The All Seeing Blind

The story ‘The All Seeing Blind’ is written by Abid Surti in Gujarati. It is translated into English from the Hindi translation by Anil Sood.

Loknath is a blind person. He became blind at the age of ten. One day in his dream Shankarji told him to ask for a wish in a minute. Loknath spent a minute to think and he asked nothing. When he shared this with his mother, she told him that he could have asked for a pair of eyes. Loknath replied that it would be selfish to seek happiness for himself in a world full of people living in misery.

Loknath walked to his telephone booth without a walking stick. He had his own calculation for covering distance. He helped a kid to cross the road. He reached his telephone booth. A young person came to his telephone booth to make a call. After he finished his conversation, he gave a rupee coin to Loknath. Then Loknath extended his handkerchief towards him. How could he know the young man was sweating? The coin he gave was sticky and the receiver was wet. Then a moustached man came. When he finished his conversation, he gave Loknath a twenty-rupee note. Loknath felt the crispness of the new note and returned the change. Just then he heard the familiar squeak of sandals. He chirped ‘Hellooo’ in a very amiable tone. Seeing a pretty eighteen-year-old maiden, the moustached man murmured, “A blind man with x-ray eyes!” The girl called Poonam came every day at the lunch hour. She was a personal secretary in a company.

Three days later Inspector Godbole told him about a bank robbery. Loknath asked him about the bundles of bank notes that were missing. The inspector said, “Two lakh rupees consisted of hundred-rupee notes and the balance was made up of twenty-rupee notes.” Taking out a twenty-rupee note Loknath asked him, “Could this be one of those?” The inspector opened his pocket diary and compared the serial number. He asked Loknath where he got it. Loknath gave a clue about the moustached man. He also told his height. By his manner of speaking, he guessed that he should be from Punjab.

A little later, a young man stepped out of a taxi and asked Loknath, “Are you Loknath?” Loknath nodded. “I am.” “I Know” he said with a smile, “You are Rahul.” Rahul was the boyfriend of Poonam. Rahul was mystified. Loknath’s eyes did not have vision but he could see through his other senses – smell, hearing, touch…

Then came the moustached man. He asked if the phone was really dead and if there was any other booth nearby. Loknath told him that there was another booth in the passage of a building across the road. The inspector was standing there and he nabbed him.

Poonam had an artificial foot. But she did not reveal it to her boyfriend because she had a fear of loosing the relationship. Loknath suggested her to test his love by revealing the truth. So, she told her boyfriend about her artificial foot. He asked for a day to ponder over it. The following day Rahul invited Loknath to have a lunch with them. It was a clear indication that Rahul had accepted Poonam’s love. Poonam showed Loknath his photograph in the newspaper. She read the headline aloud, “A gang of bank robbers arrested with the help of a sightless man.”

-Gnaneswara T N, Assistant Professor, GFGC, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru

Breaking Ties

Sara Aboobacker is one of the finest radical authors from Karnataka. She has written novels and short stories in Kannada. She is an outstanding author who has succeeded in revealing the patriarchal and unjust rules obligatory on women in the religion of Islam. Her first novel Chandragiriya Teeradalli has been translated into several languages. It has been translated into English by Vanamala Vishwanatha as Breaking Ties. It focuses on the life of Nadira, a young Muslim woman attempting to assert independence first from her father, and later, from her husband. She has an autocratic father. Her mother believes that a woman should be submissive. Barely into her teens, Nadira was married off to Rashid. But her father separated her from her husband and planned to give her in marriage to Salim, a rich and elderly person. Through this novel, Sara Aboobacker has voiced feminine sensibility and oppression of women in patriarchal society.

Summary

Born in the Western Ghats, the Chandragiri flows westward to join the Arabian Sea. At one point in its course, the river changes direction to flow north-south for a couple of miles, then turns west again and finally mingles with the sea. To the east of this curve is Kiliyuru; to the west is Bagodu village.The river Chandragiri dominates the narrative in many ways. It not only sets the boundaries to the bigger world outside; it also reflects and sympathises with the moods of the characters.

Mahammad Khan lived in Kiliyuru. Mohammed Khan was tall and well-built, light brown in complexion. He was rude, short-tempered and obstinate. He had to have his way in everything. A dictator. So, his friends were few.

When Mahammad Khan married Fatima, she was barely eleven - no age to know what marriage was all about. But Mahammad Khan was already past twenty-eight.

He had never been one to work hard. He was always seen chatting with people either on the river bank or in the mosque, with no thought for time. He went on without a care, knowing well that Fatima would somehow manage and provide for the family.

In the midst of all torture and pain, Fatima was still grateful to her husband for one thing. He had not remarried and imposed a second wife on her, though she had not produced a son. She was grateful that he hadn't eyed other women after marriage. However cruel her husband was, Fatimma was still depended on him for a sense of security. She would get very anxious if he came home late. Whatever he was, a household without a man was no household, according to Fatimma.

Mahammad Khan had two daughters. His elder daughter, Nadira, lived with her husband. Rashid and Nadira were made for each other. They had a baby. Her husband's house was situated to the west of the river. Nadira rarely missed her mother's house. She was supremely happy. Not once had she nagged her husband to buy her this or that; not once had she hurt her mother-in-law. She had been ready to give her life for the people of that little Kavalli house.

Mahammad Khan was busy looking for a match for their younger daughter, Jamila. Somehow, he had managed to make as much jewellery for her as they had for Nadira. And they were struggling now to put together some money for her dowry. However hard he tried, to collect three thousand rupees for Jamila's marriage, Mahammad Khan was unsuccessful. The groom was from a good family. He even owned a small shop and they could manage a living, rolling beedis right there in the shop. In Khan's mind, the groom's greatest asset was that he lived in Kiliyuru itself.

The next morning Mahammad Khan set out for Manipura. When he reached Rashid's shop, his son-in-law greeted him respectfully. Making sure that nobody was around, he told Rashid the purpose of his visit. Now Rashid understood everything. But Rashid told him that he couldn't give him so much money. Mahammad Khan had never thought that his son-in-law would defy him like this.

Mahammad Khan went straight to his daughter's house. He asked Amina to send his daughter and the baby with him. In the beginning, she hesitated to send her daughter-in-law without consulting with her son. Even Nadira was not keen on visiting her parents. Mahammad Khan told his daughter that her mother was always thinking of her. At last, Amina decided to send her daughter-in-law with her father. After reaching his home, Khan declared that he won't send his daughter to her husband's house. Now Nadira understood all that had happened.

For Nadira, it was an endless stretch of darkness, with no moon in sight. Her only hope was her husband. Sooner or later, he would come to take her home. Nadira waited and waited for her husband and her mother-in-law, counting every hour. To kill time, she would sit with her sister and learn how to roll beedis. When she too helped, their income increased a little. Mahammad Khan was pleased with that. What had begun as a pastime had now become life's necessity. Her disgust towards her father also grew in proportion.

In the meantime, Mahammad Khan had sold a part of their coconut grove, the sole support of their life, and raised the money needed for Jamila's dowry. Though they managed the dowry, they fell short of money for wedding expenses.

Jamila’s wedding was over. One day Paru, the fish-seller from Kavalli visited Mahammad Khan’s house and handed a letter to Nadira. It was from Rashid. He had suggested Nadira to come with Paru. But Nadira told Paru that she could not come with her without telling her father.

Another day Aminamma, Nadira’s mother-in-law, came to Mahammad Khan’s house and carried Nadira’s baby when Nadira and her mother were out of sight.

One evening as Mahamad Khan sat near the Kadavu, Jabbar of the banana plantation came over and sat by his side. He suggested Mahammad Khan to take talaaq from Rashid and to marry off Nadira with New House Selim. Selim was a rich person. He had a wife and a houseful of children! His eldest son was older than Nadira by a few years.

The next morning Mahammad Khan set off to Manipura. He met his son-in-law Rashid and demanded for tallaq threatening him. Rashid pronounced talaaq three times at a mosque in the presence of a maulvi. But when her father proposed her marriage with Selim, Nadira said that she would kill herself by jumping into the Chandragiri. Mahammad Khan was worried. Now he thought of remarrying Nadira with Rashid. He consulted the maulvi. The maulvi said that according to the Qua’ran when a husband utters talaaq three times, the relationship between him and his wife stands dissolved. If they have to come together again, the wife should remarry and get a talaaq from the second husband. She has to wait for three months. Once it is proved that she is not pregnant by him, then the first husband can marry her.

Mahammad Khan’s state of health started to worsen. He arranged the marriage of Nadira with the sixty-year-old Sheik Ali, a coconut picker. On the marriage day the maulvi asked Nadira’s consent for the marriage. It took her a while before she could say “Yes”. The nikah was over. Fatimma came over to Nadira and draped a new saree around her. Nadira told her mother that she needed some air. Nadira came straight to the river bank. She continued along the bank and reached the mosque. She walked towards the pond in the mosque. She plunged into the lake.

Characters

Nadira

Nadira was the eldest daughter of Mahammad Khan. She had read the Qua'ran thoroughly and never missed the namaaz, praying five times a day. Right from the time she was ten, she had been fasting for all the thirty days.

Nadira was married to Rashid. Rashid and Nadira were made for each other. Nadira would not touch her dinner until Rashid returned, whatever the time. Nadira rarely missed her mother's house. She was supremely happy. Not once had she nagged her husband to buy her this or that; not once had she hurt her mother-in-law. She had been ready to give her life for the people of that little Kavalli house.

She had never crossed the Chandragiri on her own. Doing so without the company of a male member of the family was unthinkable.

However hard he tried, to collect three thousand rupees for Jamila's marriage, Mahammad Khan was unsuccessful. He asked Rashid to give money. But Rashid told him that he couldn't give him so much money. Mahammad Khan had never thought that his son-in-law would defy him like this.

Mahammad Khan went straight to his daughter's house. He asked Amina to send his daughter and the baby with him. In the beginning, she hesitated to send her daughter-in-law without consulting with her son. At last, Amina decided to send her daughter-in-law with her father. After reaching his home, Khan declared that he won't send his daughter to her husband's house.

Nadira hoped that her husband he would come to take her home. But her husband did not come. But one day her mother-in-law came and carried her baby. Her father got talaaq from her husband forcefully. He proposed her marriage with Selim who had wife and children. Nadira did not give her consent and said that she would kill herself by jumping into the Chandragiri. Then her father decided to remarry her with Rashid. But she had to marry another man and seek talaaq from him before marrying the first husband. Her marriage was arranged with sixty-year-old Sheik Ali. But on the marriage day she killed herself by plunging into the lake in the mosque.

Rashid

Nadira's husband Rashid ran a small business in that town. His house was there miles away from town - in a tiny village called Kavalli. His humble house was in the middle of a half-acre farm full of coconut, banana and arecanut trees. His household ran smoothly out of the income from the shop and the trees.

When Rashid married Nadira, she was barely fourteen. He was twenty-five. He had given in to pressure from his mother and consented to marry. Mahammad Khan had married off his daughter with as much pomp as he could manage. He gave ten sovereigns of gold and two thousand rupees in dowry. He had celebrated the wedding in a manner much appreciated by the people of that town.

Rashid had not seen Nadira before the wedding; only his mother Amina had. What Amina had to say after she had seen the girl was etched in Rashid's mind. "Rashi, the girl is still young, but very pretty. Large eyes, a bowl-shaped face and a complexion like kedige. I was told she has read the Qua'ran thoroughly and never misses the namaaz, praying five times a day. Right from the time she was ten, she has been fasting for all the thirty days. She is an ideal bride." Though his mother had reassured him, he still worried that the girl was too young and half-heartedly consented to marry. He saw her for the first time only on the wedding night.

On Fridays, Rashid did not go to work. He would stay home wandering about in the garden. In the afternoon, Rashid would go to the mosque for namaaz. On Friday evenings, he would go to Manipura to watch a movie. Of late, on Fridays, Rashid had started to stay home, wandering around the home and the garden, chatting with Nadira; this gave him more joy than watching films since he was literate, he started to bring magazines home trying to teach Nadira how to read.

Mahammad Khan

Mahammad Khan lived in Kiliyuru. His only asset was a one-acre coconut grove on the banks of the river and a small mud hut in the middle of that grove. A couple of cows, three or four goats and their young, and some fowl - these were the movable assets of Muhammad Khan's wife Fatima.

Mohammed Khan was tall and well-built, light brown in complexion and beard in the style of a maulwi. He would not set foot outside without a cap on his head, a shawl over it under court he was of the view that there was nothing as good as a coat to cover up their poverty. Never mind if Fathima did not have a good sari; he had to have a coat. He was rude, short-tempered and obstinate. He had to have his way in everything. A dictator. So, his friends were few.

He had never been one to work hard. He was always seen chatting with people either on the river bank or in the mosque, with no thought for time. He went on without a care, knowing well that Fatima would somehow manage and provide for the family.

Mahammad Khan was one of those who believed in the masculine principle to the total negation of the feminine. In his eyes, a woman was a creature without a heart, without feelings. She had to implicitly obey her father, husband, and then her sons.

He tries to separate his daughter from her husband and also tries to marry her off with an old rich person for the sake of money.

Fatimma

When Mahammad Khan married Fatima, she was barely eleven - no age to know what marriage was all about. All she knew was that she would be dressed in silk and gold by other women who would then sing and clap their hands. She had seen that there would also be a man dressed as a bridegroom. Beyond this, she knew nothing. Before she knew it, her marriage with Khan had taken place. But Mahammad Khan was already past twenty-eight.

In the midst of all torture and pain, Fatima was still grateful to her husband for one thing. He had not remarried and imposed a second wife on her, though she had not produced a son. She was grateful that he hadn't eyed other women after marriage.

However cruel her husband was, Fatimma was still depended on him for a sense of security. She would get very anxious if he came home late. Whatever he was, a household without a man was no household, according to Fatimma.

Selim

New House Selim owned a big hotel in Bombay. He had just built his new house. He had a lot of property - the betelnut estate adjacent to the Chandragiri, several other fields and estates. Selim had recently bought up Mahammad Khan's farm too. His eldest son, now living in Bombay, was older than Nadira by a few years. He had invited the whole town for a grand meal a couple of years ago for the hair trimming ceremony of his eighth child. He had chopped up two huge goats for the feast.

Selim tried to attract Nadira. Several times, he sent Khan baskets filled with fruits and sweets from Bombay. He sent Khan gifts of mundu and shirt lengths. He even dyed his hair, wore freshly laundered clothes and a Jinnah cap and walked around the farm he had bought from Khan, while a servant followed him, carrying an umbrella.

Quotes by English Writers

 

1. Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. -Ralph Waldo Emerson
2. Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn. -Benjamin Franklin
3. Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man. -Francis Bacon
4. Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested. -Francis Bacon
5. Poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings: it takes its origin from emotion recollected in tranquillity. -William Wordsworth
6.  Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice. -William Shakespeare
7. Neither a borrower nor a lender be. -William Shakespeare
8. All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts. -William Shakespeare
9. Brevity is the soul of wit. -William Shakespeare
10. Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none. -William Shakespeare
11. Cowards die many times before their deaths; the valiant never taste of death but once. - William Shakespeare
12. Living well is the best revenge. - George Herbert
13. No man is an island. - John Donne
14. One cannot think well, love well, sleep well, if one has not dined well. - Virginia Wolf
15. “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” ― Socrates
16. “Wonder is the beginning of wisdom.” ― Socrates
17. “Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people.” ― Socrates
18.  “Education is the kindling of a flame, not the filling of a vessel.” ― Socrates

Voluntary Poverty

Voluntary Poverty[1]

 

-M. K. Gandhi

 

When I found myself drawn into the political coil, I asked myself what was necessary for me in order to remain absolutely untouched by immorality, by untruth, by what is known as political gain . . . . I do not propose to take you through all the details of that act or performance, interesting and, to me, sacred though they are—but I can only tell you that it was a difficult struggle in the beginning and it was a wrestle with my wife and—as I can vividly recall —with my children also. Be that as it may, I came definitely to the conclusion that, if I had to serve the people in whose midst my life was cast and of whose difficulties I was witness from day to day. I must discard all wealth, all possession.

 

I cannot tell you with truth that, when this belief came to me, I discarded everything immediately, I must confess to you that progress at first was slow. And now, as I recall those days of struggle, I remember that it was also painful in the beginning. But, as days went by, I saw that I had to throw overboard many other things which I used to consider as mine, and a time came when it became a matter of positive joy to give up those things. And one after another then, by almost geometric progression, the things slipped away from me. And, as I am describing my experiences, I can say a great burden fell off my shoulders, and I felt that I could now walk with ease and do my work also in the service of my fellow-men with great comfort and still greater joy. The possession of anything then became a troublesome thing a burden.

 

Exploring the cause of that joy, I found that, if I kept anything as my own, I had to defend it against the whole world. I found also that there were many people who did not have the thing, although they wanted it; and I would have to seek police assistance also if hungry famine-stricken people, finding me in a lonely place, wanted not merely to divide the thing with me but to dispossess me. And I said to myself: if they want it and would take, they do so not from any malicious motive, but they would do it because theirs was a greater need than mine.

 

And then I said to myself: possession seems to me to be a crime: I can only possess certain things when I know that others, who also want to possess similar things, are able to do so. But we know —every one of us can speak from experience —that such a thing is an impossibility. Therefore, the only thing that can be possessed by all is non-possession, not to have anything whatsoever. In other words, a willing surrender.

 

You might then well say to me: but you are keeping many things on your body even as you are speaking about voluntary poverty and not possessing anything whatsoever! And your taunt would be right, if you only superficially understood the meaning of the thing that I am speaking about just now. It is really the spirit behind. Whilst you have the body, you will have to have something to clothe the body with also. But the then you will take for the body not all that you can get, but the least possible, the least with which you can do. You will take for your house not many mansions, but the least cover that you can do with. And similarly, with reference to your food and so on.

 

Now you see that there is here a daily conflict between what you and we understand today as civilization and the state which I am picturing to you as a state of bliss and a desirable state. On the other hand, the basis of culture or civilization is understood to be the multiplication of all your wants. If you have one room, you will desire to have two rooms, three rooms, the more the merrier. And similarly, you will want to have as much furniture as you can put in your house, and so on, endlessly. And the more you possess, the better culture you represent, or some such thing, I am putting it, perhaps, not as nicely as the advocates of that civilization would put it, but I am putting it to you in the manner I understand it.

 

And, on the other hand, you find the less you possess, the less you want, the better you are. And better for what? Not for enjoyment of this life, but for enjoyment of personal ser-vice to your fellow-beings; service to which you dedicate yourselves, body, soul and mind . . . . even the body is not yours. It has been given to you as a temporary possession, and it can also be taken from you by Him who has given it to you.

 

Therefore, having the absolute conviction in me, such must be my constant desire that this body also may be surrendered at the will of God, and while it is at my disposal, must be used not for dissipation, not for self-indulgence, not for pleasure, but merely for service and service the whole of your waking hours. And if this is true with reference to the body, how much more with reference to clothing and other things that we use? . . . .

 

And those who have actually followed out this vow of voluntary poverty to the fullest extent possible (to reach absolute perfection is an impossibility, but the fullest possible extent for a human being) those who have reached the ideal of that state, they testify that when you dispossess yourself of everything you have, you really possess all the treasures of the world. In other words, you really get all that is in reality necessary for you, everything. If food is necessary, food will come to you.

 

Many of you are men and women of prayer, and I have heard from very many Christian lips that they got their food in answer to prayer, that they get everything in answer to prayer. I believe it. But I want you to come with me a step further and believe with me that those who voluntarily give up everything on earth, including the body —that is to say, have readiness to give up everything (and they must examine themselves critically, rigidly, and give always an adverse judgement against themselves) —those who will follow this out will really find that they are never in want . . . .

 

Want must not again be taken literally. God is the hardest task-master I have known on this earth, and He tries you through and through. And when you find that your faith is failing or your body is failing you, and you are sinking, He comes to your assistance somehow or other and proves to you that you must not lose your faith and that He is always at your beck and call, but on His terms, not on your terms. So I have found. I' cannot really recall a single instance when, at the eleventh hour, He has forsaken me . . . .

---

[1] an address delivered by Mahatma Gandhi at the Guild Hall, London on September 23, 1931

Nationalism in India: Past and Present

 

Nationalism in India: Past and Present

Gnaneswara T.N., Assistant Professor of English, GFGC, Jalahalli-584116,

Raichur Dist., Karnataka, India

Abstract

_____________________________________________________________

Nationalism is a sense of loyalty towards one’s own nation. It creates a sense of psychological bond with the nation. Indian nationalism developed as a concept during the Indian independence movement fought against the colonial British Raj. It was not purely political, but a renaissance movement embracing almost every sphere of Indian life. History and fiction, folklore and songs, popular prints and symbols, all played a part in the making of nationalism. From the uncompromising stand against fascism and Nazism to Khilafat movement, Indian nationalism had internationalized itself. Amidst this, religious nationalists – both Hindus and Muslims propounded the Two Nation theory. It laid the foundation of narrow nationalism in India. Indian nationalism is an instance of territorial nationalism, inclusive of all its people, despite their diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds. Various races, religions and ethnicities had co-existed from the dawn of time in India. Nationalism was a historical need to India. But now it is a means to get power for some political parties. There are lots of misconceptions and propaganda about nationalism. Generally, the idea of nationalism has become negative with irrational blaming and the spread of hatred among the people. But most of the views are being used for political gain through misconception and half-truths. _____________________________________________________________

Key words:

Nationalism, India, Hindutva, propaganda, hatred, intolerance, violence

Nationalism: meaning

“Nation”, as Benedict Anderson said, “is an imagined community.” Nationalism is a sense of loyalty towards one’s own nation. It creates a sense of psychological bond with the nation. Nationalism spreads when people begin to believe that they are all part of the same nation, when they discover some unity that binds them together.[1]

Difference between Patriotism and Nationalism

Patriotism is about protecting the land we live in. Nationalism is about protecting the way we live. A patriot is tolerant and tries to learn something new, but a nationalist cannot tolerate criticism and considers it an insult.[2]

Rise and growth of Nationalism in India

Indian nationalism developed as a concept during the Indian independence movement fought against the colonial British Raj. The consolidation of the British East India Company’s rule in the Indian subcontinent during the 18^th century brought about socio-economic changes which led to the rise of an Indian middle class. A rising political consciousness among the native Indian social elite spawned an Indian identity and fed a growing nationalist sentiment in India in the last decades of 19th century.

It was not purely political, but a renaissance movement embracing almost every sphere of Indian life. It was a vast movement of a whole people towards national independence, national self-respect and national enlightenment. History and fiction, folklore and songs, popular prints and symbols, all played a part in the making of nationalism. The image of Bharat Mata was first created by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay in 1870 when he wrote ‘Vande Mataram’ for our motherland. Moved by the Swadeshi movement, Abanindranath Tagore painted his famous image of Bharat Mata. Devotion to this mother figure came to be seen as evidence of one’s nationalism. As the national movement developed, nationalist leaders became more and more aware of such icons and symbols in unifying people and inspiring in them a feeling of nationalism. Carrying the flag, holding it aloft, during marches became a symbol of defiance. In late nineteenth century nationalists began recording folk tales. It was essential to preserve this folk tradition in order to discover one’s national identity and restore a sense of pride in one’s past. Another means of creating a feeling of nationalism was through interpretation of history. The British saw Indians as backward and primitive, incapable of governing themselves. In response Indians began looking into the past to discover India’s great achievements.

Indian National Congress was founded in 1885. It was the first organized expression of Indian Nationalism on an all-India scale. The partition of Bengal in 1905 escalated the growing unrest, stimulating radical nationalist sentiments and becoming a driving force for Indian revolutionaries.

From the very beginning Indian nationalism had a deep sense of internationalism. From the uncompromising stand against fascism and Nazism to Khilafat movement, Indian nationalism had internationalized itself. Amidst this, religious nationalists – both Hindus and Muslims propounded the Two Nation theory. It laid the foundation of narrow nationalism in India.

Savarkar coined the term Hindutva for his ideology that described India as a Hindu Rashtra, a Hindu nation. This ideology has become the cornerstone of the political and religious agendas of modern Hindu nationalist bodies like the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad.

When the past being glorified was Hindu, and the images celebrated were drawn from Hindu iconography, then people of other communities felt left out. In 1906-1907, the All India Muslim League was founded, created due to the suspicion of Muslim intellectuals and religious leaders with the Indian National Congress, which was perceived as dominated by Hindu membership and opinions. While prominent Muslims like Muhammad Ali Jinnah embraced the notion that Hindus and Muslims were distinct nations, other major leaders like Maulana Azad strongly backed the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi opposing any notion of Muslim nationalism and separatism.

Indian nationalism is an instance of territorial nationalism, inclusive of all its people, despite their diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds. Various races, religions and ethnicities had co-existed from the dawn of time in India.

As the Mahatma wrote, “Free India will not be a Hindu raj; it will be an Indian raj based not on the majority of any religious sect or community, but on the representatives of the whole people without distinction of religion…” “Religion,” he believed, “is a personal matter which should have no place in politics.” The 1911 census of India found that “a quarter of the persons classed as Hindus deny the supremacy of Brahmans, a quarter do not worship the great Hindu gods… a half do not regard cremation as obligatory, and two-fifths eat beef”. i.e., Hindus too could only be understood in the plural rather than the singular.[3] Pluralism, for Hindus, is a way of life. And this pluralism stems from a polytheistic tradition of worshipping innumerable gods. Hinduism allows for different schools of tradition and philosophies to reside concurrently. Nehru too articulated nationalism in similar terms where diversity was not an impediment to love for one’s country.

While the inclusive nationalism of Gandhi and Nehru came from direct experience of fighting for freedom, from a personal interaction with the people, Hindutva was constructed by thinkers who were not active participants in the struggle against imperialism and therefore could fabricate theories divorced from the lived experience and reality of the masses. The RSS ideologue M S Golwalkar had in 1939 written that the policy of Germany’s Nazi government led by Adolf Hitler to purge the Jews was “a good lesson” for Hindustan “to learn and profit by”.[4]

New Nationalism

Nationalism was a historical need to India. But now it is a means to get power for some political parties. If we observe the recent debates on nationalism then the term is being redefined for achieving political goals. The concept of nationalism is being used for acquiring votes in the elections. There are lots of misconceptions and propaganda about nationalism. Generally, the idea of nationalism becomes negative with irrational blaming and the spread of hatred among the people. Now in India, the debate of nationalism v/s anti-nationalism is taking new heights. But most of the views are being used for political gain through misconception and half-truths. If a person is being critical of the government’s style of working or they often criticize the policy of the government, they are not anti-nationalists. Supreme Court Justice Deepak Gupta observes: “Freedom of expression has no meaning if it does not include the freedom to question and criticize accepted norms and authority. Citizens should be able to criticize the government, individuals or institutions like the judiciary and the armed forces, and such criticism should not be considered a crime and dubbed as anti-national activity.”[5] Being critical of issues in the country is a huge indicator of love towards the nation and its betterment! We must show our love and respect towards the nation but that does not mean that we should take the law into our hands and become violent. The nation never wants violence, hate and fear to reflect on its people. Instead we should stand for national integration.

The BJP seeks to preserve and spread the culture of the Hindus, the majority population. In Maharashtra, the Shiv Sena uses the legacy of the independent Maratha kingdom under famous figure Shivaji to stir up support, and has adopted Hindutva as well. They and their admirers/voters believe that they are the monopolists of patriotism and the opposition and the independent press are invariable deemed unpatriotic.

Sangh Parivar is in search of icons. Faced with a severe shortage of freedom fighters, they think that anyone who walked on the ‘right’ side of the national movement before independence, or of the nation-building movement after independence, is intellectually theirs to appropriate. These national icons, they seem to think, need to be rescued from the illegal custody of the Congress and restored to the entire nation. Sardar Patel was a Congressman, but the Sangh Parivar has appropriated him.[6]

PM Modi’s ‘Make in India’ project to push for indigenous production in technology is a manifestation of techno-nationalism. The latest test of ASAT (anti-satellite) missile which was laced with the rhetoric of ‘national pride’ and ‘progress’ is a clear case of techno-nationalism.

The current U.P. Government has started replacing Muslim names with Hindu ones. Mughalsarai is now Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Junction, Gorakhpur’s Urdu Bazar is Hindi Bazar, Ali Nagar is Arya Nagar and Allahabad is Prayagraj.

This January, the Hindu Sena, a far-right Hindu outfit known for its bizarre displays of nationalism, commemorated the 118th death anniversary of Queen Victoria with the firm belief that she freed India from Islamic ‘invaders’. The absolute shocker was Hindu Sena founder and national president Vishnu Gupta’s claim that Queen Victoria granted us loktantra (democracy)![7]

Vigilantism reached crescendo when people started to investigate what is cooking in your kitchen and what is placed in your fridge. Lynching citizens belonging to minority on these trivial things became a new normal. Quite naturally, minorities are ‘second-class citizens’ in such a situation. We see more intolerance and more violence. It is a threat to democracy.

In 2015, 41 novelists, essayists, playwrights and poets returned awards received from Sahitya Akademi angered that the academy had remained silent on the murder of rationalists Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare and M.M. Kalburgi by unidentified assailants. 12 film-makers returned their national awards to protest ‘growing intolerance in the country’. Recently, acclaimed theatre artiste, poet and playwright S Raghunandana has refused to accept the Sangeet Natak Akademi award citing the growing trend of hatred towards activists, intelectuals and attempts to throttle their righteous struggle to uphold the spirit and values of the constitution.[8] In 2016, Kanhaiya Kumar was arrested on sedition charges for making “anti-national remarks.” Shehla Rashid, a student activist, has been booked for sedition over her tweets accusing Indian Army officers of torturing civilians in Jammu and Kashmir. Most recently, tradition charges were lodged against some 49 signatories to a letter to the prime minister seeking action against mob lynching, although the charges were dropped later.[9] An archaic law is used as a tool to suppress dissent.

A Supreme Court bench comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and Hemant Gupta said in a judgement in April 2019, “Contemporary events reveal that there is growing intolerance… Organised groups and interests pose a serious danger to the existence of the right to free speech and expression.”[10] Former Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh speaking at a conference in 2015 said, “Suppression of free speech poses a grave danger for economic development.”[11] Former president Pranab Mukherjee appealed to the nation “that the core values of India’s civilization that celebrate diversity, plurality and tolerance should not be allowed to wither away”. He remarked that “Many ancient civilizations have collapsed, but the Indian civilization has survived because of its core civilization values and adherence to them”.[12]

Conclusion

Nationalism was a historical need to India. But now it is a means to get power for some political parties. There are lots of misconceptions and propaganda about nationalism. Generally, the idea of nationalism has become negative with irrational blaming and the spread of hatred among the people. Now in India, the debate of nationalism v/s anti-nationalism is taking new heights. If a person is being critical of the government’s style of working or they often criticize the policy of the government, they are not anti-nationalists. We must show our love and respect towards the nation but that does not mean that we should take the law into our hands and become violent. Instead we should stand for national integration.

(This paper was presented in the Two Days National Conference on 'Diverse Faces of Nationalism: Past, Present and Future' held at Government First Grade College and PG Centre, Shivamogga, Karnataka, India on 7th September, 2019 and published as a book chapter in Diverse Faces of Nationalism: Volume II edited by Naveena V.)

---

[1] India and the Contemporary World, NCERT, p. 70

[2] Chandra Mouli, K.V., Letters to the Editor, Deccan Herald, August 16, 2019, p. 10

[3] Manu S Pillai, Afterword, The Courtesan, The Mahatma & The Italian Brahmin: Tales from Indian History

[4] Deccan Herald, July 21, 2019, p. II

[5] Editorial, Deccan Herald, September 13, 2019, p. 10

[6] Prasannan R., ‘Colossal obsessions of an oriental kind’, The Week, November 18, 2018, p. 19

[7] Reader’s Digest, May 2019, p. 22

[8] Deccan Herald, July 18, 2019, p. 6

[9] Thulasi K Raj, ‘The Sedition Law must go’, Deccan Herald, November 6, 2019, p. 10

[10] Times of India, April 11, 2019. Web.

[11] Deccan Herald, Nov 6, 2015. Web.

[12] Narayanan M.K., ‘The Age of Intolerance’, The Hindu, 28 October 2015

Swami Vivekananda’s Views on the Subaltern

 

Swami Vivekananda’s Views on the Subaltern

Gnaneswara T.N., Assistant Professor of English, GFGC, Jalahalli-584116,

Raichur Dist., Karnataka, India

Abstract

_____________________________________________________________

The concept of subaltern contains the groups that are marginalized, oppressed and exploited on the basis of social, cultural, religious and political grounds. Swami Vivekananda was one of the prominent spiritual and social reformers of modern India. In his fiery speeches the condition of the subaltern would come up repeatedly. The subject of the lowest caste – the Shudras – has been a frequent discussion for him. The Shudras, who belong to the last Varna, are the subalterns of Hindu society. Swami Vivekananda clearly identified the causes for our downfall, one of which was the neglect of the masses which he labeled as the great national sin. He said that millions were oppressed in the name of religion and one of the chief causes of India’s ruin was the monopoly of education by a few belonging to the privileged classes. He lamented that for centuries people had been taught theories of degradation and have been told that they were nothing. Women are also considered as subaltern in a male-dominated society like India. According to Swami Vivekananda, another major reason for India’s degradation was the trampling of the women. He said that uplift of women deserves utmost priority and only after that can there be hope for any real good for the nation.

_____________________________________________________________

Key words:

Hindu society, shudras, masses, women, subaltern

Meaning of ‘Subaltern’

The term ‘subaltern’ was first used by Antonio Gramschi, an Italian Marxist, in the 20th century. A subaltern is a person degraded by the social hierarchy in the hegemony. When a person is subordinated in the socio-cultural structure he is the subaltern. It can also mean someone who has been marginalized or oppressed. The concept of subaltern contains the groups that are marginalized, oppressed and exploited on the basis of social, cultural, religious and political grounds.

Swami Vivekananda

Swami Vivekananda was one of the prominent spiritual and social reformers of modern India. He was born on 12th January 1863 at Calcutta in Bengal province. He met Ramakrisna Paramahamsa and became his disciple. After the demise of his master he travelled all over India as a Parivrajak on foot. He met people from every segment of the society, from the richest to the poorest, from the most learned to the most ignorant, from high caste priests to those condemned as the low caste, from Maharajas to penniless beggars. The firsthand knowledge which he gained through his explorations gave him a complete understanding of our country including the causes for its downfall. Being a visionary and endowed with an extraordinary intellect and even a more feeling heart, he could find out the cure for India’s maladies and for restoring her to her former glory. He felt deeply concerned and pained by the degradation of our country. During his meditation at Kanyakumari, he contemplated on this.

Swami Vivekananda’s views on the subaltern

Swami Vivekananda was a keen student of history and that helped him understand the then condition of our country. In his fiery speeches the condition of the subaltern would come up repeatedly. In Hindu society the upper castes enjoyed all the privileges and the lowest castes had to bear all the societal obligations. The subject of the lowest caste – the Shudras – has been a frequent discussion for him. The Shudras, who belong to the last Varna, are the subalterns of Hindu society. In his book, Modern India, Vivekananda refers to the status of a Shudra in the Hindu society. The Shudras produce the wealth for the society by their labour. Swami Vivekananda asks:

"And where are they through whose physical labour only are possible the influence of the Brahmin, the prowess of the Kshatriya, and the fortune of the Vaishya? What is their history, who, being the real body of society, are designated at all times in all countries as “baseborn”?"[1]

Swamiji explains the condition of the poor in this country:

"A country where millions of people live on flowers of the Mohua plant, and a million or two of Sadhus and a hundred million or so of Brahmins suck the blood out of these poor people, without even the least effort for their amelioration – is that a country or hell? Is that a religion, or the devil’s dance?"[2]

The Shudras were the most tortured class of the Hindu society. Swami Vivekananda said,

"My brother, what experiences I have had in the South, of the upper classes torturing the lower!"[3]

"…. for whom kind India prescribed the mild punishments, “Cut out his tongue, chop off his flesh”, and others of like nature, for such a grave offence as any attempt on their part to gain a share of the knowledge and wisdom monopolized by her higher classes – those “moving corpses” of India…."[4]

"In the first place, scarcely any opportunity was given to the Shudra for the accumulation of wealth or the earning of proper knowledge and education; to add to this disadvantage, if ever a man of extraordinary parts and genius were born of the Shudra class, the influential higher sections of the society forthwith showered titular honours on him and lifted him up to their own circle. His wealth and the power of his wisdom were employed for the benefit of an alien caste – and his own caste-people reaped no benefits of his attainments;"[5]

Swami Vivekananda clearly identified the causes for our downfall, one of which was the neglect of the masses which he labeled as the great national sin. He said,

"They (the poor) have no chance, no escape, no way to climb up. The poor, the low, the sinner in India have no friends, no help – they cannot rise,… They sink lower and lower everyday, they feel the blows showered upon them by a cruel society, and they do not know whence the blow comes. They have forgotten that they too are men. And the result is slavery."[6]

He criticizes Hinduism for exploiting the poor:

"Is it a religion that fails to remove the misery of the poor and turn men into gods! Do you think our religion is worth the name? Ours is only Don’t touchism, only “Touch me not”, “Touch me not.” Good heavens!"[7]

"No religion on earth preaches the dignity of humanity in such a lofty strain as Hinduism, and no religion on earth treads upon the necks of the poor and the low in such a fashion as Hinduism."[8]

See his concern for the poor:

"Do you feel that millions are starving today, and millions have been starving for ages? Do you feel that ignorance has come over the land as a dark cloud? Does it make you restless? Does it make you sleepless?"[9]

At last Vivekananda opines that under the rule of British, “only the Shudra-ness – the-beast-of-burdenness – is now left with the Indians themselves.”[10] His opinion is that under the rule of British irrespective of the Varnas, the whole Indian society has become Shudra.

"What to speak separately of the distinct Shudra class of such a land, where the whole population has virtually come down to the level of the Shudra?"[11]

But Swami Vivekananda is optimistic. He said,

"But there is hope. In the mighty course of time, the Brahmin and other higher castes, too, are being brought down to the lower status of the Shudras, and the Shudras are being raised to higher ranks. ….Yet, a time will come when there will be the rising of the Shudra class, with their Shudra-hood;….Socialism, Anarchism, Nihilism, and other like sects are the vanguard of the social revolution that is to follow."[12]

He compares the king to the lion, the king of beasts, who tears the heart of innocent animals into pieces:

"….the king is like the lion; in him are present both the good and evil propensities of the lord of beasts. Never for a moment his fierce nails are held back from tearing to pieces the heart of innocent animals, living on herbs and grass, to allay his thirst for blood when occasion arises;…."[13]

"Attributing all Godship to himself, in his pride, like the king Vena he looks upon other people as wretched specimens of humanity who should grovel before him; any opposition to his will, whether good or bad, is a great sin on the part of his subjects. Hence the oppression steps into the place of protection – sucking their blood in place of preservation."[14]

He says to the upper class people:

"….forget not that the lower classes, the ignorant, the poor, the illiterate, the cobbler, the sweeper are thy flesh and blood, thy brothers."[15]

"Our mission is for the destitute, the poor, and the illiterate peasantry and laboring classes, and if, after everything has been done for them first, there is spare time, then only for the gentry."[16]

"Bread! Bread! I do not believe in a God, who cannot give me bread here, giving me eternal bliss in heaven! Pooh! India is to be raised, the poor are to be fed, education is to be spread…."[17]

Swami Vivekananda was highly critical of the so-called educated who do not care for the poor and downtrodden. He said,

"So long as the millions live in hunger and ignorance, I hold every man a traitor who, having been educated at their expense, pays not the least heed to them!"[18]

He said that millions were oppressed in the name of religion and one of the chief causes of India’s ruin was the monopoly of education by a few belonging to the privileged classes. He lamented that for centuries people had been taught theories of degradation and have been told that they were nothing. Laziness, lack of energy, want of sympathy and appreciation for others were at the root of all miseries and that they should be given up. What is the way to regeneration? The first step in this regard is uplifting the masses by restoring their lost individuality and faith in themselves. Swami Vivekananda said that we should remember that the nation lives in the cottages and that no amount of politics will be of any avail until the masses of India are once more well educated, well fed and well cared for. Swami Vivekananda stresses the importance of education of the masses. He calls to the Sannyasins to teach the poor where they are to better their condition. He said,

"….Suppose some disinterested Sannyasins, bent on doing good to others, go from village to village, disseminating education and seeking in various ways to better the condition of all down to the Chandala, through oral teaching, and by means of maps, cameras, globes, and such other accessories – can’t that bring forth good in time? …if the mountain does not come to Mohammed, Mohammed must go to the mountain. The poor are too poor to come to schools and Pathashalas…."[19]

"Education, education, education alone! Travelling through many cities of Europe and observing in them the comforts and education of even the poor people, these brought to my mind the state of our own poor people, and I used to shed tears. What made the difference? Education was the answer I got."[20]

According to him, a nation is advanced in proportion as education is spread among the masses.

Women are also considered as subaltern in a male-dominated society like India. According to Swami Vivekananda, another major reason for India’s degradation was the trampling of the women. He said that uplift of women deserves utmost priority and only after that can there be hope for any real good for the nation. He said that our country is one of the weakest in the world because Shakti was held in dishonor here. He said,

"There is no chance for welfare of the world unless the condition of women is improved."[21]

"You always criticize the women, but say what have you done for their uplift?? Writing down Smritis etc., and binding them by hard rules, the men have turned the women into manufacturing machines!.... In the period of degeneration, when the priests made the other castes incompetent for the study of the Vedas, they deprived the women also of all their rights."[22]

"All nations have attained greatness by paying proper respect to women. That country and that nation which does not respect women has never become great, nor will ever be in future."[23]

Swamiji’s most ardent Western followers were female e.g., Sister Nivedita, a.k.a. Margaret Noble. One of Swami Vivekananda’s great missions was setting up a Math for women with Sri Sarada Devi as the nucleus. He brought Sister Nivedita to India for the education of women because illiteracy chained them to ignorance and misery.

Conclusion

Swami Vivekananda felt deeply concerned and pained by the degradation of our country. In his fiery speeches the condition of the subaltern would come up repeatedly. The subject of the lowest caste – the Shudras – has been a frequent discussion for him. Swami Vivekananda clearly identified the causes for our downfall, one of which was the neglect of the masses which he labeled as the great national sin. He said that millions were oppressed in the name of religion and one of the chief causes of India’s ruin was the monopoly of education by a few belonging to the privileged classes. According to Swami Vivekananda, another major reason for India’s degradation was the trampling of the women.

(This paper was presented in the conference 'The Voices Unmute' held at Vijayanagara Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Ballari on 3-6-2019 and published as a book chapter in 'Silent Voices of Tribal Indian English Literature edited by N. Shantha Naik.)

---

[1] Swami Vivekananda, Modern India, Vol. 4 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 464

[2] Swami Vivekananda, 41, Epistles-Second Series, Vol. 6 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p.266

[3] Ibid, p.265

[4] Swami Vivekananda, Modern India, Vol. 4 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 464

[5] Ibid, p. 466

[6] Swami Vivekananda, 4, Epistles-First Series, Vol. 5 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 15

[7] Swami Vivekananda, 41, Epistles-Second Series, Vol. 6 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 265

[8] Swami Vivekananda, 4, Epistles-First Series, Vol. 5 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 16

[9] Swami Vivekananda, My Plan of Campaign, Vol. 3 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 240

[10] Swami Vivekananda, Modern India, Vol. 4 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 464

[11] Ibid, p.465

[12] Ibid, Pp. 465-6

[13] Ibid, p. 456

[14] Ibid, Pp. 461-2

[15] Ibid, p. 477

[16] Swami Vivekananda, 154, Epistles-Second Series, Vol. 6 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 429

[17] Swami Vivekananda, To my Brave Boys, Vol. 4 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 359

[18] Swami Vivekananda, 25, Epistles-First Series, Vol. 5 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 57

[19] Swami Vivekananda, 41, Epistles-Second Series, Vol. 6 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, Pp. 266-7

[20] Swami Vivekananda, Vol. 4 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 480

[21] Swami Vivekananda, 75, Epistles-Second Series, Vol. 6 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 336

[22] Swami Vivekananda, Vol. 7 of The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, 12th Edition, 2016, p. 205

[23] Ibid, p. 205