs in manning the Mughal administration so far as the number was concerned. Interestingly, Kashi Nagri Pracharini Sabha [established in 1893] committed to the cause of Hindi as official language published Hindi translation of this book in 1931.

It is nobody’s argument that Aurangzeb did not commit heinous crimes against his subjects. It needs to be remembered that his cruelty was not restricted to non-Muslims, his own father, brothers, Shias, those Muslims who did not follow his brand of Islam and Muslim ruling families in the eastern, central and western parts of his kingdom faced brutal repression. Aurangzeb executed renowned Sufi saint, Sarmad in the precinct of Jama Masjid of Delhi. It is also true that there were countless cases when Hindus and their religious places were violently targetted during Aurangzeb’s despotic rule. However, there are contemporary records available of his patronizing Hindu and Jain religious places.[ix] Reducing all his crimes to the repression of Hindus only will tantamount to reducing the gravity of his crimes.

The linking of Aurangzeb’s crimes or a king/ruler in the pre-modern times of India to his/her religion is going to create serious consequences even for ‘Hindu’ version of history as narrated by the RSS. Take for example, Ravana, the king of Lanka who according to again Hindu’ narrative committed unspeakable crimes against Mother   Sita, her husband Lord Rama and his companions during 14 years long vanvaas  or exile. This Ravana was a learned Brahman who also happened to be one of the greatest worshippers of Lord Shiva who is worshipped at Kashi Vishwanath Temple. If like Aurangzeb Ravana’s criminal deeds are linked to his religion then PM Modi will have to wage war against all Brahmins and Shivites!

It is tragic for democratic-secular polity of India that its PM who is legally bound to uphold the all-inclusive and joint heritage of the Indian nation is religiously working to polarize the people of India on the basis of subjective and fabricated history. While inaugurating the renovation of the Temple complex at Kashi he willfully disregarded the fact of modern India that morning prayers at the Kashi Temple used to begin with the playing of shehnai (an instrument played at auspicious occasions) by Ustad Bismillah Khan (1914-2006), a practising Muslim who was awarded the highest national civilian award, Bharat Ratna. Khan in his autobiographical descriptions stated proudly that his mesmerizing shehnai skill was due to the blessings of Vishwanath; the eternal Shiva. It is to be noted that it was not only Kashi Vishwanath Temple where morning prayers used to start with musical rendering by a Muslim musician. The prayers at Maa Sharda Temple at Maihar in Madhya Pradesh used to start with the playing of sarod by Ustad Alauddin Khan (1862-1972) who also founded Maihar Gharana of the Indian music.

It is hoped that PM of India will keep in check his Hindutva impulses and not facilitate the agenda of enemies of India to undo it succeed.

 

Shamsul Islam

December 18, 2021

Link for some of S. Islam's writings in English, Hindi, Urdu, Marathi, Malayalam, Kannada, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati and video interviews/debates:

http://du-in.academia.edu/ShamsulIslam

Facebook: https://facebook.com/shamsul.islam.332

Twitter: @shamsforjustice

http://shamsforpeace.blogspot.com/

Email: notoinjustice@gmail.com

LINK FOR BOOKS BY SHAMSUL ISLAM CURRENTLY AVAILABLE (Updated September 2021)

https://www.academia.edu/40952491/ALL_BOOKS_OF_SHAMSUL_ISLAM_WITH_BUYING_LINKS

 

 

  

 

 



[i] Modi interviewed by two Reuters journalists, Ross Colvin and Sruthi Gottipati, on July 12, 2013. Link: http://blogs.reuters.com/india/2013/07/12/interview-with-bjp-leader-narendra-modi/

[iii] https://www.indianrajputs.com/view/jaipur and https://www.indianrajputs.com/famous/Jai-Singh-II-Amber.php

[iv] Cited in Golwalkar, MS, We or Our Nationhood Defined, Bharat Publications, Nagpur, 1939, p. 68.

[v] Lal, Rai Lala Maharaja, Short Account of the Life and Family of Rai Jeewan Lal Bahadur Late Honrary Magistrate Delhi, With Extracts from His Diary Relating to the Times of Mutiny 1857, IMH Press, Delhi, 1902, pp. 3-4.

[vi] Savarkar, V. D., The Indian War of Independence 1857 Rajdhani, Delhi, 1970, p. 50.

[vii] Cited in Chand, Tara, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. 3, Publication Division  Government of India, Delhi, 1992, p. 162.

[viii] Chand, Tara, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. 1, Publication Division  Government of India, Delhi, 1961, p. 124.

[ix] Trushke, Audrey, Aurangzeb: The Man and the Myth, Penguin, Gurgaon, 2017, pp. 99-106. 

Thursday, November 25, 2021

THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION DAY HOW RSS DENIGRATED INDIAN CONSTITUTION: A PEEP INTO ITS ARCHIVES

 

NOVEMBER 26; THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION DAY

HOW RSS DENIGRATED INDIAN CONSTITUTION: A PEEP INTO ITS ARCHIVES

The Constituent Assembly of India finalized the Constitution of India on November 26, 1949 which is celebrated as the CONSTITUTION DAY. This Constitution promised new born Indian Republic a polity based on democracy, justice, egalitarianism and rule of law. However, RSS was greatly annoyed. Four days after the historic event of approval of it, the RSS English Organiser in an editorial on November 30, 1949, complained:

“But in our Constitution there is no mention of the unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat. Manu’s Laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. To this day his laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing.”

Thus RSS wanted this Constitution to be replaced by Manusmriti or Manu Code which is known for its derogatory and inhuman references to Sudras, Untouchables and women. By demanding promulgation of the laws of Manu in independent India RSS was simply following its mentor, philosopher and guide VD Savarkar. According to him,

Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worship-able 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.”

RSS continued to hate Indian Constitution despite it being regarded as one of the finest documents upholding principles of equality and justice globally. The most prominent ideologue of RSS, MS Golwalkar declared it to be anti-Hindu. The collection of his writings Bunch of Thoughts which is a Bible for the RSS cadres carries the following statement against the Constitution.

“Our Constitution too is just a cumbersome and heterogeneous piecing together of various articles from various Constitutions of Western countries. It has absolutely nothing which can be called our own. Is there a single word of reference in its guiding principles as to what our national mission is and what our keynote in life is?”

What kind of civilization the RSS and Hindutva camp want to build by enforcing the laws of Manu, can be known by having a glimpse of the laws prescribed by Manu for the lower castes/Untouchables and women. Some of these dehumanizing and degenerate laws, which are presented here, are self-explanatory. 

Laws of Manu concerning Dalits/Untouchables

[This selection of Manu’s Codes is from F. Max Muller, Laws of Manu (Delhi: LP Publications, 1996; first published in 1886). The bracket after each code incorporates number of chapter/number of code according to the above edition.]

 

1.   For the sake of the prosperity of the worlds (the divine one) caused the Brahmana, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya, and the Sudra to proceed from his mouth, his arm, his thighs and his feet. (I/31)

2.   One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Sudras, to serve meekly even these (other) three castes. (I/91)

3.   Once-born man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. (VIII/270)

4.   If he mentions the names and castes (jati) of the (twice-born) with contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth. (VIII/271) 

5-   If he arrogantly teaches Brahmanas their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears. (VIII/272)

6.   With whatever limb a man of a low caste does hurt to (a man of the three) highest (castes), even that limb shall be cut off; that is the teaching of Manu. (VIII/279)

7.   He who raises his hand or a stick, shall have his hand cut off; he who in anger kicks with his foot, shall have his foot cut off. (VIII/280)

8.   A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man of a high caste, shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or (the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed. (VIII/281)

      As per the Manu Code if Sudras are to be given most stringent punishments for even petty violations/actions, the same Code of Manu is very lenient towards Brahmins. Shloka 380 in Chapter VIII bestowing profound love on Brahmins decrees:  

      “Let him never slay a Brahmana, though he have committed all (possible) crimes; let him banish such an (offender), leaving all his property (to him) and (his body) unhurt.”

Laws of Manu concerning women

1.   Day and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their (families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they must be kept under one’s control. (IX/2)

2.   Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence. (IX/3)

3.   Women must particularly be guarded against evil inclinations, however trifling (they may appear); for, if they are not guarded, they will bring sorrow on two families. (IX/5)

4.   Considering that the highest duty of all castes, even weak husbands (must) strive to guard their wives. (IX/6)

5.   No man can completely guard women by force; but they can be guarded by the employment of the (following) expedients:

6.   Let the (husband) employ his (wife) in the collection and expenditure of his wealth, in keeping (everything) clean, in (the fulfilment of) religious duties, in the preparation of his food, and in looking after the household utensils.

7.   Women, confined in the house under trustworthy and obedient servants, are not (well) guarded; but those who of their own accord keep guard over themselves, are well guarded. (IX/12)

8.   Women do not care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age; (thinking), ‘(It is enough that) he is a man,’ they give themselves to the handsome and to the ugly. (IX/14)

9.   Through their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their natural heartlessness, they become disloyal towards their husbands, however carefully they may be guarded in this (world). (IX/15)

10. (When creating them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct. (IX/17)

11. For women no (sacramental) rite (is performed) with sacred texts, thus the law is settled; women (who are) destitute of strength and destitute of (the knowledge of) Vedic texts, (are as impure as) falsehood (itself), that is a fixed rule. (IX/18)

Reproduced parts of Manu Code above need no further elaboration and commentary. They are too glaringly venomous, fascist and degenerated against Untouchables who are referred to as Sudras by Manu.

It is hugely sad times for democratic-secular Republic of India that RSS-BJP rulers who worship Manusmriti and want to undo the present Indian polity would be putting up a farcical show of celebrating the Constitution Day. The nation must be at guard to defend the Constitution from wolves in the attire of sheep!

Shamsul Islam

November 26, 2021

Link for some of S. Islam's writings in English, Hindi, Urdu, Marathi, Malayalam, Kannada, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati and video interviews/debates:

http://du-in.academia.edu/ShamsulIslam

Facebook: https://facebook.com/shamsul.islam.332

Twitter: @shamsforjustice

http://shamsforpeace.blogspot.com/

Email: notoinjustice@gmail.com

 

 

 

Sunday, November 14, 2021

Ahistoricity of Savarkar’s Rehabilitation Project

 

Ahistoricity of Savarkar’s Rehabilitation Project

An aggressive campaign to rehabilitate VD Savarkar (1883-1966) as great Indian freedom fighters is under way. He is being touted as a legendary Indian nationalist, freedom fighter who spent 50 years in the Cellular Jail [CJ]. Multiple mercy petitions of his are hailed as a ruse to secure freedom in order to work for uprooting the British rule, last but not the least, he is glorified as a rationalist who fought against the Untouchability. 

Let us compare these claims with the writings of Savarkar and records of his activities available in the archives of the Hindu Mahasabha in order to know the truth.

Savarkar’s journey from Indian nationalist to Hindu nationalist

It is true that Savarkar penned THE INDIAN WAR OF INDEPENDENCE 1857 in 1907 in which he glorified the joint struggle of Hindus and Muslims in the 1857 rebellion. In this tome, proscribed by the British rulers, he underscored the fact that Hindus and Muslims “were both children of the soil of Hindusthan. Their names were different, but they were all children of the same Mother; India therefore being the common mother of these two, they were brothers by blood”. He went to the extent of praising the Jehadi spirit Moulvi Ahmed Shah in the liberation war of 1857. “The great and saintly Ahmed Shah had woven fine and cleverly the webs of the Jehad—the War of Independence—through every corner of Lucknow and Agra.”

However, Savarkar’s incarceration at the CJ brought fundamental change in his idea of India. His first official biographer, Dhananjay Keer corroborated the fact that while leaving the Cellular, he gave this mantra: “One God, one country, one goal, one race, one life, one language” which was later concretized as Hindutva. The reason for discarding commitment to an all-inclusive India and turning Islamophobic was provided by Savarkar himself: “A large number of the wicked warders consisted of Mussalmans…And the prisoners under them were mostly Hindus. The Hindu prisoners were persecuted…”

It will be interesting to know that Savarkar was the only one at Cellular Jail who presented the persecution at the hands of the warders as a Hindu-Muslim issue. Barindra Kumar Ghosh (known as Barin, younger brother of Aurobindo Ghosh) in his memoirs, THE TALE OF MY EXILE made it clear that Muslim prisoners too suffered at the hands of these Cellular Jail officials. ““In the Andamans it is they [warder, petty officer, jamadar etc.] who are in-charge of everything and have the authority…Ramlal sits a little cross-wise in the file, give him two blows on the neck. Mustafa did not get up immediately he was told to, so, pull off his mustache. Baqaullah is late in coming from the latrine, apply the baton and unloose the skin of his posterior—such were the beautiful proceedings by which they maintained discipline in the prison.”

Barin was also witness to the fact that there were kind hearted Pathan warders who on many occasions “secretly brought out a dish of meat…I do not know whether any food prepared by the famous Draupadi herself could have been as savoury as that dish with suh a gusto did I devour it”.

The truth is that Savarkar used the persecution by the Muslim jail officials as an alibi to legitimize his abandonment of commitment to Indian nationalism. The renowned historian R. C. Majumdar who is regarded as a true ‘Bhartiya’ by the Hindutva brigade while sifting heaps of official papers relating to the Cellular Jail in the course of writing of his landmark book on the CJ, Penal Settlement in Andamans could not avoid commenting, “that the incarceration in the Andamans had produced a great change on the great revolutionary leaders [Savarkar, his brother and Barin] and their attitude towards the British Government and their view of destroying it by revolution or secret conspiracies had suffered a radical change”.

Savarkar preceded Jinnah in propounding two-nation theory

Muslim League [ML] under MA Jinnah demanded Pakistan in March 1940. Long before it Savarkar had laid down two-nation theory. In his book HINDUTVA (1923) he declared India to be the homeland of Hindus only and Muslims could not be part of Indian nationhood. He declared: “The root meaning of the word Hindu, like the sister epithet in Hindi, may mean only an Indian, yet as it is we would be straining the usage of words too much-we fear, to the point of breaking-if we call a Mohomedan [sic] a Hindu because of his being a resident of India.”

Muslim league under MA Jinnah demanded Pakistan in March 1940. Long before it Savarkar had laid down his two-nation theory. In his book HINDUTVA (1923) he declared India to be the homeland of Hindus only and Muslims could not be part of Indian nationhood. He declared: “The root meaning of the word Hindu, like the sister epithet in Hindi, may mean only an Indian, yet as it is we would be straining the usage of words too much-we fear, to the point of breaking-if we call a Mohomedan [sic] a Hindu because of his being a resident of India.”

Savarkar took over the leadership of Hindu Mahasabha [HM] in 1937. While addressing the 19th Session of Hindu Mahasabha at Ahmedabad in the same year stated: “As it is, there are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India…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.”

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 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 total top leadership of Congress including Gandhi, mass fines were levied and demonstrators were subjected to public flogging. Hundreds of civilians were killed in violence, many shot by the police and army. Congress was banned. It is not generally known that during these times of repression Savarkar announced full support to the British rulers. Addressing the 24th session of the HM 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…”

 

What it meant at the political front was unambiguous. HM and ML joined hands in running coalition governments in Bengal and Sind (and later NWFP). 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 coalition Government. The case of Bengal is well known. Wild Leaguers whom even the Congress with all its submissiveness could not placate grew quite reasonably compromising and socialable [sic] as soon as they came in contact with the HM and the Coalition Government, under the premiership of Mr. Fazlul Huq and the able lead of our esteemed Mahasabha leader Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerji, functioned successfully for a year or so to the benefit of both the communities."

It is to be noted that Mookerji was deputy premier and held the portfolio of suppressing QIM in Bengal.

Backstabbing Netaji Subhash Chander Bose

The Savarkar rehabilitation squad wants us to forget about the terrible betrayal of Netaji by Savarkar. When Netaji was planning to liberate India militarily, Savarkar offered full military co-operation to the British masters. Addressing 23rd session of Hindu Mahasabha at Bhagalpur in 1941, he declared: “our best national interests demands that so far as India’s defence is concerned, Hindudom must ally unhesitatingly, in a spirit of responsive co-operation with the war effort of the Indian government in so far as it is consistent with the Hindu interests, by joining the Army, Navy and the Aerial forces in as large a number as possible and by securing an entry into all ordnance, ammunition and war craft factories…Again it must be noted that Japan’s entry into the war has exposed us directly and immediately to the attack by Britain’s enemies…Hindu Mahasabhaits must, therefore, rouse Hindus especially in the provinces of Bengal and Assam as effectively as possible to enter the military forces of all arms without losing a single minute.”

According to HM documents Savarkar was able to inspire one lakh Hindus to join the ranks of the British armed forces.

Savarkar’s mercy petitions were no ruse but instruments of abject surrender

Veer Savarkar submitted minimum 5 mercy petitions [MP] in 1911, 1913, 1914, 1918 and 1920. Savarkarites claim that these were submitted not as an act of cowardice but “as an ardent follower of Shivaji, Savarkar wanted to die in action. Finding this the only way, he wrote six letters to the British pleading for his release”.  A perusal of the two available mercy petitions will prove that there cannot be a lie worse than the claim that Savarkar’s MP petitions were in league with the tricks which Shivaji used to hoodwink the Mughal rulers successfully. The mercy petition dated 14th November, 1913 ended with the following words:

“[Therefore] if the government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me, I for one cannot but be the staunchest advocate of constitutional progress and loyalty to the English government which is the foremost condition of that progress. …Moreover my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the Government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise. The Mighty alone can afford to be merciful and therefore where else can the prodigal son return but to the parental doors of the Government?”

The petition dated 30th March 1920 from this prodigal son of the British masters ended with the following words: “The brilliant prospects of my early life all but too soon blighted, have constituted so painful a source of regret to me that a release would be a new birth and would touch my heart, sensitive and submissive, to kindness so deeply as to render me personally attached and politically useful in future. For often magnanimity wins even where might fails.”

There was nothing wrong on the part of the CJ detainees in writing mercy petitions to the British. It was an important legal right available to the prisoners. Apart from Savarkar, Barin, HK Kanjilal, and Nand Gopal too submitted petitions. However, these were only Savarkar and Barin who sought forgiveness for their revolutionary past. Kanjilal and Nand Gopal did not demand any personal favour but status of political prisoners.

Savarkar secured remission of 37.5 years in his sentence of 50 years

Savarkar was incarcerated at Andamans on July 4, 1911 for two life terms [50 years]. On May 2, 1921 [after NINE years TEN months] he was transferred along with his elder brother, Babarao, to the mainland. He was finally released conditionally on January 6, 1924 [total imprisonment TWELVE years SIX months] from Yeravda Jail.

Was Savarkar a rationalist who stood for scientific temper and fought against Untouchability?

Savarkar is glorified as a rationalist and crusader against Untouchability. Let us compare these claims with Savarkar’s beliefs and acts as recorded in the HM archives. He declared Manu to be the lawgiver for Hindus and emphasized that once we “re-learn the manly lessons” he taught with others. According to him “our Hindu nation shall prove again as unconquerable and conquering a race as we proved once” when lawgivers like Manu ruled. He declared Manusmriti to be “most worship-able after Vedas…Today Manusmriti is Hindu law”.

He gave personal guarantee that “the Hindu Maha Sabha shall never force any legislations regarding the entry of untouchables in the ancient temples or compel by law any sacred ancient and moral usage or custom prevailing in those temples. In general the Mahasabha will not back up any Legislation to thrust the reforming views on our Sanatani brothers so far as personal law is concerned”.

Savarkar defended Hindu Princes who were British stooges

 

Savarkar was a great defender of the Hindu princes ruling native India. According to Savarkar, the Hindu princes were not only co-religionists but also descendants of the brave Hindu kings in the past and thus their ‘power in emergency’. In fact, Hindu Mahasabha and RSS both proudly described the Hindu princes ruling native India in league with the British rulers as ‘Shakti-sthan’ (centres of power) of Hinduism. It surely meant that Hindu sectarian leadership had neither any idea about the aspirations of toiling Hindu masses nor believed that Hindu princes were nothing but fifth column of Britain in India. The crucial fact should not be missed here that only those princes (both Hindu and Muslim) who remained absolutely loyal to foreign rulers by contributing men and material in suppressing the ‘Mutiny’ were retained as native rulers by the colonial masters in the post 1857 period.

These Hindu rulers as true and committed henchmen of the White masters never allowed any democratic activity in their kingdoms. There were endless instances of rape, killing, maiming and terrible persecution of political activists demanding basic human rights in these native states. Indian freedom struggle is witness to innumerable cases when subjects in these states were not allowed even to unfurl Tricolour.

Mysore was a Hindu princely state where 26 patriotic Indians were massacred by the police of the ruler for daring to salute Tricolour. Shockingly, it was in defence of this massacre which had sent a wave of indignation throughout India that Savarkar sent the following message to the Mysore Hindu Sabha session at Shimoga on April, 17, 1941: “The chief aim of the Mysore State Hindu Sabha must be to consolidate and strengthen the Hindu power in the Hindu State and to stand by the Maharaja and the Hindu State in weal and woe extending the most loyal and patriotic support to them in defending the Prince and the State against any subversive activities carried on by any non-Hindu forces or by the Hindu dupes of the Pseudo Nationalistic organisations.”

Savarkar advised Queen of England to hand-over India to Nepal King as he was the King of all Hindus of the world

Savarkar even suggested to the British Queen of England that India before it slips out of her hand “should be handed over to an equal an independent ally of Britain like His Majesty the Nepal King” who was the sovereign of all Hindus of the world.

These are really sad times for the largest democracy in the world that a personality antithetical to all its ideals is being presented as an icon with total disregard to historical facts available even in the Hindutva archives.

Shamsul Islam

14-11-2021

[A truncated version appeared in THE STATESMAN, 14-11-2021.

Link: https://www.thestatesman.com/opinion/savarkars-rehabilitation-1503024319.html

Link for some of S. Islam's writings in English, Hindi, Urdu, Marathi, Malayalam, Kannada, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati and video interviews/debates:

http://du-in.academia.edu/ShamsulIslam

Facebook: https://facebook.com/shamsul.islam.332

Twitter: @shamsforjustice

http://shamsforpeace.blogspot.com/

Email: notoinjustice@gmail.com