Written by: Majbuddin
BJP is the political wing of RSS whose ideology is driven by Golwalkar and Savarkar. If BJP is assumed as a cart, the Bulls are Golwalkar and Savarkar pulling that cart. The legacy is carried by Mohan Bhagwat, current chief of RSS. The innate ideology of RSS is anti muslim. I will discuss various facts and figures which are standing tall in history, which can’t be changed. However attempts are being made regularly by BJP led government. I think it is very important to understand how RSS led ideology works and changes people’s mind over the time. If we ignore to understand it, we won’t be able to understand various events going on in the country and their ideological references. My aim is to blatantly discuss them all and do away with misconceptions Indians may have.
One of the debated concepts is partition and misconceptions therein. Right wing politics make people believe that partition is the result of consent of Gandhi and attempt of Jinnah to create muslim state and also Nehru is held responsible somewhere. To understand, let us see the historical events chronology leading to partition.
Ahmed Sirhindi in 1564 opposed Mughal Emperor Akbar common religion Din-e-ilahi made to synchronise Hindus and muslims and other religions by adopting good practices of all religions and creating a new common religion Din-e-ilahi.
When muslim leaders and thinkers saw the fall of Mughal Empire and rise of non muslim Maraths, Jats etc, they started porpagating the need of another muslim nation to safeguard the interests of muslims in India. In 1883 Sir Syed Ahmed Khan said in his speech that Hindus and muslims were two different prominent nations in India and that these are two limbs of the country. In his speech in 1887 he says “Now suppose that all the English were to leave India—then who would be rulers of India? Is it possible that under these circumstances two nations, Mohammedan and Hindu, could sit on the same throne and remain equal in power? Most certainly not. It is necessary that one of them should conquer the other and thrust it down. To hope that both could remain equal is to desire the impossible and inconceivable”.
Savarkar at Hindu mahasabha in his speech in 1937 says “There are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India”, and added that “India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogenous nation. On the contrary, there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Muslims, in India.”
3 years later, Jinnah brought resolution to create Pakistan in 1940 in Lahore session.
Despite both elite community’s common goal of creating two nation, the ideas of both were different. While the reason for such endorsement for Muslim Indian elite was “fear” and “safeguarding muslim’s interest”, the reason of Hindu Mahasabha and Savarkar was “anti-Muslim and Hate”.
In 1943 Savarkar said “I have no quarrel with Mr Jinnah’s two-nation theory. We, Hindus, are a nation by ourselves and it is a historical fact that Hindus and Muslims are two nations.”
While muslim elite was in favor of creating Pakistan, the common muslims were opposed to the idea. A large number of Islamic political parties, scholars propagated composite nationalism. According to 1941 CID report, more than 50 thousands (the number was very unusual at that time)muslim weavers and muslim middle class gathered at Delhi to opppse two nation concept.
In 1937 provincial elections, hindu mahasabha under Savarkar, extended full support to Muslim league and formed coalition government with it. The idea was two nation theory. In that election, however, Muslim leage got less than 5% of muslim votes. A large majority did not support separate state theory.
Only in 1946, after Jinnah’s attempt and communal politics, Muslim league won almost all the seats reserved for muslims calling it as a referendum for creation of Pakistan. Right wing often quote this election to target muslims responsible for partition. The fact however, is that, at that time, there was arrangement of separate electorate for muslims and Hindus. And Congress has won all major seats reserved for Hindus. In 1946, Abul Kalam Azad was president of congress and muhhamd Ali Jinnah, was president of Muslim league. Also Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan helped congress form the government in NWFP.
According to M S Golwalkar, in his book “bunch of thoughts”, he propagates the concept of cultural nationalism and opposes territorial nationalism. He propagated the concept of “patribhoomi” i.e. “Fatherland” and “Holyland ” associated it with patriotism and nationalism. Cultures like Hinduism, Buddhism and Sikhism fit in this ideology as these have both their Fatherland and Holyland in India. The idea behind this is to alienate Muslims and christians. By the matter of fact, Sikhism and Buddhism originated in India so their Fatherland and Holyland is in India, but others whose religions originated somewhere else’s like that of Islam and Christianity, their holylands are defined in their scriptures. It is here interesting to note that he and his followers regard other minorities like Zoroastrian (Parsi) and jains as ideal minorities who coincided their Holyland with India. However, the cultures, scriptures of these religions are also different. It may be due to the fact that their population is not so considerate to worry and that too the majority lives in India, the combined population of which is less than 0.6%.
In his book “bunch of thoughts” Golwalkar also approves Manusmriti and praises Manu who is sternly patriarchal in his approach and anti feminist. His followers skip this fact. The followers of Golwalkar and the right wing often approve the caste system, advocating that it actually helped Hindus of United province who were orthodox, kept free from Muslim invasion, unlike with north east and north west. (Bunch of thoughts, page 108)
Golwalkar also writes that Muslims need to be subordinate to Hindus. In his book, he says muhhamad worshipped the mountain and submitted to him.” In India, muslims are Muhammad and Hindus are that Mountain. You can understand the rest. ”
Right wing following the legacy of Golwalkar often reiterate hindutva as the cultural identity of India. They promote cultural nationalism as opposed to civic nationalism enshrined in our constitution which talks of multiculturalism, tolerance and brotherhood. My personal opinion is that Muslims and Christians are muslims and Christian by chance, not by choice. By the time, they realise such ideology, their practices have become an integral and inseparable part of their life, which cannot be changed. So, how they can be blamed for that? Even if they are by choice, they have every right to do so and follow what they like.
The followers of Golwalkar and Savarkar also advocate that Sikhism and Buddhism are part of their own religions and share common cultures only to alienate Muslims and Christians from their landscape . They however hide this fact that both Buddhism and Sikhism originated as a result and revolt against many evil practices prevailing in Hinduism.
The legacy led by RSS often target Mughal emperors, saying them foreigners and invaders branding them oppressor of Hindus. The fact however, is during colonisation and annexation, many lives are lost and many human rights violations and violence. There is no democracy, there is direct war to annex. It is also wrong to say Mughals were foreigners. The first Mughal emperor Babur may be a foreigner but his descendants were Indians. Their homeland was india. They lived here and did not transfer their wealth to Persia or Arabia or the Middle East. They worked for the development of India. They were born here and died here. Their burials are in India. During their reign, India alone accounted for one third of world’s total GDP is another fact. India used to consist of several countries. Small provinces within India were independent countries and there was no central stronghold. Mughals filled that vacuum is another fact.
They also target Mughals for Hindu women persecution, which has no reasonable source in history or is dubious. Such mentions are found only in Savarkar writings. In many of his speeches, Savarkar can be found anti-Muslim propogating hate and sepertism and raping muslim women during riot as a political tool and as a revenge for falsely claimed Hindu women persecution during medieval times.
Savarkar and Golwalkar were of the idea of nationhood based on pure race or religion. During 1946-47, both Hindu Mahasabha and RSS were in favor of religious nationalism and agreed that religion should be the basis of nationhood. Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru and Maulana Azad were among those who opposed the idea and believed in unity in diversity.
Gandhi was the biggest proponents of the idea of unity in diversity and multiculturalism and non violence which made him enemy of Hindu Mahasabha as it believed Gandhi was giving undue advantage to Muslims in India. It eventually led to his murder by free India’s first terrorist Nathuram godse who was a member of both RSS and Hindu Mahasabha.
Today’s right wing is stealing leaders like Sardar Patel and Ambedkar from congress which suits their one side of story. Sardar patel suits their political narrative as he helped india consolidate into a single state in a way it practilise the idea of akhand bharat. Also, because they hate Nehru for his pluralism and unity in diversity which eventually became the idea of independent India. Also they hold Nehru responsible for Kashmir and believe that if Patel were PM, he would have handled the issue differently. The evidences however, by V. P Menon, Gandhi proves otherwise. But that is another issue and can be discussed later.
They pretend to follow and appreciate Babasaheb simply to encash Dalit votes. It is interesting to note that the followers of Golwalkar and Savarkar whose followers endorses Babasaheb do not trust the constitution and pro right wing burn the copies of constitution, break the mannequin of Babasaheb often.
They befool people through their propaganda by selectively choosing that portion of idea which suits their political narrative. Babasaheb was of the idea that the greatest oppressors of Dalits was upper caste Hindus himself for several years and still they are being treated untouchables, exploited and persecuted by upper caste Hindus. In all his speeches he often quotes “Hindus and Dalits” everytime, clearly indicating that Dalits are not Hindus.
After Assisination of Gandhi ji, Sardar Patel banned RSS calling for “rooting out forces of hate and violence”. Right wing proponents hide this fact as it does not suit their political narrative.
The current jibe of Amit Shah on “Friday” targeting muslims in U.P is an example of anti Muslim stance and anti constitution stance of RSS sponsored political party. Also there is persecution of muslims going on in many parts in name of cow slaughter etc, several mosques are set on fire in Tripura by VHP karyakartas in recent days. The prime time hate debates on TVs are example of state sponsored Media for right wing propaganda.
Muslims are targeted on India Pak matches for cheering up Pakistan which never had clear proof. Even muslim players are targeted. Currently Mohd Shami was targeted when India lost to Pakistan in cricket match.
Why are all these done by right wing?
RSS need to channelise the anger of its youth wing which eventually participate in anti Muslim clashes and they are kept on work. In the words of Savarkar, RSS is an organisation whose worker works and dies without achieving any purpose. It is an attempt to give purpose to its youth wing followers. Also such clashes polarise Hindus in India which helps RSS political wing win elections.
Followers of RSS and Right wing keep iterating the ideas of Golwalkar and Savarkar in one way or the other and almost all incidents including chanting jai Shree Ram can be attributed to such ideologies.
Today, right wing supports Netaji as a patriot. But the same right wing never supported war against the British. It was loyal to British and Savarkar assured the British to channelise Hindus to work for British government and help him form the government. It propagated war against muslims and still does so. The same right wing RSS and Hindu mahasabha was against Netaji when he asked from japanese their support to overthrow British. In 1857, Netaji called for “Dilli Chalo” was to overthrow British from India and declaring last Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar as the emperor of India and seeking his help. Bahadur Shah was exiled and all his sons were martyred for engaging in war against British. The right wing shrewdly hides this information as it does not suits their political narrative.
RSS led political party which has failed on issues of corruption index, inflation, GDP, press freedom, Democracy index, hunger index, employment , Jammu and Kashmir, GST, farmer Issues, CAA and many more are now asking to vote in name of nationalism, cultural nationalism, hindutva, and divisive politics. If it wins, it would be a signal that it need not do anything for the development of the country, the ideology alone is enough. Such victory will be the defeat for the common men as they would not get the delivery.
Savarkar had written 3 mercy petitions to British before Gandhi arrived to India in 1913. He had pledged to be loyal with the British and never indulge in any activity against British rule. Knowing this Gandhi ji did not hated Savarkar. He respected his stand as individual
He later requested British to grant mercy to Savarkar and his brother on humanitarian basis. He helped Savarkar whose ideology later assassinated him. Gandhi respected all opinions. With staunch Hindu he was a staunch human being. He respected pluralism, individual opinion and rights of every person and non violence. The idea of India is the idea of Gandhi which gives respect to all opinions and their rights. You can become Godse by firing a bullet, but the aura of Gandhi is much bigger, to become Gandhi you have to become tolerant, pluralistic, liberal and secular, that is you have to become India. That is Indianess.