The Veer, Mercy Petitions and Contemporary Justifications – The Shillong Times

By Dr Saji Varghese

Savarkar had lived for a long period in Europe and his Hindutva is a European product . The word Hindutva, now so familiar is Sarvarkars choice in preference to the religious term, Hinduism, means Hinduness or the essence of being Hindu.

The recent claim of the Defence Minister of India, Rajnath Singh that Vinayak Damodar Savarkars mercy petition for amnesty was carried out on the advice of Mahatma Gandhi, has waded into a controversy. Many, including prominent historians, journalists and opposition party leaders questioned the statement made by the Defence Minister on October 12, while releasing a book on Veer Savarkar. Several questions that pop up in peoples minds are : Did the contrasting ideology of Mahatma Gandhi support his plea for amnesty?, What compelled such a petition ? The followers of the ideologies of Savarkar never contested their belief, that he who professed the radicalists Hindu voice was a staunch nationalist and an unwavering patriot.Savarkar, one of the founders of the Hindu Right Wing was known for his radical ethno-religious views which challenged in many ways the existence and practice of secularism in India . He argued that the true Indian was one, for whom the Motherland and the Holy land were one and the same. This dual bond to the land created a precious type of perfect solidarity and cohesion. For this reason he claimed that Muslims and the Christians could never be true Indians, as their Holy land lay elsewhere.However, today there is a more inclusive concept of what is India . By contrast Savarkar argues that Dalits and tribal people did worship gods that were fundamentally attached to the land, though their religion was not of the mainstream. At one point he suggested that Christians, Parsis, Jews and Muslims could count as genuine Hindus too, if they were willing to renounce their allegiance to their Holy land. In the modern world, his argument is that the world will have to bow to the power of the unified India as he believed that India would rise to its glory in unity. He wrote this in Hindutva: who is a Hindu?. His views were more like an advocate of atheism and rationalism, and his strong opposition to orthodox Hindu beliefs were reflected in his book too and to whom Hinduism was a genetic and political force inbuilt into Hindus. He was also a man of contradictions. On the one hand, he was an outspoken political voice for the Hindus, on the other, he was a rationalist, who opposed Hindu superstition, the caste system, and worship of the Cow a sacred animal for the Hindus.Savarkar had lived for a long period in Europe and his Hindutva is a European product . The word Hindutva, now so familiar is Sarvarkars choice in preference to the religious term, Hinduism, means Hinduness or the essence of being Hindu. The inquiry into the essence of Hindu had been historical and all the modern debate could still be the consequence of such an inquiry. Do these ideas lead to the conception of unity in diversity? Savarkar was not in denial of this tradition, however, he was in favour of rebuilding the tradition along European lines. For him, the religious and cultural traditions are the key markers of Hindutva, though he was not a religious practitioner.Rajnath Singhs remarks sparked protests from Savarkars critics. Many opined that Gandhi, an ardent pacifist and opponent of the revolutionary, could not have advised and supported Savarkars release. One opposition leader blamed Singh for trying to twist history. However, is there a need for the ruling partys further cleansing (justification) of the acts of the leaders which seem to be in control of almost everything, on its road to the next 2024 showdown? Though the means seem acceptable and popular as Gandhi is a pacifist and advocate of peace and passive resistance would be appealing to the masses. Savarkar did write at least seven petitions between 1911 and 1920 for his release from the notorious Cellular Jail in the Andaman Islands, where he and his brother spent 10 years after they were sentenced for life for waging a war against the British in India. In a 1920 petition, he expressed his willingness to join the constitutional line of political activity and abstain from political activity for a long period of time, notes Vikram Sampath, historian and author of a two-volume biography of Savarkar.While a term of governance witnessed the vital assiduity being heaped on the freedom fighters and social revolutionaries who were undercover in the earlier regime, this claim seemed to have further cleansed an unchivalrous move of a patriot in the much secular water of the ocean of Ahimsa. An illogical claim may be called a petitio principii, the very assertion is nothing other than a presupposition which stands in need to be proved. Despite the assertion, there is no material on record to prove the same. Although the right-wing leader was exonerated of all charges, his critics allege that Savarkar was connected to the 1948 assassination of Gandhi. They dispute his role in the Indian freedom struggle and condemn his advocacy of a Hindu nation. The two were fiercely opposed to each other.Historian Ramachandra Guha says Savarkars rivalry with Gandhi dated back to 1909 when he openly abused Gandhi. His hatred of Gandhi was intensely personal. In 1920, Savarkars younger brother Narayan Rao sought the help and advice of Gandhi, for securing the release of his elder brother in the wake of the royal proclamation. Gandhi sent a small reply a week later which reads, It is difficult to advise you. I suggest, however, framing a brief petition setting forth facts of the case bringing out in clear relief the fact that the offence committed by your brother was purely political. However, a few months later, Gandhi built a case for their release. In an article in Young India, a weekly paper. He wrote that the Savarkar brothers had said they did not entertain any revolutionary ideas. They both state unequivocally that they do not desire independence from the British connection. On the contrary, they feel that Indias destiny can be worked out in association with the British. Nobody has questioned their honour or their honesty, Gandhi wrote.Many narratives of the freedom struggle and the related events have become easy locus for the political convenience of the leaders in contemporary times. Does history and facts get distorted through these assertions which recur with covert motives? Whatever be the intent, there is a need to keep history and historical movements apolitical.(The writer teaches at Lady Keane College, Shillong)

Read this article:

The Veer, Mercy Petitions and Contemporary Justifications - The Shillong Times