Clubhouse is the latest in thing. While it has its share of advantages, there are some demerits, too, which largely depend on the participants who take part in the discussions and the narratives they seek to build. For instance, the platform enables discussions on various topics in a democratic way, while it also helps strengthen stereotypical notions and prejudices on various issues and organisations. I, too, was invited to speak on some topics by our workers a couple of times. As I am undergoing Ayurvedic treatment in Kerala, at present, I have some free time at my disposal which I make use, at times, by eavesdropping into some of the discussion rooms to get a hang of the dialectical engagements happening around in this platform.
Some of the ‘rooms’ I frequent discussed issues such as ‘political Islam’ and the dangers posed by it to the humanity. While the protagonists of Islamism and their apologists dismiss it as mere Islamophobia, the fear is palpable across sections, even among a section of Muslims. Kerala is reeling under the looming threat of political Islam which is spreading its tentacles to all spheres of human action and interaction. What is more worrying is the attitude of political parties. The political party in power in Kerala and the main opposition have been vying with each other to appease the protagonists of this petro-dollar-aided political ideology that come camouflaged as religion and allowing it to dig its heels deeper. Mindless of the sword hanging above their heads, many intellectuals, to show that they are balanced, try to equate political Islam with Hindutva. As Hamid Chendamangalore, a liberal Muslim scholar, once suggested such positions by secular-liberals are fraught with danger and give an opportunity to proponents of pan-Islamism get away scot-free. Their presumptions, prejudiced notions and political correctness blind them to face the reality. In their attempt to indulge in ‘deliberate balancing’ act, they create a ‘Hindutva’ which is far removed from reality.
Critics of Hindutva often say it is an exclusive political doctrine – which it is not. Unlike Islam, the goal of Hindutva (or Hinduness) is promotion of pluralism as it permits freedom of choice and of conscience. Exclusivism is foreign to the Hindu mind.
As Sri Aurobindo says India has always given space to all streams of thought and traditions and allowed them to flourish in their own way, independently. We never sent armies to destroy cultures and uproot places of worship or burn down libraries and bring about uniformity in thoughts and beliefs.
Pre-Islamic Arabia had nurtured in its bosom hundreds of religions and civilizations. In the bustling city of pre-Islamic Mecca, there existed Christians, Jews and Pagan religionists. Where are they now? Where are the magnificent temples they built? According to a scholar on Islam, more than 1,000 small and big religions perished in the sands of Arabia without leaving a trace ever since Islam became the dominant religion of West Asia. The onslaught on Yezidis and enslavement of their womenfolk should also be viewed in this perspective.
In India, on the contrary, little traditions of the Janapads (small geographical areas), grew retaining their innate characteristics, even if many of their practices might look contrary to the ways of the majority around them. The majority who lived around accepted and respected them as part of their culture. This acceptance and management of contradictions, which came natural to the Hindu, is what other societies including the West failed to come to terms with. Communism, which evolved from the liberal Christianity, could not digest this, so they propagated the idea that India is a conglomeration of multiple nationalities and therefore it should be divided into different nations. The Communists aided and supported the ‘two-nation theory’ raised by the Muslim League under MA Jinnah. Thereafter also, Communists and the members of the Left ecosystem have provided logistical and ideological tools to support all secessionist movements in India. The ‘tukde-tukde gang’ emerged from this ecosystem.
However, our social reformers and nationalist thinkers did not find any conflict in these seeming contradictions in the traditions or regional aspirations or pride. For, acceptance of one aspect doesn’t amount to the rejection of others. This is exemplified when Vallathol Narayana Menon, the renowned nationalist poet, writes,
“Bharatham ennu kettaal abhimaana puuritham aakanam antharamgam…
Keralam ennu kettaalo thilakkanam chora namukku njarambukalil.
(Meaning: When we hear the name our country Bharat, our heart should fill with pride…But when we hear Kerala, blood should surge in our veins).
Similarly, Tamil poet and nationalist Subramonya Bharatiyar tried to arouse Tamil spirit. But it never ran contrary to Bharatiyata or Hindutva but, on the other hand, complimented the idea of larger nationhood.
We all are aware that Vande Mataram song — the power-packed mantra for the emancipation of Bharat — written by Bankim Chandra was originally in praise of Bangaliat. But that song resonated across the country and struck a chord with the nationalists and revolutionaries who worked for the freedom of the country.
So this is the reality: Kashmiriyat, Bengaliyat, Tamilatva, Gujarati Gaurav or Kannadika pride – all these identities are not mutually exclusive or contradictory but complimentary or parts of the Hindutva whole. These are all regional manifestations of the Hindutva – all these together form the Hindutva whole. Once commenting on this aspect, P Parameswarji said, “Without Kerala Bharat is incomplete and without Bharat, Kerala is dangerous.
In Lalitha Sahasranama, the Goddess is described as ‘sahasra dala patmastha’ – the Goddess who resides on a thousand-petalled lotus. This is our concept of Bharat Mata. In conceptual level, this explains Hindutva or Bharatiyata.
Discussion about this post