India currently is in the grip of ‘constructed Hate’. This in turn has led to violence against vulnerable sections of society, particularly religious minorities and dalits. As such one understands that love is a natural phenomenon and Hatred is generally a phenomenon constructed around misconceptions about the targeted sections of society. These targeted sections of society have to bear the brunt of the violence. The major source of misconceptions is the interpretation of history, which nationalism in the name of religion interprets in a way to suit is political agenda.

Currently all three major periods of Indian History, ancient, medieval and modern are presented in a distorted fashion in the discourse which is dominating the social scene. On the top of that the historians who have tried to interpret history in rational, scientific way are looked down and defamed by the dominant political narrative. As pointed out by Eric Hobswam ‘History is to nationalism: what poppy is to the opium addict’. We can clearly see the vast divergence in interpretation of the past in Indian nationalists on one hand and communal nationalists on the other. Many historians have taken it upon themselves to stand to oppose the communal distortions of history to preserve the inclusive interpretation of our past even at the cost of facing death threats for their understanding, which goes against the grain of propaganda by the communal forces.

Professor D.N.Jha the former Professor and Head of History Department of Delhi University is one such eminent person who not only had to face the death threats but also had to go against the communal stream, which dominates the stream. Prof Jha’s death (4 February 2021) is a great loss not only to the world of professional historians but also to movement which is trying to uphold the plural, inclusive nature of our country. He was a one of the great anchor for the ideology of the movement for democratic, plural India. This ideology aims to preserve the diversity and affirmative action for religious minorities by providing the deeper understanding of ancient and medieval history through his immaculate, scholarly work. The issues he touched are the ones’ which have been rattling the society and aimed at targeting and tormenting the religious minorities in particular.

When his book ‘Myth of Holy Cow’ was published he started getting regular phone calls threatening him with dire consequences. The narrative of Holy Cow was being deliberately brought to the fore as with this issue Muslims could be scared and thrown in to the margins. We did see as to how this narrative around Holiness of cow later went on to assume the form of lynching’s in which primarily Muslims lost their lives and also dalits had to face the wrath of the communal forces, like the incident of Una where four dalits were mercilessly flogged for skinning a dead cow.

Jha’s work, based on deeper study of scriptures, showed that beef was part of the food habit in early India, Vedic and Post Vedic both. His sources were primary and wide prevalence of beef as a part of cuisine was meticulously demonstrated. At another level what he researched was ratified by the likes of Ambedkar, who had mentioned this fact earlier in his book, ‘Who were the Shudras’. Also Swami Vivekananda had pointed to the similar observation, Swamiji points out, “You will be astonished if I tell you that, according to old ceremonials, he is not a good Hindu who does not eat beef. On certain occasions, he must sacrifice a bull and eat it.”

[Vivekananda speaking at the Shakespeare Club, Pasadena, California, USA (2 February 1900) on the theme of ‘Buddhistic India’, cited in Swami Vivekananda, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol 3 (Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, 1997), p. 536.]

Jha’s scholarly work gave a great strength to the movement which upheld the diversity of food practices in India. As such communal forces are not serious about welfare of cow became obvious when the news of Hundreds of cows dying in a Cow Shed (Gaushala) due to hunger and diseases in Hingonia in Rajasthan came to the public knowledge. An interesting anecdote is mentioned in Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s biography by Vijay Trivedi (Har Nahi Manunga) where Vajpeyee while consuming beef in US humorously points out that any way the beef he is relishing is that of an American Cow!

Now Ram Temple has been inaugurated by the Prime Minster and aggressive and intimidating fund collection for Ram Temple are going on, one recalls the Reports of Historians on Ram Temple issue. He was part of the report writing team, ‘Ram Janm Bhumi-Babri Masjid: A Historians report the nation’. This report in a clear-cut manner demonstrated that neither was there a proof of Temple being destroyed to build the mosque, nor was there a definitive proof of Lord Ram being born there. Though Supreme Court rejected the report as a mere opinion but it did conclude on similar lines. It is another matter that it allotted all the land to those who were part of demolition, which was recognized as a crime by the Apex Court.

The attempt is made to attribute the destruction of Nalanada to Bakhtiyar Khilji. The communal historiography has harped on this myth to the extent of its becoming a part of social understanding. The aim as usual is to link the acts of Muslims Kings to today’s Muslims. While Khilji might have wrought destruction in different places, the much revered Nalanda’s destruction has more to do with the Brahmanical reaction to rise of Buddhism. Citing diverse sources he observes that “actual scuffle between the Buddhist and Brahminical mendicants and the latter, being infuriated, propitiated the Sun God for twelve years, performed a fire-sacrifice and threw the living embers and ashes from the sacrificial pit into the Buddhist temples which eventually destroyed the great library at Nalanda called Ratnodadhi”. (‘History of Indian Logic’, as cited by D.R. Patil, The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, page 327). The diverting of attention to Khilji is a mechanism to hide under the carpet the scuffle between Buddhism and Brahmanism, which has been the central fulcrum around which Indian past has revolved.

One more shameful incident which happened in recent years was the attack on girls in a pub in Mangalore. This was done by Sri Ram Sene, led by the ex-RSS pracharak Pramod Mutalik. The attack was on the ground that drinking by women is against Indian traditions. Not only did he co-write an article to burst this myth he went on to contribute the book, Drink of Immortality (2020). This work explores the distillation of Alcohol of different varieties in ancient India and its consumption by men and women. Also pointing out that Vedas, Ramayana and Mahabharata also mention the consumption of alcohol.

Jha belonged to the stream of academics that actively engaged and contributed to struggles for better society, a society with respect for diversity and pluralism, a society upholding the rights of oppressed and marginalized, including the religious minorities. Humble tributes to a great historian!


Category :- English Bazaar Patrika / OPED

Netaji Subhashchandra Bose’s birth anniversary was marked by various events this year (January 23). His portrait was unveiled by the President in Rashtrapati Bhavan. It was declared that his anniversary will be celebrated as Parakram Divas (Bravery day). Railway Minister announced the renaming of Howrah-Kalka Mail as Netaji Express. Mamta Bannerjee in contrast stated that his anniversary will be celebrated as Dehs Nayak Divas (National Hero Day). Through word of mouth propaganda and the social media BJP and company is spreading the falsehood that Congress did not honor Bose and that Bose supported Hindutva.

In a public meeting in Kolkata to celebrate his anniversary on 23 January when Mamata Bannerjee rose to speak a section of BJP supporters shouted Jai Shri Ram. Bannerjee said it is an insult to her and left the meeting without speaking. As such the slogan dear to Bose was Jai Hind.

All this is happening in the backdrop of forthcoming West Bengal elections where BJP is making all the attempts to win the Assembly elections. In tune with the attempt to pick up the icons by BJP; Subhash Bose is the latest on the line. He is a tall National figure and is greatly revered in WB. So far BJP never talked of putting Netaji in such a way as it is doing currently. The truth that Netaji’s ideology was totally in opposition to the one being pursued by BJP is being hidden under the carpet and strong attempt is underway to show that Netaji had ideology similar to the present ruling dispensation. Netaji was for socialism, democracy and communal amity and the present ruling party is for Hindu nation, is practicing the divisive politics and is undermining democracy through all its action.

As far as his differences with Congress party (INC) are concerned they related more to means to be employed for getting Independence. He was twice President of INC. The difference came up mainly in the wake of Second World War when Congress under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi planned a nationwide agitation; ‘Quit India Movement’. Bose at this point of time wanted to make the British quit by allying with Germany and Japan who were Britain’s enemy countries. The majority of Congress Central committee was with Gandhi’s proposal and leaders like Patel and Nehru totally opposed the strategy proposed by Bose.

Still it was a tactical difference; Congress and Bose both were for getting freedom, while Hindu Mahasabha and RSS supported the British war efforts. Savarkar of Hindu Mahasabha was in the lead to make the British army strong by helping them to recruit Indians into British army. Bose on the contrary formed ‘Azad Hind Fauz’ (Indian National Army, INA) in Singapore with the aim of countering British army. He continued to be admirer of INC, Gandhi and Nehru; as is evident from the fact that he wrote to Mahatma Gandhi addressing him as Rashtrapita (Father of the nation). He sought Gandhi’s blessings while forming INA and two of INA Brigades were named after Gandhi and Nehru.

While Hindu Mahasabha and RSS have been totally against the state sponsored welfare programs and the concept of Socialism, Bose was a firm socialist. Within Congress he was with Nehru and other socialists for incorporation of socialist ideals in the national movement. Bose was strongly advocating for planning commission for the planned development of the country. Incidentally the planning commission which was set up after Independence was scrapped by BJP-NDA Government and replaced by Niti Ayog. When he left Congress he formed Forward Block, a socialist outfit, which had been part of the Left Alliance which ruled WB for decades.

Congress also looked at INA in a positive light and when after the end of World War II, the soldiers and officers of INA were tried in the Courts; lawyers like Bhulabhai Desai and Congress leader Jawaharlal Nehru among others fought the case for the INA. Interestingly Nehru adorned the lawyer’s gown precisely to fight the cases for the brave soldiers of INA.

One should note that Hindu Mahasabha’s Shyama Prasad Mukherjee was part of the Government of Bengal in alliance with Muslim League. When British Government was suppressing the Quit India Movement, Mukherjee promised British not to bother about the Quit India Movement in Bengal as he will deal with them properly. Parallel to this Hindu Mahasabha’s Savarkar wanted British army to be strong and chief of RSS, Golwalkar put out a circular to its branches to stick to their regular activities and not to do anything which will annoy the British.

Hindu Rashtra (Nation) has been the main plank of Hindu Mahasabha-RSS. Bose was totally opposed to the politics of communalists, Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha. It was under his President-ship of Congress that that dual membership of communalists was barred. They no longer could be on the elective committees of Congress. Also in one of his broadcasts from Berlin he criticized these formations for their siding with British. As per him the politics of communal organizations was totally against the interests of peasants and workers. His opposition to Shyama Prasad Mukherjee joining Hindu Mahasabha’s Bengal unit was very strong.

It is not much projected as to what were the ideas of Bose on the issue of nature of Nationalism and Hindu Muslim unity.  To quote Bose from his writings, “With the advent of the Mohammedans, a new synthesis was gradually worked out. Though they did not accept the religion of the Hindus, they made India their home and shared in the common social life of the people – their joys and their sorrows. Through mutual co-operation, a new art and a new culture were (sic) evolved ….” And also that, “Indian Mohammedans” have continued to work for national freedom.” In order to uphold rights of minorities, he conceptualized a new State where “religious and cultural freedom for individuals and group” should be guaranteed and no “state-religion” would be adopted [‘Free India and her Problems’].

While sticking to ‘first comers’, RSS ideologues say that Aryans were the original inhabitants in India and from here they emigrated to parts of West Asia and Europe. In contrast Bose points out “, “The latest archeological excavations … prove unmistakably that India had reached a high level of civilization as early as 3000 B.C. … before the Aryan conquest of India.” His praise for Mohenjo-daro and Harappa is certainly a rational counter-argument based on ‘scientific findings’ against the imagination of a Hindu-Aryan origin of Indian culture. Bose was forward looking and did not subscribe to ‘golden ancient period’ thesis propounded by communalists.

Time and over again the Hindu nationalists have been trying to gain legitimacy by appropriating the national icons like Vivekanad, Sardar Patel and the like. BJP is on the lokout for those nationals icons who differed with Congress, with Gandhi or Nehru. Now with WB elections forthcoming ‘no holds barred’ efforts is on to appropriate a tall leader of freedom movement, whose ideology is totally in opposition the one of Hindu nationalists. He was a true socialist wedded to the concept of Hindu Muslim unity. He fought against British while Hindu nationalists supported them. He called Gandhi as rashtrapita, while one of the Hindu nationalist murdered him!


Category :- English Bazaar Patrika / OPED