Bachelor of Arts (Honours)

POLITICAL SCIENCE

BAPS-14

MODERN INDIAN POLITICAL

THOUGHT

Block-03

TAGORE AND SAVARKAR

UNIT 9: TAGORE CRITIQUE OF NATIONALISM

UNIT 10: SOCIO POLITICAL THOUGHT OF

RABINDRANATH TAGORE

UNIT 11: SAVARKAR: HINDUTWA-A CRITICAL

ASSESMENT

UNIT 12: SOCIO POLITICAL THOUGHT OF VINAYAK

DAMODAR SARVARKAR

Course Writer

Dr. Prabira Sethy Dr. Dashrathi Bhuyan Assistant Professor, Political Science Associate Professor, Political Science Institutional Affiliation: Maharaja Agrasen College, Berhampur University

University of Delhi (Unit-11 & 12)

(Unit-10)

Ms. Tulasi Roy Academic Consultant, Political Science,

Odisha State Open University

(Unit-9)

Course Editor

Dr. Tarini Sen Barik

Retd.Reader in Political Science(Women’s College Sambalpur) (Unit-9)

Dr.Promod Roy

Sr.Lecturer in Political Science Presently deployed at DHSE (O), Bhubaneswar (Unit-10)

Dr Manoj Mishra

Assistant Professor (Pol.Sc),SVM College ,Jagatsinghpur (Unit-11 &12))

Course Coordinator

Ms.Tulasi Ray Academic Consultant (Political Science)

Odisha State Open University, Sambalpur

Material Production

Prof. (Dr.) Manas Ranjan Pujari

Registrar

Odisha State Open University

© OSOU, 2021. Development process and social movements in

contemporary India is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike

4.0http://creativecommons.org/licences/by-sa/4.0

Printed by:

1

UNIT-9 RABINDRANATH TAGORE

Structure

9.1 Objective

9.2 Introduction

9.3 Tagore on Spiritual foundations of Humanism

9.3.1 Tagore’s views on Human Reason

9.4 Tagore’s understanding of Nation/Nationalism

9.5 Tagore’s Criticism of Nationalism

9.6 Tagore’s Theory of Freedom and Self-Realisation

9.6.1 Road to Freedom

9.7 Synthetic Universalism

9.8 Summary

9. 9 Exercises

9.10 References

9.1 OBJECTIVE

After reading this unit, you will be able to understand:

Life sketch of Rabindra Nath Tagore

About Tagore’s understanding of nationalism

Understand a clear idea of the Theory of Freedom and Self-Realisation and

Know about Gandhi’s and Tagore’s differentiated views

9.2 INTRODUCTION

Rabindranath Tagore was born on May 7, 1861, in Culcutta. He was not essentially a

mainstream Indian political thinker and was having interests in music, painting, poetry,

and literary creations but still, his ideas exert much influence on the social and political

vision of India. His family had relocated from their native countries to Govindpur, one

of the three settlements that subsequently became Calcutta, around the end of the

seventeenth century. He was the first Non-European to win the Nobel Prize in literature

in 1913. He is also known as ‘Gurudev’, ‘Kabirguru’, and ‘the Bard of Bengal’. His

compositions are now among the National Anthem of two nations - India-Jana Gana

Mana; Bangladesh-Amar Shonar Bangla, which he composed in the wake of the Bengal

2

Partition in 1905 to foster a spirit of Unity and Patriotism among Bengalis. Through the

pursuit of commercial and banking activities, the family was able to accumulate

property and significant corporate holdings throughout time. They had reaped the

benefits of the British East India Company's expanding influence.

9.3 TAGORE ON SPIRITUAL FOUNDATIONS OF HUMANISM

Tagore’s ideas of humanism were also enshrined in his principle of ‘synthetic

universalism’. This principle seeks to extend the reach of human personality beyond

national frontiers, towards a universal dimension. Tagore argued that when people

evolve their political organization into different nations, the rivalry between these

nations tends to obstruct their mental and moral development. Each nation resorts to

the regimentation of thought of its power and glory. This situation proves to be a fetter

on human freedom.

Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941), a great Indian poet, philosopher, and educationist,

was an ardent humanist. Like Swami Vivekananda, he evolved his view of humanism

on spiritual foundations. Accordingly, each human being is regarded as the mirror of

the divine. Tagore argued that the supreme person, or the infinite, dwells in human

personality itself. In other words, each human being is a replica of God. Tagore

lamented that the human spirit had been suppressed by the despotism of government

and other organs of power for a long. It could attain freedom only through mental and

moral illumination.

Tagore regarded man as the culmination of the creative process. The creative spirit is

therefore a hallmark of human existence whether it is manifested in the work of art

literature or the human existence whether it is manifested in the work of art and

literature or in the humblest vocations like tilling the soil, breaking the stones, or

building the road. All human activities are equally dignified in the eye of God. The

creative spirit of man is the source of all splendour, beauty, fragrance, and elegance

Tagore regarded man as the culmination of the creative process. The creative All

human activities are equally dignified in the eyes of God. The creative spirit of man is

the source of all splendour, beauty, grace, and elegance in the universe. It is a source

of delight for everybody. Every man should perform his duty with a sense of joy.

Tagore asserted that the splendours of the creative spirit cannot be realized in the dark

chambers of mountain caves or the isolation of forest retreats. Life should be accepted

in all its phases - comedies, as well as tragedies-with full enthusiasm Asceticism or

renunciation, is not conducive to the realization of God who dwells in a broken home

as well in magnificent temples and churches. Compassion for the lowly, the forlorn,

the lost and the humiliated is the sure way of access to God, Man as a creation

represents the Creator, and this is why of all creatures it has been possible for him to

comprehend this world in his knowledge, in his feeling, and in his imagination, to

realize in his spirit a union with a Spirit which is everywhere.

3

9.3.1 Tagore’s views on Human Reason

The word "Humanism" is derived from the Latin word ‘Humanities’ which implies

‘any attitude or mode of life-oriented on human need and interest, as well as the

complete development of man's full potential.’ Humanism has had a significant impact

on modern civilization. Humanism is a belief system that places a premium on people's

autonomy. Humanism places a greater focus on logic and critical thinking than

conventional religious beliefs. Tagore's global humanism is mostly expressed in his

interpersonal relationship conception. The concept of nationalism and patriotism was

essentially by internationalism. His internationalism stated that all human beings have

an equal right to live on this planet and that they should be treated equally regardless

of their nationality or nation of origin. His song "Jana Gana Mana" portrays the Indian

people's strong humanistic mentality.

9.4 TAGORE’S UNDERSTANDING OF NATION / NATIONALISM

Rabindranath Tagore was a brilliant genius, a passionate nationalist, and above all, an

unquestionable humanist who has inspired generations of intellectual and thoughtful

minds beyond religious, racial, and linguistic barriers, as well as state and national

boundaries. Tagore's literary and artistic talent, which lasted six decades, exemplifies

a sensitive artist, an empathetic man of letters, a profound thinker, and a strategic

experimentalist. If someone promises to introduce his all-encompassing intellectual

engagements briefly, it may be considered a false promise; moreover, the author of this

article assures his readers of an introduction to Tagore's thought-provoking point of

view on Indian nationalism, focusing on the very soul of his intellectual thought and

consideration. Tagore’s understanding of Nation and Nationalism are described in the

following manner:

Ideas on Indian Nationalism

Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941), addressed his ideas on Indian nationalism on

numerous occasions. Tagore's unique, integrated views on Indian nationalism are

reflected in a series of his speeches on nationalism published in 1917 in the same title.

He argues that the genuine spirit of nationalism is found in its broad humanistic concern

rather than a narrow political tactic. During the First World War, the development of

ardent nationalism may have prompted him to interpret and interpret it as an evil

pandemic. He was attempting to disrupt the popular notion of nationalism, which he

saw as more of a political pretext for seizing other countries resources.

The Modern Notion of Nation/Nationalism

The modern notion of nation/nationalism is championed by the west; the statist version

of nation/nationalism and its attribute of aggressiveness, claims of superiority, and

madness for subjugating and annihilating other nations detested him. On the contrary,

he strongly emphasized a version of a nation/nationalism embedded in society; not in

4

a state which would preserve humanity, establish her connection among individuals,

and precluded violence and destruction. Tagore envisaged in his idea of

nation/nationalism a vision of human unity. Rabindranath Tagore in an article entitled

`What Is Nation,’ illustrated and interrogated the idea of the nation from various

perspectives. In this article, he mentioned that there was no trace of the idea of the

nation in the Indian heritage. Firstly, despite having commendable mastery over

Bengali vocabulary: Tagore was not convinced with any particular term in Bengali for

representing a nation or nationalism as he did not find any suitable alternative which

might bear the exact essence of the terms. Therefore, he preferred to use the English

terms nation and nationalism in analyzing his views. Following Ernest Renan’s

arguments, Tagore reiterated that Egypt, China, Asiria, and Persia in the primordial age

were not accustomed to the idea of nation/nationalism. Although the Roman Empire

was about to emerge as a nation, it fell prey to the attack of the Barbarian Tribes and

gradually disintegrated. But the fragments of the Roman Empire emerged as nations

like England, France, Germany, and Russia through a study and prolonged struggle for

a century.

The Subjective Dimension of Nationhood

Tagore sought to find out the factors which determined the nationhood of the

population in his above mention article. While defining the idea of nation Tagore

endeavoured to find out the unifying factors or the principles of commonness in the

existing nations of the world. At the initial level, he interrogated the viability of the

existing factors such as Monarch/King language, religion, and race, agreed-upon

widely, responsible for the formation of a nation. Thereafter, in pursuit of this, he

contended the role of those binding principles for the creation of a nation. Indeed

Tagore looked out for the missing link between the objective elements of nation-

building and the sense of bonding; consciousness of nationality—the subjective

dimension of nationhood. As the prevalent agreed-upon version of the nation, he

observed that the king or Monarchs united a population that subsequently emerged as

a nation. Tagore, in conformity with this notion, argued that Ireland and Scotland

became an integral part of the English nation as a result of monarchical rule in Britain.

The sense of nationhood developed under the rule of a monarch once a conqueror

occupied land and with the advancement of time the ruler earned the unconditional

loyalty of the people of that land. However Tagore observed in contradiction to the

earlier analysis that there were numerous examples of nations where there was no trace

of such dynastic rule, even nations had been developed without the manifest or latent

presence of a Monarch. There were other examples of nations still surviving even after

the downfall of dynastic rule.

Language as a Source of Solidarity Within a Nation

Among the other major binding factors of a nation was language. Tagore observed that

language might be considered a source of solidarity within a nation. Yet it seemed

dubious to him as he argued that the U.S.A and England despite being two different

5

nations used English as common parlance. On the other hand, Switzerland emerged as

a united nation despite having more than three different lingual groups. Further, the

agreed-upon notion of nation entailed that uniformity in religious practices of a group

of people led them to emerge as a nation. On the contrary, Tagore seemed that people

with varying religious beliefs such as Protestants, and Catholics could certainly be part

of different nations.

Religious Inclination

Tagore further argued that a person could become part of any nation either French or

German or English irrespective of his/her religious inclination. Another prerequisite of

nation-building held by the agreed-upon doctrine of the nation was racial homogeneity.

But Tagore contradicted as it was also true that in this world there was not a single race

that was pure. Finally, wealth and territoriality might be considered important

components of nation-building. But this could not properly clear the essence of the

nation. The main binding principle was cherishing the lineage of a glorious past and

consensus co-existence.

Nationhood

Indeed nationhood was a condensed form of inherent consciousness of mutual mental

and emotional attachment with the aspiration to strive together and live together which

evolved through outages and persisted through generations. Tagore felt that a group of

people realized a strong sense of interconnectedness among one another when they

suffered together and face the adversities unitedly. Tagore found that reciprocity and

sharing of sorrow, pain, and happiness brought individuals together and attached them

to a string that hold them together.

A nation is such an entity having a soul. It is the willingness of a group of people to

stay together. The nation is a living reality, nationality is a psychological commodity.

In the article ‘What Is Nation’ Tagore stressed on autonomy and distinctiveness of

nations. He also admitted that contradictions among nations would lead to the

advancement of civilization.

9.5 TAGORE’S CRITIQUE OF NATIONALISM

In `Nationalism’ he criticized that the autonomy of a nation could prove to be precious.

He argued that the urge to establish the distinctiveness of a nation ultimately resulted

in flaunting its superiority over other nations and even it might provoke a nation to

devote other nations. Tagore accused western nationalism of the catastrophic

consequence of the First World War and imperialist expansion throughout the globe.

Even he warned the Japanese people to abandon the organized self-seeking mechanism

of western nationalism. Tagore did not oppose the claim of the distinct identity of the

nation. He looked down upon the tendency of aggressive distinctiveness of the nation

and the tendency to overpower other nations. Rabindranath Tagore criticized

Nationalism in various ways which are described in the following manner:

6

The Nation was an Embodiment of Institutionalized Power

Tagore mentioned that the nation was an embodiment of institutionalized power. In the

‘Creative Unity’, Tagore delineated the present conflict of the modern-day, world

between the ‘living spirit of the people and the process of nation-building. He

reiterated, “The people are living beings. They have their distinct personalities. But

nations are organizations of power, and therefore their inner aspects and outward

expressions are everywhere monotonously the same.” Tagore asserted people were

self-expressive and creative beings, and therefore they could create which made ‘the

world of man fertile of life and variedly beautiful’. Contrary to this fact, he claimed

that “the nations do not create, they merely produce and destroy. But when actuated by

greed and hatred, they crowd away into the living man who creates, then the harmony

is lost, and the people’s history runs at the break-neck speed towards some fatal

catastrophe.

People Became Conscious of Self-Preservation

Tagore thought that at the time of crisis the people became conscious of self-

preservation and sometimes for doing so people might reach the level of hyper-

consciousness. But the similar attribute of a nation might prove baneful for the other

nations. Tagore further observed that a group of people remained subservient to their

narrow self-interests when they got training to do so. Similarly, Nationalism directed

and motivated the people to attain its narrow purposes, and thereby they became

morally degraded and intellectually blind. However, Tagore admitted that self-seeking

attributes were not always necessarily selfish. Sometimes self-interests of the people

represented the interests of all.

Nation Promoting Collective Interests

Therefore, a nation Promoting collective interests and remaining within its limits would

not appear to be sinister to other nations. But Tagore lamented that, in reality, almost

every nation practised unrestrained selfishness and was involved in the aggressive

occupation of a foreign land as a result of the commercial adventurism of the nations

they became wealthy and prosperous. He further illustrated, that this material prosperity

not only feeds continually the selfish instincts of the people but impresses men’s minds

with the lesson that, for a Nation, selfishness is a necessity and therefore a virtue. It is

the emphasis laid in Europe upon the idea of Nation’s constant increase of power,

which is becoming the greatest danger to man, both in its direct activity and its power

of infection’.

Tagore also elaborated that nationalism, as it evolved in an unrestricted manner, would

debase the moral foundation of human civilization. To him “The ideal of the social man

is unselfishness, but the idea of Nation, like that of professional man, is selfishness.”

Tagore was also aware of the fact that he only emphasized the negative aspects of

nation/nationalism. But he should provide the solution to the problem. While

responding to his friends in the West once he remarked, “I have often been asked by

my Western friends how to cope with this evil, which has attained such sinister strength

7

and vast dimensions. I have often been blamed for merely giving a warning, and

offering no alternative. When we suffer as a result of a particular system, we believe

that some other system would bring us better luck. We are apt to forget that all systems

produce evil sooner or later when the psychology which is at the root of them is

wrong.”(Rabindranath Tagore)

The Problem of Narrow Selfishness

New institutions, replacing the older ones, would not be able to tackle the menace

permanently. Hence Tagore observed that the freethinking, open-minded, noble-

hearted individuals could resolve the problem of narrow selfishness. Tagore

vehemently criticized western nationalism as the embodiment of imperialism, narrow

and aggressive nationalism. Tagore firmly believed in universal humanism and human

emancipation. To Tagore, nationalism in the west represented `organized selfishness’

and `organized self-interest of a whole people’. Nationalism was “Bartering of higher

aspirations of life for profit and power which cuts at the very roots of goodness, justice,

and truth in human’s relationship. Indeed nationalism promoted and proliferated

worldwide suspicion and great panic it laid to the moral perversion of the human race

and the terrible absurdity.” Tagore viewed nationalism as “impending calamity –a most

dangerous thing that undermines the supremacy of man”.

Nationalism Emerged in India and Europe

Tagore elaborated that the idea of nation/nationalism emerged and evolved under

different circumstances in India and Europe. European nationalism tended to occupy

the world market, conquer and exploit. European nationalism was aggressive and

expansionist. Indian nationalism came into being as resistance to colonial domination

and exploitation. Indeed Tagore exhorted in his writing on Nationalism that it created

a gulf among mankind and upheld racial supremacy and chauvinism. Under the spell

of nationalism, people started worshipping the nation to which they belonged. They

flaunted their superiority and sought to establish their pre-eminence by destroying other

nations’ autonomy.

Wake of Industrialization and Advancement of Science and Technology

In the wake of industrialization and advancement of science and technology

nationalism became a slave to capitalism. Capitalism for its ever-increasing craving for

expansion had taken over the west. Therefore western nationalism/nation turned into a

torch-bearer of exploitative and aggressive machine civilization which devalued the

moral consideration and human elements. The materialist craves dehumanized the

notion of nationalism and produced a new version of national solidarity which was

based on self-seeking and self-serving demands and mechanical relations.

Nature of Capitalist and Imperialist Expansion

Tagore thus ruminated that nationalism in this vision form was morally unacceptable.

He explaining the dreadful nature of capitalist and imperialist expansion conceded that

8

the force of commercialization resulted in the commodification of mankind and the lust

for gaining superiority and hunger for exploitation led to unhealthy competition among

the nations in the west. Consequently, this mad race and antagonism turned into

catastrophic warfare among them, the utter destruction of their people and annihilation

of other nations.

Differentiated Between the Spirit of the West and the Nation of the West

Tagore carefully differentiated between the spirit of the west and the nation of the west.

The spirit of the west promoted and spread values like freedom equality and fraternity.

On the other hand, the nation of the west was based on violence, destruction, and

devaluation of moral considerations. However, the predominance of the nation of the

west suppressed the spirit of the west and thereby the world became a victim of

domination and subordination of European nationalism in the form of colonialism and

imperialism. Tagore mentioned that India did not witness the emergence of a nation as

it was developed in the west. In his own words, “The word Nation does not occur in

our language, nor does it exist in the country. We have learned of late to prize national

greatness under European education. But its ideals cannot be found in our minds.”

India as a Result of Foreign Invasion

For centuries there was intermixing of numerous races in India as a result of foreign

invasion. Subsequently, the invaders made this land their habitation for generations.

Therefore different cultures, languages, and religions coexist in India. Indian society

absorbed almost all the elements and practices of all the races that came from outside

and resided and here. However, their autonomy had been preserved. Tagore stated,

“The history of India does not belong to one particular race but to a process of creation

to which various races of the world contributed-- the Dravidians and the Aryans, the

ancient Greeks and the Persians, the Mohammedans of the West and those of Central

Asia”. Therefore Indian nation could be attributed to the principle of unity and

diversity. Indian civilization always valued morality and spirituality and it gave

primacy to the society over the politics. Tagore delineated, “Europe prizes political

independence; we set store by spiritual liberation”.

Hence neither nation nor nationalism in India professed and promoted violence,

aggression, and exploitation of others. Indian national solidarity is based on the

principle of `the whole world was her family. Tagore castigated western nationalism.

He was quite confirmed by the fact that the pursuit of installing or imitating the Western

version of the nation in India would be counterproductive. He asserted that the

foundational basis of Indian and European nations was different. He stated, “The basis

of Hindu civilization is society; the basis of European civilization is the State. Man can

attain greatness either through society or through the State. But if we ever think that

building up the Nation after the European pattern is the only way open and the only

aim of humanity, we shall be wrong. In another article entitled ‘Indian Society,’ Tagore

claimed that unity among Indian people existed in the pre-colonial era. Unlike Europe,

9

the source of unity was laid in the Indian social system. Indeed, harmony and co-

existence among the Indian people was a social phenomenon and not a political project.

He further explained that society exercised absolute control over human life. Most of

the nations throughout the world encountered several upheavals and strived for self-

preservation, but in India, the society meandered through several obstacles and

managed to survive for several centuries. Tagore was well aware of the inherently

aggressive nature and exploitative elements of the European nation. His pessimistic

understanding of the European conception of the nation led him to observe, “The

civilization as manifested in the cult of the Nation has yet to be tested. But it is clear

that its ideals are not ennobling; they carry the evils of injustice and falsehood; there is

a sort of terrible cruelty about the cult”.

The Spatial Notion of Nation/Nationalism

Indeed his vision transcended the spatial notion of nation/nationalism based on

exclusivity. His idea of nation/nationalism elevated to the level of internationalism and

ultimately got a cosmopolitan outlook. Universal humanism, emancipation, the

sentiment of bounding and reciprocity, and moral consideration were the fundamental

principles of Tagore’s idea of nation/nationalism. Tagore considers a nation as a

conscious being, having a sole and inherent feeling of mental attachment among the

people.

Tagore came up with the idea of the ‘cult of the Nation’ which was based on human

professionalism. He maintained that the cult would lead people toward great success.

But he warned strongly that it would bring great danger to the individuals by turning

them away from the higher purposes of life. It seemed to him, “The greater the amount

of success, the stronger the conflicts of interest and jealousy and hatred which are

aroused in men’s minds, thereby making it more and more necessary for other peoples,

who are still living, to stiffen intonations. With the growth of nationalism, man has

become the greatest menace to man.”

9.6 TAGORE’S THEORY OF FREEDOM AND SELF-REALISATION

A specific Indian idea of freedom that started to evolve with Rammohan, was

articulated subsequently by Swami Vivekananda, Aurobindo Ghosh, Gandhi, and

Tagore. For Tagore, freedom was not merely political emancipation but the mingling

of the individual with the universe depicted in his song –my freedom is in this air, in

the sky, and this light of the universe. The goal of freedom lay in making one perfect.

He significantly remarked that many nations and people were powerful but not free

because the realization of freedom was something very different from merely using

coercive power. It was the condition and attitude of life in which one might wish to

develop his best. The human being as a part of this great universe could enjoy real

freedom only when he could harmonize his relations with the world. It is a bond of

unity where the power leads to disunity.

10

Tagore’s notion of freedom was influenced by Expressionism (1910-24) and political

theorists of the early Twentieth century like Ernest Barker, Mary Parker Follet, and

Harold J. Laski who vigorously pleaded for a plural society as a basic precondition for

the successful functioning of democracy. He shared with Eliot the idea of modern

society as to mechanical and following through with the creative human spirit and

energies. He desired freedom that would enable a human being to realize his ideas and

aspirations as they found expression in different types of creative art with the help of

reason and scientific outlook and by allowing the potentialities of industrialization

towards human liberation.

Tagore was guided by the Upanishadic doctrine of Satyam, Sivam, and Advaitant

(truth, goodness, and unity) and was utterly dissatisfied with the philosophy of

glorification and expansionism pursued by powerful nations for that human creativity.

Tagore, like the early Indian liberals, considered the real problem of India as social and

not political. A narrow vision of political liberty would grossly be inadequate in

establishing a good society for that would deny an individual’s moral and spiritual

freedom.

9.6.1 Road to Freedom

Attainment of freedom is the keynote of Tagore’s humanism. He identifies two aspects

of a human being: his physical existence, and spiritual existence .physically he is part

of nature where he is governed by the laws of the physical world. Here he is not free:

he is also constrained to live as a part of the community. On the other hand, his spiritual

existence is part of the Divine. Here he is driven by divine inspiration. In this capacity,

he is capable of independent existence as an individual who could not be suppressed

by any external forces. The realization of his individuality could serve as a motive force

behind self-realization. When an individual is driven by the spiritual force, his physical

existence does not come in his way to freedom. Tagore firmly believes that the human

body is not a cage of the soul; it is a medium of attaining self-realization by invoking

the divine inspiration which is an integral part of human existence.

Every true freedom that we may attain in any direction broadens our path of self-

realization... The unimaginative repetition of life within a safe restriction imposed by

Nature may be good for the animal, but never for Man. Rabindranath Tagore (The

Religion of Man)

Freedom is not in darkness, nor vagueness. There is no bondage so fearful as that of

obscurity. It is to escape from this obscurity that the seed struggles to sprout, the bud

to blossom. Rabindranath Tagore (Sadhana)

Tagore had a firm faith in the potential of Man to overcome all obstructions to his way

to emancipation. This was beautifully expressed by him in the following words:

11

“As I look around, I see the crumbling ruins of a proud civilization strewn like a vast

heap of futility. And yet I shall not commit the grievous sin of losing faith in Man... A

day will come when an unvanquished Man will retrace his path of conquest, despite all

barriers, to win back his lost human heritage”. (Crisis in Civilization).

9.7 SYNTHETIC UNIVERSALISM

Tagore's idea of humanism was also enshrined in his principle of ‘synthesis

universalism'. This principle seeks to extend the reach of human personality beyond

national frontiers, towards a universal dimension. Tagore argued that when people

evolve their political organization into different nations, the rivalry between these

nations tends to obstruct their mental and moral development. Each nation resorts to

the regimentation of thought of its people to consolidate its power and glory. This

situation proves to be a fetter on human freedom. To obviate this destructive tendency

and achieve constructive ends, each individual should strive to develop his or her

talents by rising above narrow nationalism and entering into a creative relationship with

the whole of humanity. For this, he or she should get in touch with world literature, art,

religions, philosophy, social symbols, and etiquette and thereby feel at one with all

human beings.

“When a man does not realize his kinship with the world, he lives in a prison-house

whose walls are alien to him.” Rabindranath Tagore (Sadhana)

“Man's abiding happiness is not in getting anything but in giving himself up to what is

greater than himself, to ideas that are larger than his individual life, the idea of the

country, of humanity, of God”. Rabindranath Tagore (Sadhana)

“During the evolution of the Nation, the moral culture of brotherhood was limited by

geographical boundaries because at that time those boundaries were true. Now they

have become imaginary lines of tradition divested of the qualities of real obstacles. So

the time has come when man's moral nature must deal with this great fact with all

seriousness or perish”. Rabindranath Tagore (Nationalism)

9.8 SUMMARY

Indeed, Tagore’s vision went outside the exclusive spatial notion of nation/nationalism.

His concept of nation/nationalism was elevated to the level of internationalism, and he

eventually developed a cosmopolitan perspective. Universal humanism, emancipation,

a sense of belonging and reciprocity, as well as moral consideration, were all

mentioned. Tagore’s essential beliefs of nationhood and nationalism. Tagore sees the

nation as a conscious being a single and fundamental sense of mental bonding among

persons. He presented aspects of Indian culture to the West and vice versa through

12

foreign travel and lectures. He was an outspoken supporter of Indian independence,

and he renounced the knighthood he had acquired in 1915 in protest of the Jallianwala

Bagh Massacre. ‘Where The Mind Is Without Fear’ is a pre-independence poem in

which the author earnestly pleads with God to awaken his fellow beings to the necessity

of living in a free and united country. He wants his people to wake up and live a life of

dignity and honour. (Rabindranath Tagore)

9.9 EXCERCISE

1. Describe Tagore’s views on Humanism.

2. Define Rabindranath Tagore’s understanding of Nation/Nationalism.

3. Explain Tagore’s Critique of Nationalism.

4. What is Tagore’s theory of freedom and self-realization?

5. What is Synthetic Universalism?

9.10 REFERENCES

D. Dalton, (1982) ‘Indian Idea of Freedom: Political Thought of Swami Vivekananda,

Aurobindo Ghose, Rabindranath Tagore and Mahatma Gandhi’, Academic Press,

Gurgaon.

T. Pantham and K. Deutsch (1986), (eds.) ‘Political Thought in Modern India’, New

Delhi, Sage

V. Mehta and T. Pantham (eds.), (2006) ‘A Thematic Introduction to Political Ideas in

Modern India: Thematic Explorations, History of Science, Philosophy and Culture in

Indian civilization’ Vol. 10, Part: 7, New Delhi, Sage Publication.

Gouba, O.P. (2016). Indian Political Thought. New Delhi: Mayur Paperbacks.

Padhy, K.S.(2017). Indian Political Thought. Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.

Varma, V.P. (2009). Modern Indian Political Thought. Agra: Lakshmi Narain Agarwal

educational Publishers.

13

UNIT-10 SOCIAL AND POLITICAL THOUGHTS OF

RABINDRANATH TAGORE

Structure

10.1 Objectives

10.2 Introduction

10.3. Life-Sketch

10.4 Rabindranath Tagore’s Political Ideas

10.4.1 Nation

10.4.2 Nationalism

10. 4.3 Patriotism

10. 4.4 Democracy

10. 4.5 Theory of Rights

10. 4.6 Concept of Freedom

10. 4.7 Internationalism And Universalism

10.5 Rabindranath Tagore’s Social Thoughts

10.5.1 Philosophy of Humanism

10.5.2 Progress and Civilization

10.5.3 Joint Family System

10.5.4 Lesser Position of Women

10.5.5 Opposed To Rituals and Dogmas

10.5.6 Casteism and Untouchability

10. 6 Summary

10.7 Exercises

10.8 References

14

10.1 OBJECTIVES

After studying this unit, you will be able to:

Comprehend the life sketch of Tagore.

Analyze the central social ideas of Tagore.

Examine the key political ideas of Tagore.

10.2 INTRODUCTION

Gurudev Dr Rabindranath Tagore was a man of ‘philosopher, educationist, patriot,

humanist, and internationalist in one way. He envisioned a progressive and a new

societal order. His ever-soaring spirit drew him a lot away from matters as material as

his humanism and universalism made him consider beyond the national concerns. This

provided an atypical persona to his views. Thus, Tagore spoke of ‘humanism,

universalism and of the oneness of man’. He carted the human-centred note of India

and nationalism of the East for the ‘universal brotherhood, peace, prosperity of all

mankind irrespective of nationality, religion and colour’. To him, democracy is not

only the form of government which provides freedom to the individual but also it is

practised as a way of his life in managing with people around him. He raised his organ

voice to criticize the ills of society specifically as it is in India these days. He was

repelled by the non-natural disunions in men on the footing of castes and creeds and

reproached Indians for being dogmatic and superstitious. According to him, the sinful

of untouchability is a disease on the social body of the country and he strongly

reproached it. Having pointed out that the spirit of India was alive, he longed for the

West to take the benefit out of it and at the same time he sought the East to utilise the

knowledge of the West as well. Though he identified the conflict in society in-between

‘castes, sects, civilizations and have’s and have’s not’ but he believed that the mission

of civilization is to solve these conflicts.

10.3. LIFE-SKETCH

Rabindranath Tagore was one of the greatest eminent individualities of modern Asia.

He was born on May 7, 1861 (into an aristocrat and a lover of beauty, a family of

scholars, social reformers and entrepreneurs) in his ancestral house, at Jorasanko, on

the bank of the holy Ganga in Calcutta. His father’s name was Devendranath Tagore

and his mother’s name was Sarda Devi. He was the 14th child of his father. His

education was commenced before other regular students. His education started with

nursery poems & fairy stories. At the age of 7, he was admitted to regular school, but

had to depart studies in India at the age of 17 when he went to England with his elder

brother named Satyandra Nath Tagore. He was admitted to a school in England but

soon dropped out to continue his self-education. Tagore was married at the age of 25.

He had 5 children of the 3 are daughters and 2 are sons. Tagore was very much

influenced by Upanishads, the Teachings of Buddha and the Bhakti Cult and the

15

philosophy of Sri Chaitanya, Joydev, Vidayapati and Chandidas respectively. His

thinking was also influenced by the simple and spontaneous Baul songs of Bengal. He

travelled throughout the country beyond the country to the East and the West as the

cultural ambassador of our heritage.

Although he commenced his career by reading English literature he read the works of

‘Dante, Shakespeare, and Goethe’. Though Tagore did not obtain any college education

he had expertise in the English language & his intellect was a God-given gift to him.

The amalgamation of unusual intelligence & hard work made him an influential

personality not only in India but in the entire world. He was a phenomenal writer who

has left ineradicable evidence on literary and social thought in this country. He is well-

known as a famed educationist, a poet, an internationalist & a lover of humankind. He

was the noblest poet of his age. In the Western eyes, he was the spectacular national

figure & a cultural emissary of the spiritual East. He implanted patriotism in his

countrymen through his poetry. Gandhi pictured him as the “great sentinel” &

venerated him as ‘Gurudeva’. He symbolizes ‘humanism, universalism and the

oneness of man’. He was a patriot without fairly being a nationalist. He had no apologist

for colonial rule. Because in 1919 after the British soldiers fired on a defenceless crowd

in Amritsar, he returned his Knighthood to the King. He became the first Asian to win

the reward of the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1913 for his English version of

Geetanjali (poetry) which carried him worldwide recognition. Oxford University

conferred him its Doctorate Honour is Causa on 7th August 1840. He was “the most

universal, the most encompassing, the most complete human being”. In the words of

Dr Radha Krishnan “He was the greatest figure of modern renaissance. A poet of his

talents we had for some generation. He was along the lines of Valmiki and Kalidas”.

Unluckily, this august man respired his last on August 7, 1941, at the ripened age of 80

6 years before the sun of freedom dawned over the country. So, he could not see the

dawning of the country’s freedom that he had beloved so greatly. Even so, our taking

up of the national anthem “Jana Gana Mana” composed in Independent India is a

splendid complement to the incredible poet whom we may depict as the intellectual

leader of Indian nationalism. In the words of Dr Verma, “Tagore’s inspired poetry and

prose became the literacy vehicles of the regeneration of a fallen race because, in his

writings, he embodied some of the noblest ideals of Indian culture. His songs &

messages gave inspiration to social & political workers. Hence, although not in the

thick of the political fight for independence. Tagore was venerated as a seer of Indian

freedom”. He was neither a politician nor an academician. Still, his input to present-

day politics was really significant & to political thought very remarkable. Some of their

renowned books are – ‘Gitanjali (1912), Sadhna (1913), One Hundred Poems of Kabir

(1914), Nationalism (1917), and Greater India (1921), Gora (1924), The Religion of

Man’, etc. etc.

10.4 RABINDRANATH TAGORE’S POLITICAL IDEAS

Some of the important political ideas of Rabindranath Tagore are mentioned below:

16

10.4.1 Nation

According to Tagore, the concepts like ‘nation’ and ‘states’ are not of Indian origin

rather they are of European origin. He says the state is an ‘organisation for power’.

Tagore opines that the idea of the nation-state may have been beneficial to some, but

owing to it others have grieved. Tagore averred “Nation is the greatest evil for the

nation”. They play on the weakness of the rest of the world. It aims at achievement and

not virtuousness. It is a combined self-centeredness at the price of morality. In its

organic form, it lessens individual to a sheer cogwheel. Tagore contemplated nation to

be contradicted to the social interest of man. To him, the ‘idea of social man is

unselfishness’, but the idea of the nation like that of professional man is selfishness’.

10.4.2 Nationalism

It procreates Selfishness & Hatred for Others. Tagore did not favour the notion of

nationalism. He had a comprehensive notion of the entire world as one. He thought that

nationalism procreates dislike for others & a longing to overpower others by any means

whatsoever. He penned that the word ‘nation’ does not happen in our language nor does

it exist in our country. We have, of late, been educated to accolade national immensity

by dint of European education. But its ideals cannot be found in our minds. ‘Our

history, our religions, our family, our society none of them have recognized the

ascendency of the cult of the nation’. Europe acclaims political independence, we

carved in stone by spiritual freedom. The civilization as revealed in the cult of the

nation has so far been tested. But it is clear, that its ideas are not supportive; they bring

the ills of injustices and untruths and there is a kind of dreadful brutality about the cult.

To him, “the basis of Hindu civilization is society but the basis of European Civilization

is stated. Man can attain greatness either through society or through the state. But if we

ever think that to build up a nation after the pattern of Europe is the only way open and

the only aim of humanity, we will be wrong”. Further he expresses that, “The nation

with all its paraphernalia of power & prosperity, its flag & pious hymns, its

blasphemous prayers in the churches, and the literary mock-thunders of its patriotic

bragging cannot hide the fact that nationalism is the greatest evil for the nation”. Thus,

according to Tagore, nationalism procreates imperialism and put differently,

selfishness & hatred for others.

Inexistence of Independent Groups with Separate Interests in Society

Tagore did not favour the presence of autonomous groups with detached interests

within a society and contended with their amalgamation with the national mainstream.

He said “The section which is unable or unwilling to adapt itself to the entire scheme

but struggles to keep up a separate existence, will have to drop out and be lost sooner

or later. And the component which realizing its dedication to the ultimate ideal

acknowledges its unimportance will lose only its pettiness and find permanence for its

greatness in that of the whole”.

17

Opposed to European Type of Nationalism

Tagore was greatly opposed to the nationalism of the European kind which had caused

two World Wars. He stated this kind of nationalism blocked the growth of the higher

side of human nature and was accountable for most of the ills from which the present

society was suffering. He thought that nationalism was directed to the replacement of

selflessness of man by the self-centeredness of the nation and anticipated the cult of

combined self-centeredness as the ethical responsibility of the individual citizens.

Consequently, the individual just becomes a cog in the wheel of the machine and loses

his freedom. Therefore, he opposed this kind of nationalism as it worked against the

values of international harmony & understanding.

Revolted against Militant & Aggressive Nationalism

Tagore revolted against militant & aggressive nationalism. He believed it was an

unavoidable effect of modern science. To him, technological orientation impels man to

join the society for self-protection. This makes society primarily a part of power & as

a collectivity, it does not have much to do with the quest for greater ideals. As science

progresses, society turns further compound. It leads to larger wealth and development

of technology and with it man’s self-centeredness too upsurges. Nationalism is a

consequence of this course. It is a painful epidemic of evil which is gradually

destroying the moral essentials of mankind. It embodies self-centeredness in a

concentrated form for, once it surfaces, it rejects each other ideally. It becomes identical

to power which has no respect for human ideals like freedom and equality. It even leads

to the ending of personal humanity.

It Hinders the Growth of Humanism

According to Tagore, nationalism has stalled the development of humanism. In its

organic form, it diminishes an individual to a sheer cog. Tagore understood the spiritual

companionship of men. He envisaged the dawning of “the great federation of men”.

National arrogance is the consequence of narrow imagination and an absence of

spiritual sensitivity. He thought about the revival of the spirit of the people of India. He

sensed that the cult of nationalism works as an unsafe aesthetic which curtails the

thoughtful potentialities of man and diminishes him to being the ‘abject slave of

power’. Organised nationalism ruins the spiritual sensibilities of men and makes them

unsighted to the noble purpose of presence which is to ‘cherish love, moral freedom

and spiritual harmony’. It is the ‘battle-cry of modern capitalistic imperialistic states

which aim to dwarf the sensibilities of men and thus dull them into being willing

cannon-fodder in wars engineered by the ruling powers’. Hence, as a substitute for the

idolatry of the nation, Tagore preached the cult of the citizenship of the heavenly

kingdom. He criticized nationalism as ‘structured gregariousness & mechanical

glutting and hence he claimed for the release of cosmopolitan humanism.

Identify Oneself with Tradition and Heritage of Country

18

According to Tagore, nationalism meant recognizing oneself with the custom and

heritage of the country. He greeted India as “the enchanter of the world’s mind”. Indian

culture underwent itself in the cult and practice of social synthesis. It did never

overstate the significance of governmental vicissitudes. It is social. “Greek civilization

has a narrow-minded view because it was built in walled cities. European civilization

is based on the overrated emphasis on political power”. The leading theme of India’s

history and culture is to find the one among many to discover the unity among diversity.

Throughout the entirety of Indian History, there is to be discovered a process of

synthesis. Thus, a process of integration of the different traits of the unlike people and

their cultural ideals has been going on in Indian history. This pursuit of amalgamation

is a sign of the hunt for the primaeval spiritual being-it is evidence of the enduring

ambition for unity amongst multitudinous variety.

Tagore believed in the huge value of the spiritual heritage of India. He was opposed to

the denationalizing propensities inherent in the copying of Western countries. To him,

“India had held aloft the torch of the True, the Good, & the Eternal Spirit and it would

be ridiculous to forsake these. It was of no purpose to graft the soulless materialistic

economic civilization of the west on Indian soil”. However, Tagore recognized the

conception of cultural synthesis.

Development of Positive Virtues of Manliness and Self-Help

Tagore’s nationalism was not founded on the condemnation of British rule, rather it put

underscores the growth of constructive ‘virtues of manliness and self-help’. He reacted

to the narrow dividing walls with indifference and considered humankind as an organic

whole. He emphasized ‘sympathy for the lowly, the forlorn, the lost & humiliated’.

Thus, Tagore denied blinding his eyes to the miseries of the neighbours. He severely

condemned the Government for the partition of Bengal. Yet again, Tagore articulated

his agony over the Jallianwala Bagh carnage. Besides Tagore sternly criticized the

‘non-cooperation movement’ started by Gandhi to gain political concessions for the

Indian people. Correspondingly, Tagore did not like Gandhi’s programme to make

bonfires of foreign clothes and undiscriminating boycott of the instituted schools &

expressed these deeds as suicidal foolishness. Tagore emphasized that the origins of

India’s slavery lay in her neglect of the individual and acceptance of the social system

which condemned millions of her children to indignity & humiliation. Therefore, he

asserted on the people to commence nation-building services on their own, which

would naturally lead to political independence. Put differently, he persisted in a

constructive programme for the rejuvenation of his country. No wonder he did not

support the technique of either the Moderates or the Extremists. He emphasized that

the gift of freedom can never come to the people through charity. It must be achieved

by India by displaying her morals through pre-eminence over the ruling nation. Thus,

Tagore highlighted the values of ‘self-help & self-reliance’ which were later recognized

by other political thinkers like ‘B.G. Tilak, B.C. Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai & M.K. Gandhi’.

19

So, the faith in the nation-state and nationalism have increased fences between the

societies. Thus, both nation and nationalism have a very limited room.

10. 4.3 Patriotism

According to Tagore, patriotism signifies connecting with one’s country, its traditions

and heritage as well. It is the greatest aspect of nationhood. It is the key to religions.

He had a profound love for the national heritage and the country. He wanted every one

of his countrymen to be so strong as to stand on his own. This he emphasised most

through his patriotic songs:

“Make us strong that we may not

Insult the weak and the fallen,

That we may hold out love high when

All things around us are –

Wooing the dust”.

But Tagore could not coincide with the patriotism which instigated ‘conflict, racial

bitterness, religious bigotry and political discord’. Due to this, he did not back the non-

cooperation movement. Thus, he remonstrated against the ‘Communal Award’ as it

recognized the unfairness and was against the concern of the country. He liked all men

regardless of their racial identities. He understood in undertaking the righteous thing

for the country and humankind. His patriotism was not fixed to the geographical

bounds. He associated himself with all humankind.

10. 4.4 Democracy

According to Tagore, democracy is the involvement of the people in exercising the

sovereignty of the body politics. It denotes the political parity of each in the society.

However, a political party is simply one of the numerous aspects of civic life. It is

reliant on various other aspects such as economic and cultural, according to Tagore,

which are indispensable for the effective working of the democratic system. To him in

a true democracy, politics should not be separated from ethics. Tagore wanted people

to stick to Dharma, to be self-sufficient and resourceful. He thought that it was time to

‘renew the life of the people and they ‘learn to look after their affairs’. According to

Tagore, real democracy can be viable once the right of service is assumed by all.

Everyone should provide service to the community in the interest of the community. It

is all to our shame if we lose the natural right of service and cast charge on others for

the non-discharge of our duties. The government should not be in those leaders which

are self-centred politicians. To him, it barely serves any useful purpose if there is utter

gratification of having political rights and using them at the time of election.

20

10. 4.5 Theory of Rights

Tagore was a staunch exponent of human rights. But he contended that man should not

entreat these rights, he should make them for himself through soul potency. According

to him, the sole method to get rights was through productive agony and forbearing

selflessness. He perceived the significance of political freedom for the usefulness of

other rights. He uttered that absence of political freedom damages the ethical strand of

the people and limits their souls. Hence, he argued for India’s right to ‘self-

determination’ to defend the right of humankind.

10. 4.6 Concept of Freedom

Tagore assigned huge value to freedom for the growth of the individual and the society

as well. But his concept of freedom is rather unlike other political philosophers.

Usually, freedom is compared with national independence or accessibility of some

‘civil’ and ‘political’ rights to the citizens. But Tagore’s concept of freedom was not

only political. It comprised ‘freedom of mind, freedom of spirit to rise above the narrow

self and realised unity with fellow beings. It also encompassed ‘freedom from bondage

to the dead weight of tradition and custom; freedom from fear, freedom from the

narrowness of mind and outlook’. In the words of Tagore “If political freedom can be

achieved by us, well and good. But even if that does not happen, let us not, with a heap

of tainted political rubbish, obstruct our way to larger freedom of the soul.” According

to him, genuine freedom is viable if there exists “a perfect harmony of relationship”.

Tagore’s finest elucidation of the concept of freedom is imparted in the ensuing prayer

in Gitanjali:

“Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;

Where knowledge is free;

Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;

Where words come out from the depth of truth;

Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;

Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead

habit;

Where the mind is led forward by Thee into ever-widening thought & action-

Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake”.

Thus, he thought of a spiritual conception of freedom. To him, freedom denotes the

lighting of the souls on the point of self-fulfilment. This is feasible by the achievement

of universality. So, he ponders love as the way to freedom. Through ‘sympathetic

cooperation, compassion and trustful understanding’ man is brought nearer to the

godsends of freedom.

21

10. 4.7 Internationalism and Universalism

Being a true statesman and a man of foresightfulness Tagore understood the entire

world is one and to carve up it into a separate nation – small or big – is to make enemies

within ourselves. To him, the word ‘nation’ would mean a limited understanding of

detaching ourselves from others and would have a tendency to be concerned in

ourselves may be at the price of others. Tagore’s constant world awareness and his

longing to see and know other lands and people and start with them a relation of

goodwill and companionship as too his increasing confidence that the world born by

struggle and violence required India’s note of unity and peace incited him to go to

foreign countries.

He disparaged the barbarous manifestation of imperialist haughtiness and social

chauvinism. Each nation is a member of humankind and each must render the account

of what it has built for the weal of mankind. According to Tagore, the politician

misapplies the circumstances rather than bridging the gap between East and West they

broaden it. He warned the politician to come out and eschew their tendency to divvying

this world into diverse compartments. The betterment of a lot of the individuals in every

nation can only carry genuine development.

According to Tagore “Life becomes untrue and its burden heavy if we do not see

ourselves in the infinite; we have to realize the consciousness of the all. True

universalism is not the breaking down of the walls of one’s own house, but the offering

of hospitability to one’s guests and neighbours”. Further he says we have to liberate

man from themselves that he has interwoven around him i.e. the organisation of

national egoism. In his own words, “he only knows the reality who sees the universe in

one’s self and one’s self in-universe”.

10.5 RABINDRANATH TAGORE’S SOCIAL THOUGHTS

10.5.1 Philosophy of Humanism

Tagore had an unspoken belief in self-realization through love and service of mankind

primarily the down-trodden. He understood that the quest for God rests in the service

of humanity. He sensed that it was merely on the foundation of humanism that the large

gulf between the East and the West be bridged and as a result, a synthetical culture

could be grown. In his early youth age, he was inspired by the humanism of the West

particularly his love for freedom and the large-hearted radicalism of the British people.

He assumed the Western definition of humanism that man was the central and final

truth. To him ‘If there is a God, He must be interpreted in human terms. Discarding the

conventionalism and orthodoxy of Hinduism, he adapted to the spirituality of Western

humanism.

22

10.5.2 Progress and Civilization

In today’s world, one of the main causes for the prevailing mess is the usual error of

naming progress with civilization. We are advancing communication, building up

townships and high-rise buildings and are garnering the power of the atom.

Undoubtedly all these are evidence of the outstanding progress that man has achieved

recently. But despite the titanic progress that humankind has achieved in the arena of

science, human society even now locates itself ruled by the predacious laws of nature.

To him, ‘civilization is the freedom that man has achieved by acquiring a knowledge

of the laws of nature, and by subordinating himself to the moral laws that are the

specific creation of man’s consciousness. So, in the modern world refuting the authority

of moral laws, laws unusual to man’s world are often accepted as ‘progresses. But

without this building and binding force of civilization, the idea of the unity of man and

the acceptance of moral laws as the potentate of human society, a lot of this progress

has caused misery and destruction to man. Thus progress the deity that governs the

modern western way of thinking. In the words of Tagore:

“…. the lust for power and the obsession with the magic of progress have made the West forget

the central motive force of her being, the priceless realization of the fundamental unity of man”.

Tagore was aggrieved by the materialistic root of western civilization. He sought a

compromise between Western science and Indian spiritualism to guide the human race.

Tagore was awake that the machine-driven type of ‘occidental civilization’ had veered

human beings into sheer slaves and killed their freedom and initiative to work in a

natural pathway. Besides, he too uncovered that there was an organised attempt in the

West in the direction of physical and intellectual fineness. For vindicating itself in the

eyes of humankind he wished for Western to come forward with its science and culture

for the support of the weak and helpless nations.

According to Tagore, the individuals who contribute to society are the ‘upper class. He

desires all to be service-rendering to make leisureliness accessible to everyone. To him,

civilization cannot outlive if simply few have the leisureliness. In his words, “Unless

all are wealthy no man, however rich, can have real wealth”. To him, society must have

a spiritual exemplar to ensue for the ‘true happiness of all. Tagore’s social rebuilding

programme encompassed the eradication of the social impediments. Because our social

system, to him, rests on common responsibility, upon ethical principles acknowledged

by all the people.

10.5.3 Joint Family System

According to Tagore, in rural India, there has been a joint family system for centuries.

This system had its peculiar merits, but of late, these merits have virtually weakened.

The demerits of this system are very eye-catching. So, a lot of the present Indian social

thinkers are against this system. This is so too on account of the point that it is

associated with caste. Tagore called attention to this system is very distressing for

23

conjugal fine-tuning of the just wedded couples. Besides, the inattention to children

and absence of confidentiality for the twosome are the two nuisances of the joint family

system which have directed to its current crumbling.

10.5.4 Lesser Position of Women

Being a poet as well as novelist Tagore was innately perceptive of the problems of

women in our society. In his various scholarly works, he has brilliantly portrayed the

ills of child marriage, the purdah system, and the practice of Sati practised in Indian

society. He has condemned the Hindu notion of the ascendancy of men over women

and called it a remnant of the barbaric age. He has much-admired the women for their

personas of ‘chastity, modesty, devotion, power of self-sacrifice, grace and sweetness,

stability, rhythm and other human qualities’. He asserted that in the present-day cultural

crisis of Hindu society the women can perform a significant role for which they should

be provided equality of position. An institution like a family cannot work without

providing such kind of equality to them because maintaining the ‘balance of power’ is

the fundamental basis of the family. In addition to this, he also emphasised various

roles for males and females which are harmonizing with each other. He called attention

that our society cannot headway without the rejuvenation of women.

10.5.5 Opposed to Rituals and Dogmas

According to Tagore, the religious leaders for rendering their preaching into deeds

established many organisations. He dreaded that with the upcoming of the organisation,

the innate growth of the religion is hindered. The ritualized part of religion supposes a

certain deity or set of deities, places of worship, rituals and dogmas. To him, this part

is as vital as the ideational one. Tagore strongly opposed this part of religion. He

insisted that incoherent rituals and dogmas are at the best lone unified canons that grip

all together individuals of a certain community dividing them up from individuals of

other factions. But he has no consideration for these.

10.5.6 Casteism and Untouchability

Being an edified and intelligent leader of his period, Tagore was greatly aware of the

ills of the society around him. Being a poet, he was of utmost perceptive to the rough

treatment of the strong over the weak. Tagore was sickened by the artificial divisions

in men on the foundation of castes and creeds of Hindu society and revolted against

this prevailing sinful practice. In addition to this, he also condemned the untouchability

practised in Hindu society and made rock-hard pains as well for its elimination. His

dance drama named Chandalika and novel named Gora respectively examined

thoroughly the state of mind of the untouchables and their disabilities. He organised a

‘scouting team’ titled ‘Brati Balak’ for combating untouchability. For the growth of

overall public awareness, Tagore organised ‘Hindu Mela’ as a social get-together for

all the fragments of Hindu society.

24

A systematic assessment of their political thoughts of Tagore makes us wind up that he

was an arch patriot and a devoted nationalist. He was not a politician but as a seir, he

symbolizes ‘unity, harmony, cooperation and integral humanism’. He was an emissary

of amity and goodwill. It is rarely found that one man in South Asia who

subconsciously loathed nationalism was Rabindranath Tagore who triumphed in the

Nobel Prize when Europe was occupied by nationalism, fighting wars which killed

millions of its public. But one has to build a concern for truth and understand that the

region in which we are living cannot hitherto transform from ‘nation-states to market

states that trade with each other instead of going into a confrontation from time to time,

upholding militaries instead of caring of the underprivileged. His condemnation of

power and antagonistic nationalism convinces us to characterize him as a fundamental

humanist and a great lover of human beings. In his social thought, we found he has

worked efficiently how to exterminate the caste system and untouchability alteration

of the joint family system to the emancipation of women and many more. His striving

for societal reforms and unity of the country confers him a renowned place in Indian

politics of those days.

Nevertheless, it will not be unsuitable to draw attention that some of Tagore’s thoughts

were daydreams of the poet. He recognizes nationalism with an imperialistic capacity

which is rather biased. Because nationalism liberated the people from fetters of

feudalism and oppression of despotic imperialism. It has also helped surpass man from

the bonds of ‘the caste, the tribe and the locality’. Further, his support of universalism

and internationalism sometimes at the expense of nationalism and a moral approach to

politics was the result of his love for humanity at large.

10.6 SUMMARY

Usually, nationalism is intimately related to patriotism. Tagore in his book named

‘Nationalism’ says nationalism is a brainchild of the West. The nation has prospered

for long upon denatured humankind. Society progressively is today a finger-puppet

show of politicians, soldiers, manufacturers and bureaucrats. Much before the

independence, partition and the subsequent massacre and the birth of the Kashmir

problem Tagore wrote “Nationalism is a great menace. It is the particular thing which

for years has been at the bottom of India’s troubles”.

Tagore opined that true democracy can never be realised in a society “where greed

grows uncontrolled, encouraged, and even admired by the populace”. To him, if

democracy is genuine has to be get rid of the politics without ethics, government from

the clutches of the few, and leadership from the authorities of self-indulgence.

Tagore wanted the West and the East to go along the Indian type of blend about one

another’s civilization and to make the best of both in the interest of progress. He stated

for the fusion of cultures. The East should take the scientific attitude of mind from the

West and the West too should take for its own sake our idea of unity in diversity.

25

Being an internationalist, he cautioned the states against the intrinsic menaces of racial

prejudices which weakened human unity. He depicted the world as the place of men’s

spirit and not a sheer pool of political power. He intended for a ‘Federation of mankind’

which meant signalling a period of international law and collective security and uttering

bye to the rule of the strongest. He sought nations to shed ‘suspicion, fear, distrust,

lustfulness, and national egoism’ and go for ‘virtues of amity, national friendship and

a blending of their respective cultures’.

Being a victor of the political freedom of India and Asia, he potently backed the reason

for the self-government of India which only could help as the cure-all of all political

problems of India. On hearing Jallianwala Bagh's carnage his writing a letter to the

Viceroy and giving up knighthood speaks volumes of his love for freedom. During the

period of the ‘Civil Disobedience Movement’ initiated by the ‘Indian National

Congress,’ he entreated for the instant grant of the substance of independence of India.

10.7 EXERCISES

1. Examine Tagore’s ideas on the critique of Nationalism.

2. Concerning Tagore’s ideas on Nationalism, discuss his philosophy of

humanism.

3. Discuss various political ideas of Rabindranath Tagore.

4. Analyze different socio-political ideas of Tagore.

10.8 REFERENCES

‘The Rooted Cosmopolitan: Rabindranath Tagore’ (2010) in Ramachandra Guha ed.

Maker of Modern India, New Delhi: Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd.

Bhagwan, Vishnoo (1999), Indian Political Thinkers, 4th Edition, Delhi: Atma Ram &

Sons.

Sarasvati, C M (1990), Modern Indian Political Thought, New Delhi: Meenakshi

Prakashan.

Sharma, Urmila and Sharma, S.K. (2019), Indian Political Thought, New Delhi:

Atlantic Publishers & Distributors (P) Ltd.

Gauba, O P (2015), Indian Political Thought, Indirapuram: Mayur Paperbacks.

Somjee, A H (January-March, April-June, 1961), The Political Philosophy of

Rabindranath Tagore, The Indian Journal Political Science, Vol. 22, No. 1/2, pp.134-

143.

Ahmed, Khaled (9th April 2016), The Myth of a Fixed National Interest, New Delhi:

The Hindu, p.15.

26

UNIT-11 HINDUTVA: V. D. SAVARKAR

Structure

11.1 Objectives

11.2 Introduction

11.3 Hindutva

11.4 Leader of the Hindu Mahasabha

11.5 Theory of Hindutva:

11.6 Hindutva as Cultural Nationalism:

11.7 Savarkar on national language and script

11.8 Savarkar on the name Hindusthan

11.9 Regarding the Christian minorities

11.10 Savarkar on the Muslims

11.11 Summary

11.12 Exercises

11.13 References

11.1 OBJECTIVES

After studying this unit, you will be able to understand;

Hindu Nationalism of V D Savarkar

Hindutva as Cultural Nationalism

Causes of the emergence of the politics of Hindutva in India.

V D Savarkar on Social Reforms in the context of Hindutva

The role of social reforms in strengthening the Hindu nation.

27

11.2 INTRODUCTION

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was a versatile personality who has been a source of

inspiration for generations of Indians. He was a committed revolutionary, renowned

freedom fighter, eminent political thinker, devoted social and religious reformer,

prolific writer and poet, and rationalist philosopher. He launched a movement for

religious reform advocating the removal of the system of caste in Hindu civilization,

and reconversion of the converted Hindus back to the Hindu religion. Savarkar coined

the term “Hindutva” and emphasized its distinctiveness from Hinduism. The

philosophy of 'Hindutva' was fundamentally the ideology of Hindu nationalism. The

first famous supporter of Hindu nationalist ideology was Savarkar. The basic difference

between Hinduism and Hindutva is whereas Hinduism stands for the Hindu religion,

Hindutva is a political ideology that seeks wants to establish a Hindu nation in India.

Hinduism does not have any political agenda, but Hindutva has a specific political

agenda. Savarkar’s Hindutva sought tried to create an inclusive collective identity.

11.3 HINDUTVA

When Savarkar was in the Ratnagiri jail, he wrote his ideological article – Hindutva:

Who is a Hindu? It was published by Savarkar's followers under his pen name

"Maharatta." In this article, Savarkar supported a radical new vision of Hindu social

and political consciousness. Savarkar started describing a "Hindu" as a patriotic citizen

of Bharatavarsha, venturing beyond a religious identity. While emphasising the need

for patriotic and social unity in all Hindu societies, he described Hinduism, Jainism,

Sikhism and Buddhism as one and similar. He outlined his vision of a "Hindu Rashtra"

(Hindu Nation) as "Akhand Bharat" (United India), purportedly stretching crossways

the whole Indian subcontinent. He defined the Hindu race as neither Aryan, Kolarian

nor Dravidian but as consisting of those people who live as children of a general

motherland.

After his release from jail on 6 January 1924, Savarkar helped establish the Ratnagiri

Hindu Sabha, aiming to object objective of social and cultural preservation of Hindu

heritage and civilization. As a frequent and forceful orator, Sarvakar agitated for the

use of Hindi as a general national language and against caste discrimination and

untouchability. Savarkar authored the Hindu Pad-pada-shahi – a book documenting

and extolling the Maratha Empire – and My Transportation for Life – an explanation

of his early revolutionary days, arrest, trial and incarceration.

11.4 LEADER OF THE HINDU MAHASABHA

Savarkar was elected as the President of the Hindu Mahasabha in 1937 and serve until

1943. The Congress swept the polls in 1937 but Muslim leader Jinnah ridiculed

Congress rule as a "Hindu Raj", and hailed December 22, 1939, as a "Day of

Deliverance" for Muslims. On the other hand, Congress resigned and masse in a protest

28

against India’s arbitrary inclusion in World War II. Savarkar as the President of the

Hindu Mahasabha, throughout the Second World War, advanced the slogan "Hinduize

all Politics and Militarize Hindudom". He decided to support the British war effort in

India seeking military training for the Hindus.

The Muslim League adopted the Lahore Resolution in 1940, calling for a separate

Muslim state based on the Two-Nation Theory. But Savarkar opposed the Partition of

India. Hindu Mahasabha activists protested against Gandhi's initiative to hold talks with

Jinnah in 1944, which Savarkar denounced as "appeasement." He assailed the British

proposals for transfer of power, attacking both the Congress and the British for creating

concessions to Muslim separatists. Soon after Independence, Dr Shyama Prasad

Mookerjee resigned as Vice-President of the Hindu Mahasabha dissociating himself

from its Akhand Hindustan plank, which implied undoing partition.

11.5 THEORY OF HINDUTVA

Savarkar was the first methodical supporter of Hindu nationalism. He deeply analysed

his theory of Hindutva in his book entitled Hindutva published in Nagpur in 1923. In

the process of developing his doctrine of Hindu nationalism, he rejected some of the

arguments of territorial nationalism. He held the view that the existence of a mere

territory did not make a nation but a nation, on the other hand, was made by the people

who constituted themselves as a political community bound together by cultural

affinities and traditions.

11.6 HINDUTVA AS CULTURAL NATIONALISM

Savarkar was a supporter of cultural nationalism. He believes identity formation was

the essence of nationalism. India had received such an identity from the Hindu religion.

Despite having outward differences, the Hindus were internally bound together by

cultural, religious, social, logistic and historical affinities. These affinities were

developed through the process of assimilation and association over countless centuries.

It moulded the Hindus into a homogeneous and organic nation and above all induced a

will for common national life. This homogeneity was important because other sections

of the society had divergent cultural traditions. Savarkar argued that it was cultural,

racial and religious unity that counted more in the format of the nation.

While defining nation, Savarkar wrote that nation meant a political community which

had occupied a continuous and adequate territory and developed an independent

national identity. According to him, Hindus constituted a nation because they had

developed close affinities with the land-bound by the Himalayas to the Indian Ocean

and the Indus River. Hindus considered India as their fatherland and holy land. Thus,

Savarkar effectively excluded those people who did not consider India as their holy

land because their sacred religious places were not situated in India. For him, Hindu

society and not the Hindu religion came first; Hindus were a nation because they were

29

a self-enclosed community. The Hindus shared a common historical past. Savarkar

knew that ultimately, nationalism was a psychological feeling and it was necessary to

cultivate national consciousness among the Hindus. The common affinities should be

used to strengthen the national consciousness. Savarkar subscribed to the idea of

cultural and organic solidarity of the Hindu nation. He had been devoted to the idea of

Hindu resurrection and believed in the cultural superiority of Hinduism. He emphasized

the moral and social regeneration of Hinduism.

According to Savarkar, a Hindu means a person who regards this land of Bharatvarsha,

from the Indus to the seas, as his Fatherland as well as his Holyland that is the cradle

land of his religion. There are three fundamental criteria for being included under

Hinduism or being a Hindu.

First, the territorial bond or Rashtra is a primary requirement. A Hindu feels an

attachment to the geographical region extending from the Sindhu River to the

Brahmaputra and from the Himalayas to the Cape Comorin.

Secondly, the racial or blood bond of the ‘Jati’- A Hindu inherits the blood of the race

“whose first and discernible source could be traced to the Himalayan altitude of the

Vedic Saptasindhu”. A third criterion of being a Hindu is culture or Sanskriti. A Hindu

feels pride in the Hindu culture and civilization represented in common historical

memories of achievements and failures, in common artistic, literary and juristic

creations and in common rituals or festivals or other media of collective expression.

According to Savarkar, the concept of Hindutva is broader than Hinduism. Hinduism

has a religious significance and connotes the theology and ritualism of the Hindus,

Hindutva comprehends within it this religious bond of Hinduism but goes beyond.

Within Hindutva are included the social, moral, political and economic aspects as well.

Hindutva connotes the notion of an organic socio-political body knit together by the

three bonds of territorial belongings, blood or birth and culture. Savarkar firmly

believed in the doctrine of Hindutva or Hindu solidarity. In a competitive world, full

of tensions and struggles for power, the solidification of strength is the sole means of

survival.

According to Savarkar, Hindutva is not only a concept of organic socio-political unity,

it is also an essential element of nationalism. It is a movement as well as a programme

of action. He favoured inter-caste marriage between all sections of Hindus. He did not

believe in the policy of appeasement. He believed that there was no conflict between

Hindutva and nationalism. He said, “A Hindu patriot worth the name cannot but be an

Indian patriot as well. To the Hindus, Hindustan being the fatherland and Holy land,

the love they bear to Hinduism is boundless”’.

The ideology of Hindutva as propounded by Savarkar, was, rooted in the vision of

Hindu Solidarity. It was, in fact, a political construct whose antecedents lay in the

30

cultural ethics of the Hindus. He maintained that despite having numerous external

differentiation, internally, Hindus are bound together by certain commonalities which

have been brought about by centuries of assimilation and association with each other.

To Savarkar, in the making of the Hindu Rashtra what counted more than anything else

was the cultural, racial and religious unity of the people? In a Hindu Rashtra, Savarkar

offered the minorities some degree of freedom and the right to participation in the

affairs of the state provided they accepted a position of non-aggression to the interests

and rights of Hindus.

Between 1937 and 1947, Savarkar had tried to keep India united. But his efforts failed.

As a result, he suffered from a lot of frustration, pain and anger. This had also

negatively affected his health. Though he provided very important advice and timely

warning to the new rulers of India, there were hardly any takers among them.

Savarkar opined that Hindutva was not a word but a history. It was not only a history

of the spiritual or religious life of the Indian people but a history of the entire

civilization. Hinduism is only a derivative, a fraction, a part of Hindutva. To make

Hindutva a grand concept, Savarkar held that by an 'ism' it was generally meant a theory

or a code more or less based on spiritual or religious dogma or system. To investigate

the essential significance of Hindutva, Savarkar did not primarily concern himself with

any particular theocratic or religious dogma or creed. He held that had not linguistic

usage stood in the way then 'Hinduness' would have certainly been a better word than

'Hinduism' as a near parallel to Hindutva.

It is important to note here that Savarkar mistakenly cited Sanskrit as the common

reference point for all Indian languages. The languages of South India had different

origins. Savarkar wanted every political programme of Hindu nationalist ideology

should call for recognition of Sanskrit or Hindi, the vernacular language closest to it,

as the national language. Besides language, ‘common laws and rites’, such as religious

festivals, were cited as criteria of Hindutva by Savarkar. According to him, Christians

and Muslims of India were not part of the nation because of their differences from the

Hindus in cultural terms. Savarkar stated: “Their Holyland is far off in Arabia and

Palestine. Their mythology and Godmen, ideas and heroes are not the children of this

soil. Consequently their names and their outlook smack of foreign origin. Their love is

divided”.

This description of Christianity and Islam led Savarkar to write that when the Muslims

forced their entry into India, ‘the conflict of life and death began’. Nonetheless, this

conflict had a positive effect since ‘nothing makes conscious of itself so much as a

conflict with non-self’.

Savarkar’s notion of Hindutva depended on cultural criteria rather than on a racial

theory and was accordingly in tune with the traditional Brahminical worldview, but at

31

the same time, it represented an ethnic nationalism which borrowed much from western

political theory.

Savarkar stated that the festivals and cultural forms of the Hindus were common. The

Vedic rishis (monks) were their common pride, their grammarians Panini and Patanjali,

their poets Bhavabhuti and Kalidas, their heroes Shri Ram and Shri Krishna, Shivaji

and Pratap, Guru Govind and Banda were a source of common inspiration. Savarkar

held that like their ancient and sacred language, the Sanskrit, their scripts were also

fashioned on the same basis and the Nagari script had been the common vehicle of the

sacred writings in the past centuries.

Savarkar further observed that India was dear to the Hindus for it had been the home

of the Hindu race. The land had been the cradle of Hindu prophets and heroes and Gods

and Godmen. Savarkar argued: “River for the river the Mississippi(Sic) is nearly as

good as the Ganges and its waters are not altogether bitter. The stones and trees and

greens in Hindusthan are just as good or bad stones and trees and greens of the

respective species elsewhere”.

Savarkar believed that Hindusthan was a ‘Fatherland’ and a 'Holyland' to the Hindus

not because it was a land entirely unlike any other land in the world but because it was

associated with their history and had been the home of their forefathers wherein ‘their

mothers gave them the first suckle at their breasts and their fathers cradled them on

their knees from generation to generation’.

11.7 SAVARKAR ON NATIONAL LANGUAGE AND SCRIPT

Regarding the issue of the national language, Savarkar believed that Sanskrit should be

considered the sacred language and Hindi, which was derived from Sanskrit and drew

its sustenance from the Sanskrit, should be the national language. Savarkar opined that

Sanskrit was the richest and the most cultured of the ancient languages of the world.

To the Hindus, Sanskrit was the ‘holiest tongue of tongues’.

In the opinion of Savarkar, Hindu scriptures, history, philosophy and culture had their

roots so deeply embodied in the Sanskrit literature that this formed the brain of the

Hindu race. According to him, the Sanskrit language should be ‘an indispensable

constituent of the classical course for Hindu youths’.

While the opinion of Savarkar was in favour of adopting Hindi as the national

language, no distinction was implied as regards other provincial languages. Savarkar

opined that Hindi could best serve the purpose of a national pan-Hindu language. He

held the view that long before either English or even Muslims stepped into India, Hindi

in its general form had already come to occupy the position of a national language.

Savarkar emphasized that the Hindu pilgrim, the tradesman, tourist, the soldier, and the

pandit travelled up and down from Bengal to Sindh and Kashmir to Rameshwar by

32

making himself understood from locality to locality through Hindi. Savarkar argued:

“.... just as Sanskrit was the national language of the Hindu intellectual world, even so,

Hindi has been for at least a thousand years in the past the national Indian tongue of

the Hindu community”.Therefore, Savarkar recommended that every Hindu student

should learn Hindi compulsorily along with his provincial mother tongue.

On the question of the national script, Savarkar favoured the Nagri Script. According

to him, like the Hindi language, the Nagri script too had been present all over India

amongst the Hindu literary circles for around two thousand years. He held the view that

with a little touch here and there, it could be reformed to render it as suitable to modern

mechanical printing as the Roman script.

11.8 SAVARKAR ON THE NAME HINDUSTHAN

According to Savarkar, the name of the country should be Hindusthan. In his opinion,

such other names as India, Hind etc. being derived from the same original word

‘Sindhu’, might be used but only to signify the same sense, i.e., the land of the Hindus,

a country which was the abode of the ‘Hindu Nation’.

Though Savarkar argued that in this insistence on the name ‘Hindusthan’, no

encroachment or humiliation was implied in connection with any of the non-Hindu

countrymen. He believed the Parsees and Christians were too akin to the Hindus

culturally and were patriotic citizens. So objections to the name of Hindusthan should

not come from them.

Savarkar did not hide his suspicion of the Muslims. He wanted the Muslims to

remember that they did not dwell as a minority only in India. China, Greece, Hungary

and Poland had crores of Muslims among their nationals. Savarkar held that being there

a minority, the existence of Muslims in these countries had never been advanced as a

ground to change the ancient names of these countries. The country of the Poles

continued to be Poland and of the Grecians as Greece. The Muslims did not distort

them but were quite content to distinguish themselves as Polish-Muslims or Grecian

Muslims. Savarkar wanted that Indian Muslims should distinguish themselves

nationally or territorially as ‘Hindusthani Muslims’ without compromising, in the least,

their separateness as a religious or cultural entity.

Though Savarkar regretted that a large section of the Muslim community objected to

the name of the country, he found no reason why the Hindus would break up the

continuity of the nation from the ‘Sindhus in Rig Vedic days to the Hindus’ of the

present generation which was implied in Hindusthan. Savarkar held that just as the land

of the Germans in Germany, of English in England, of the Afghans in Afghanistan -

the Hindus should have it indelibly impressed on the map of the earth for all times to

come as Hindustan - the land of Hindus. Hindustan to Savarkar did not only mean so-

called British India, it comprised even those parts which were under the French and

33

Portuguese possession. He stated: “From the Indus to the Himalayas, from the

Himalayas to Tibet, from Tibet to Burma and from Burma to the Southern and Western

Seas run the lines of the boundaries of our land. The whole territory including Kashmir

and Nepal, Gomantak, Pondechery and other French possessions constitutes our

national and territorial unit. And this whole constitutes our country - Hindusthan and

must remain one, indivisible and integral.”

Therefore, Savarkar subscribed to a conceptual framework that related Hindutva to

Indian nationhood and upheld the slogan of Hindi-Hindu Hindusthan. This Pan-Hindu

conceptualization of Indian nationhood of Savarkar made a sharp distinction between

the Muslims of India and other minorities. Savarkar thought that in India the Hindus

alone constituted a nation. Minorities were merely citizens of the country who were

supposed to look upon the country as a land of the Hindus. However, Savarkar did not

view all the minorities in a similar light. So far as the Parsees were concerned, Savarkar

held that they were by race, religion, language and culture most akin to the Hindus.

They had gratefully been loyal to India. Savarkar opined that the Parsees were not

fanatics and always displayed good intentions towards the Hindu nation which to them

had proved ‘a veritable saviour of their race.’ So, Savarkar opined that the attitude of

the Hindus towards the Parsees should be one of ‘trust, friendship and equal rights.’

11.9 REGARDING THE CHRISTIAN MINORITIES

In the opinion of Savarkar, Christians were civilized people and had no extra-territorial

political designs against India. According to him, Christians were not linguistically and

culturally averse to the Hindus and, therefore, could be politically assimilated.

Savarkar was opposed to the proselytizing activities of the churches converting the

Hindus to Christianity. He argued that in that matter alone the Hindus should be on

their guard and should not give the missionaries any ‘blind latitude to carry on their

activities beyond voluntary and legitimate conversion. At the same time, Savarkar

reminded the Hindus of their duty to continue the reconversion of the Christians. So far

as the Jews were concerned, Savarkar held that they were too few and had given the

Hindus ‘no political or cultural troubles.’ He held the view that they were, in the main,

not proselytizing people and so would be friendly towards the Hindu nation. Savarkar

believed that the Jews could easily be assimilated into a common Indian state.

11.10 SAVARKAR ON MUSLIMS

Savarkar was completely antagonistic to the Muslims. He opined that the attitude of

the Hindus towards the Muslims should be ‘one of distrust and watchfulness because

of their ‘anti-Hindu’, anti-Indian and extra-territorial plans. He averred that the Hindus

should strictly refuse them any special treatment in any sphere of life including

religious, cultural or political. Savarkar held the opinion that the Indian Muslims

wanted ‘the Urdu to be raised to the position of the national tongue of the Indian state.’

34

Savarkar pointed out that the Muslims insisted on adopting the Urdu script as the

national script and rejected the Nagri. He criticized the Muslim chauvinism towards the

Vande Mataram song and pointed out that the very words Vande Mataram (Hail to the

motherland) were considered by the Muslims insulting. Savarkar warned the Hindus

that the Muslims wanted Hindusthan to be cut into two pieces - Hindusthan and

Pakistan to destroy the integrity of the country.

Savarkar thought that the Hindu-Muslim conflict was not a simple phenomenon but

rather a struggle between two different cultures and races. He reminded the Hindus: “It

is no wonder that when an overwhelming majority in a country goes on its knees before

an antagonistic minority such as the Muslims imploring it to lend its helping hand and

assuring it that otherwise the majority community is doomed to death then the minor

community does not sell its assistance at the highest bid possible and thus hasten the

doom of the major community and aims to establish its political sovereignty in the

land.”

Savarkar held the viewpoint that the Hindus did not want any special privilege and they

were even willing to guarantee special protections for the language, culture and religion

of the Muslims as a minority. In return, he demanded that the Muslims should promise

that they would never try to dominate and humiliate the Hindus. However, Savarkar

also did not conceal his suspicion of the anti-Indian design of the Pan-Islamic

movement, which thrived on the links among Muslim nations from ‘Arabia to

Afghanistan’.

Savarkar made it clear that the Hindus were not out to fight with England only to find

a change of masters, but the sole objective of the Hindus was to become the masters in

their own house. Savarkar thought that to achieve their goal the Hindus should form a

strong political organization. A party representing the Hindu nation was Savarkar's

dream. In this regard, he upheld the leading role of the Hindu Mahasabha - the first

political party of the Hindu nationalists in the twentieth century India of which Savarkar

was an active leader and chief architect. According to Savarkar, the Hindu Mahasabha

was the national representative body of the 'Hindudom'. The sole objective of the party

was the all-around regeneration of the Hindu people. Savarkar opined that the

Mahasabha was concerned with the common objective of generating respect among

people to regard India as their ‘Holyland’.

According to him, the Hindu Mahasabha was only indirectly concerned with Hinduism

which, in his opinion, was only one of the many aspects of Hindutva. He affirmed that

the party was mainly concerned with ‘other aspects of Hindutva resulting from the

second constituent of possessing a common fatherland’.

Therefore, in Savarkar’s opinion, the Hindu Mahasabha was a pan-Hindu organization

shaping the destinies of the Hindu nation in all its social, political and cultural aspects.

In his opinion, the Hindu Mahasabha was not a communal body. He argued that the

35

party should not be condemned as sectional for it tried to defend the just and

fundamental rights of the Hindu nation against the unjust and overbearing aggression

of other human aggregates and the party did not infringe on equal and just rights and

liberties of others. He declared that the consolidation and independence of the Hindu

nation were but another name for the independence of the Indian nation as a whole.

According to him, the Hindu Mahasabha had not come into being as a reaction to the

Muslim League. He held the view that the Hindu nation had developed a new organ to

battle in the struggle for existence under the changed conditions of the modern age. The

Hindu Mahasabha ‘grew up of a fundamental necessity of national life and not of any

ephemeral incident.’

Savarkar opined that it was clear from the aims and objectives of the Hindu Mahasabha

that its mission was as abiding as the life of the nation itself. It is doubtless that Savarkar

was held in high esteem by his Hindu nationalist admirers both for his writings and

public activities. The Hindu Mahasabha with him at the helm was able to create a name

for itself in the social and political domain of Indian life. But one can hardly avoid the

conclusion that neither did the Mahasabha as a political organization nor its personnel

as individuals succeed in building up a political party worth the name that the Indian

situation then demanded. The Mahasabha remained essentially a pressure group within

the Congress, busy recruiting its supporters mostly from the conservative princes and

other notables. The Indian National Congress also could not part with the company of

such people. A sort of alliance existed between the politically conscious Congress

intelligentsia and the members of the erstwhile royal houses. This alliance turned out

to be a mutually rewarding experience. As examples one may cite the cases of Dr

Moonje, a Brahmin by birth and a noted opthalmologist by profession, who benefitted

from the assistance and financial support of the heirs to the old Kingdom of Nagpur,

the Bhonsle Maharajas, whose royal house was dis-established in 1818, and of an

important Nagpur landowner, M. G. Chitnavis.

These are just a few examples which could easily be multiplied. The princes and other

notables had their special reasons to forge friendly relations with the politically

conscious intelligentsia. Such relationships between the intelligentsia and their patrons

had been identified by Christopher Bayly as one of the ways how the Congress

developed up to the early part of the twentieth century.

However, the Congress intelligentsia was later freed from the control of the notables,

in part, because of the constitutional reforms of 1909 and 1919, which made it

incumbent on it to appeal to a wider audience. The Hindu Mahasabha, being unable to

follow this path, remained highly dependent on the influence of notables whose

conservatism and factionalism hampered the development of the organization.

Excluded from the Congress in 1937 on account of its alleged communal views, it failed

to be truly represented in the elective institutions till independence. This divorce

between the Hindu Mahasabha and the Congress was not, however, complete in so far

36

as the pillars of the former preferred to remain in the latter. A prominent example of

this duality was Madan Mohan Malaviya, the founder of the Benaras Hindu University

(BHU), whose faction, firmly implanted in the United Provinces, represented the

durability of a Hindu traditionalist current within the Congress. While the Hindu

Mahasabha experienced an early decline, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangha (R.S.S.)

developed steadily and became the principal standard-bearer of the Hindu nationalist

ideology. This organization, which was formed by Dr K. B. Hedgewar after he had read

Hindutva and had been further stimulated by a visit to Savarkar, was deeply influenced

by the latter’s view of the nation.

11.11 SUMMARY

Savarkar’s theory of Hindutva has been subjected to severe criticisms from different

corners. Some scholars have rightly pointed out that Savarkar politicized religion and

introduced religious elements into politics. He supported an extreme, uncompromising

abstract form of Hindu nationalism in Indian political dialogue. His whole life revolved

around a single ideal to establish India as a Hindu nation. Savarkar became the first and

most authentic advocate of Hindutva ideology. But, Savarkar’s ideology failed to

realize its political goal because it lacked mass support.

He could not correctly define the notion of nationalism because Hindus, Muslims and

Christians shared common traditions in India even in the religious field. His support

for a reason, science and technology were influential in the sense that for him they were

more useful because they helped him forge a strong Hindu nation. Reason and science

in the West were the culmination of the development of social philosophy which fought

against religious prejudices and superstitions.

Despite the attacks on their thoughts of Savarkar from both theoretical as well as

practical perspectives, the distinction made by Savarkar between Hinduism and

Hindutva is outstanding. Hinduism is a religious and theological category whereas

Hindutva is a political concept and comprehends social, educational, economic,

political and cultural matters as well. It is beyond dispute that Savarkar was the first

Indian thinker who declared that Hindus formed a separate nation in India. He tried to

popularize Hindu nationalism throughout his life with the help of the Hindu Maha

Sabha. Anand, Vidya Sagar. 1967. Savarkar: A Study in the Evolution of Indian

Nationalism. Woolf: London.

11.12 EXERCISES

1. Explain V D Savarkar on Social Reforms in the context of Hindutva.

2. Describe the main attributes of Hindu Nationalism of V D Savarkar.

3. Critically examine how the Hindutva as Cultural Nationalism.

4. Make a Critical assessment of Hindu Nationalism of V D Savarkar.

37

5. Describe briefly the causes of the emergence of the politics of Hindutva in

India.

6. Write a short note on Savarkar's theory of social change from the Hindutva

perspective

7. What, according to Savarkar, is the role of social reforms in strengthening the

Hindu nation?

8. Discuss the main features of Hindu nationalism of V. D. Savarkar

11.13 REFERENCES

Appaiah, Parvathy. 2003. Hindutva. Ideology and Politics. Deep & Deep

Publications: New Delhi.

Jaffrelot, Christophe. 1999. The Hindu Nationalist Movement and Indian Politics.

1925 to the 1990s. Viking/Penguin Books: New Delhi.

Javaraiah, M. N. 2005. Ambedkar versus Hindurashtra. (Reply to Savarkar,

Golwalkar and Arun Shourie). Bahujan Media Centre: Mysore.

Keer, Dhananjay. 1950. Savarkar And His Times. First Edition. A.V. Keer:

Bombay (Mumbai).

Keer, Dhananjay. 1988. Veer Savarkar. Third Edition. (Second Edition: 1966).

Popular Prakashan: Bombay (Mumbai).

Mani Shankar. 2004. Confessions of secular a fundamentalist. Penguin Books: New

Delhi.

Noorani, A.G. 2003. Savarkar and Hindutva: The Godse Connection. Leftward:

New Delhi.

Prince, John. 2007. On the Verge of Hindutva: V. D. Savarkar, revolutionary,

convict, ideologue, c. 1905-1924. Dissertation, University of Hawai, August 2007.

Rao, Vandematharam Ramchendra. 1989. Prince among Patriots. Veer Savarkar.

U. G. Publications: Hyderabad.

Savarkar, Vinayak Damodar. 1999. Hindutva. Who is a Hindu? Seventh Edition.

Swatantryaveer Savarkar Rashtriya Smarak: Mumbai (Bombay).

Sharma, Jyotirmaya. 2003. Hindutva. Exploring the Idea of Hindu Nationalism.

Viking/Penguin Books: New Delhi.

Sharma, Sita Ram. 2007. Life and works of V.D. Savarkar. Book Enclave: Jaipur.

Sharma, Suresh. 1996. ‘Savarkar’s Quest for a Modern Hindu Consolidation’, in

Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences, Volume II, No. 2, 1996, pp. 189-215,

Shimla.

Srivastava, Harindra. 1993a. The epic sweep of V D Savarkar: An analytical study

of the epic sweep in the life and literature of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. Savarkar

Punruththan Sanathan: New Delhi.

Trehan, Jyoti. 1991. Veer Savarkar. Thought and Action of Vinayak Damodar

Savarkar. Deep & Deep Publications: New Delhi.

38

V.D. Savarkar. Political Thinkers of Modern India. Volume 14. Deep & Deep:

Publications: New Delhi (revised edition: Grover, Verinder. 1998.

V.D. Savarkar. Political Thinkers of Modern India. Volume 14. Deep & Deep:

Publications: New Delhi, pp. 185-190.

V.D. Savarkar. Political Thinkers of Modern India. Volume 14. Deep & Deep:

Publications: New Delhi, pp. 579-636.

Varma, Vishwanath Prasad. 1985. Modern Indian Political Thought. Eighth Edition

(First Edition 1961). Volume II. Laksmi Narain Agarwal Educational Publishers:

Agra, pp. 386-391 (Section Five: V.D. Savarkar).

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar: A biography of his vision and ideas. Deep & Deep:

Publications: New Delhi).

39

UNIT-12 SOCIO-POLITICAL IDEAS OF VINAYAK

DAMODAR SAVARKAR

Structure

12.1Objectives

12.2 Introduction

12.3Savarkar: Early Life

12.4 Works

12.5 Savarkar as a revolutionary

12.5.1 Arrest in London and Marseilles

12.5.2 Trial and Andaman

12.5.3 Support for Jewish State in Palestine

12.5.4 Arrest and Acquittal in Gandhi's Assassination

12.5.5 Kanpur Commission

12.5.6 Later Life and Death

12.6 Socio-Political Ideas of Savarkar:

12.6.1 Views on Social Reforms and Caste System

12.6.2 Interpretation of Indian History

12.6.3 A committed social reformer

12.6.4 Economic Ideas of Savarkar

12.6.5 Savarkar, the rationalist

12.7 Three premises

12.7.1 The supremacy of Western political and social thought in M

Savarkar’s philosophy and worldview:

12.7.2 The ‘clash’ of two different worldviews:

12.7.3 Savarkar’s agnosticism

40

12.8 The five philosophical dimensions of Savarkar

12.8.1 Utilitarianism

12.8.2 Rationalism and Positivism:

12.8.3 Humanism and Universalism

12.8.4 Pragmatism:

12.8.5 Realism In addition to the pragmatism:

12.9 Summary

12.10 Exercises

112.11 Reference

12.1 OBJECTIVES

After going through this unit, you will be able to:

Understand early life and the works of Savarkar.

Explain Savarkar as a revolutionary.

Describe Socio-Political Ideas of Savarkar.

Three premises of Savarkar’s understanding

Explain the five philosophical dimensions of Savarkar

12.2 INTRODUCTION

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was an Indian revolutionary thinker and politician. He was

a supporter of liberty as the ultimate ideal. He was also a poet, writer and playwright.

His concept of Hindutwa tried to create an inclusive collective identity. The five

elements of Savarkar’s philosophy are Utilitarianism, Rationalism and Positivism,

Humanism and Universalism, Pragmatism and Realism.

12.3 SAVARKAR: EARLY LIFE

Vinayak was born in the family of Damodar and Radhabai Savarkar in the village of

Bhagur, near Nasik, Maharashtra. He had two brothers namely Ganesh and Narayan,

and a sister named Mainabai. After the death of his parents, the elder brother Ganesh,

also known as Babarao, took care of the family. Babarao played a helpful and important

role in Vinayak's early life. During his childhood, Vinayak organized a youth group

41

described Mitra Mela (Group of Friends) and instilled revolutionary and nationalist

ideas in the group.

In 1901, Vinayak Savarkar married Yamunabai, daughter of Ramchandra Triambak

Chiplunkar. In 1902, he joined Fergusson College, in Pune. During his college days,

he was influenced by the ideas of revolutionary political leaders namely Bal Gangadhar

Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal and Lala Lajpat Rai.

In 1905, during the Dussehra festival days, Vinayak burnt foreign goods and clothes.

With his student friends, he formed a political group named “Abhinav Bharat”. For his

political activities, he was expelled from college but permitted to take his Bachelor of

Arts degree examinations. After completing his degree, a nationalist leader Shyam

Krishnavarma helped Vinayak to go to England to study law, on a scholarship.

12.4 WORKS

Veer Savarkar's literary works in Marathi contain "Kamala", "Mazi Janmathep" (My

Life Sentence), and notably "1857 - The First War of Independence", or the Sepoy

Mutiny. But Savarkar popularised the work 'First War of Independence. Another noted

book was "Kala Pani" (on the island prison of the Andamans), which reflected on the

torture of Indian freedom fighters by the British. To counter the then accepted view

that India's history was a saga of continuous defeat, he wrote an inspirational historical

book, "Saha Soneri Pane" (Six Golden Pages), recounting some of the Golden eras of

Indian history. His other books are "Mopalyanche Group" (Muslims' Strike), and

"Gandhi Gondhal" (Gandhi's Confusion). The latter book is a political critique of

Gandhi's politics. He is also the author of poems like "Sagara Pran talmalala" (O

Great Sea, my heart aches for the motherland), and "Jayostute" (written in praise of

freedom), one of the moving, inspiring and patriotic works in Marathi literature. He

composed and wrote his poems on the prison walls with thorns and pebbles, and

memorized thousands of lines of his poetry for years until other prisoners returning to

their houses brought them to India. Savarkar is credited with many popular neologisms

in Marathi and Hindi, like"Hutatma"(Martyr), "Mahapaur"( Mayor), Digdarshak

(leader or director, one who points in the right direction), Shankar (a score of six runs

in cricket), Saptahik (weekly), Sansad (Parliament), "doordhwani" ("telephone"),

"tanklekhan" ("typewriting") in the middle of others.

12.5 SAVARKAR AS A REVOLUTIONARY

Vinayak Savarkar was admitted into the Gray’s Inn Law College in London and took

a room at Bharat Bhawan (India Home) in London. India Home was a flourishing centre

for student political activists. Social and political activist Pandit Shyamji was the

driving force there. Savarkar founded the ‘Free India Civilization’ to help the Indian

students in London to fight for complete independence by a revolution. Savarkar

envisioned a guerrilla war for independence along the lines of the well-known armed

42

uprising of 1857. Learning the history of the revolt, from English as well as Indian

sources, Savarkar wrote the book, The History of the War of Indian Independence. He

analyzed the circumstances of the 1857 uprising and assaulted British rule in India as

undeserved and repressive. It was via this book that Savarkar became one of the first

writers to praise the revolution as India's "First War for Independence." The book was

banned from publication during British rule. But anyhow an exiled Indian

revolutionary- Madame Bhikaji Cama, ensured its publication in the Netherlands,

France and Germany. Clandestinely, the book was circulated and it achieved great

popularity and influenced the growing young Indians.

Savarkar had printed and circulated a manual on the creation of bombs and other ways

of guerrilla warfare amongst his friends. In 1909, Madan Lal Dhingra, a follower and

friend of Savarkar, assassinated British M. P. Sir Curzon Wylie in a public gathering.

Savarkar published an article in which he praised the murder and worked to get support

for Dhingra's legal defence. Madan Lal Dhingra was tried at the Old Bailey on July

23, 1909. During his trial, he stated that he did not regret killing Curzon Wyllie. On

August 17, 1909, he was found guilty, sentenced to death, and executed at Pentonville

Prison. Strongly protesting the verdict of the court, Savarkar fought with British

authorities in laying claim to Dhingra's remnants following his execution. Savarkar

hailed Dhingra as a hero and martyr and began encouraging revolution with greater

intensity.

12.5.1 Arrest in London and Marseilles: Elder brother Ganesh Savarkar had

organised an armed revolt in India against the Morley-Minto reforms of 1909. The

British police alleged Vinayak D Savarkar in the investigation for allegedly plotting

the crime. To avoid the arrest, Savarkar moved to Madame Cama's house in Paris. He

was however arrested by police on March 13, 1910. When the ship S.S. Morea reached

the port of Marseilles on July 8, 1910, Savarkar escaped from his cell. But, Savarkar

was re-arrested. Savarkar's arrest at Marseilles caused the French government to protest

against the British, which argued that the British could only recover Savarkar if they

took appropriate legal proceedings for his rendition. This dispute came before the

Permanent Court of International Arbitration in 1910, and it gave its decision in 1911.

12.5.2 Trial and Andaman: Arriving in Bombay he was taken to the Nevada Central

Jail in Pune. He was sentenced to 50 years of imprisonment and on July 4, 1911,

transported to the Cellular Jail in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. He was forced to

perform hard labour for several years. Obtaining permission to start a jail library,

Savarkar believed he would also teach some fellow convicts to read and write. Savarkar

appealed for clemency in 1911. In 1920, the Indian National Congress leaders like

Mahatma Gandhi, Vithalbhai Patel and Bal Gangadhar Tilak demanded his

unconditional release. On May 2, 1921, the Savarkar brothers were moved to a jail in

Ratnagiri, and later to the Yeravda Central Jail. He was finally released on January 6,

1924, but under severe restrictions- he was not to leave Ratnagiri District and was to

43

refrain from political behaviours for five years. However, police restrictions on his

behaviours were not dropped until provincial autonomy was granted in 1937.

12.5.3 Support for Jewish State in Palestine: On 19 December 1947, he supported

the claims of the Jewish people to set up a self-governing Jewish state. He regretted

India's vote at the United Nations Organisation against the formation of the Jewish state

terming the vote a policy of appeasement of Muslims.

12.5.4 Arrest and Acquittal in Gandhi's Assassination: Savarkar was a member of

the Hindu Mahasabha and RSS. Nathuram Godse was the editor of "Agrani – Hindu

Rashtra” a Marathi daily from Pune which was run by a company "The Hindu Rashtra

Prakashan Ltd." Savarkar had invested 15000 in the company. Following the

assassination of Gandhi on January 30, 1948, police arrested the assassin Nathuram

Godse and his alleged partners in crime and conspirators. After Gandhi's assassination,

Savarkar's house in Mumbai was attacked by angry mobs. Savarkar was arrested on 5

February 1948, from his home in Shivaji Park, and kept under detention in the Arthur

Road Prison, Mumbai. He was charged with murder, and conspiracy to murder.

12.5.5 Kapur Commission: On November 12, 1964, a religious programme was

organised in Pune, to celebrate the release of the Gopal Godse, Madanlal Pahwa, and

Vishnu Karkare from jail after the expiry of their sentences. Dr G. V. Ketkar, the

grandson of Bal Gangadhar Tilak, former editor of Kesari and then editor of Tarun

Bharat, who presided over the function, was arrested. A public uproar occurred both

inside and outside of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly and in both houses of the

Indian parliament. Under the pressure of 29 members of parliament, Union Home

minister Gulzarilal Nanda, appointed Gopal Swarup Pathak, M. P. and a senior

advocate of the Supreme Court of India, to enquire about Gandhi’s murder conspiracy.

Appa Ramachandra Kasar, the bodyguard, and Gajanan Vishnu Damle, secretary of

Savarkar, told the Kapur Commission that Godse and Apte visited Savarkar on or about

the January 23 or 24, which was when they returned from Delhi after the bomb incident.

12.5.6 Later Life and Death: After he was acquitted of the allegations related to

Gandhi's assassination and released from jail, Savarkar was arrested by the Congress

government, for delivering "militant Hindu nationalist speeches". He was released after

agreeing to give up political activities. He died on February 26, 1966, at the age of 83.

12.6 SOCIO-POLITICAL IDEAS OF SAVARKAR

Savarkar was influenced by the philosophy of Gopal Ganesh Agarkar, a nationalist

philosopher. Agarkar was deeply influenced by the ideas of Herbert Spencer, Jeremy

Bentham and J. S. Mill. Savarkar was a supporter of positivist epistemology and

accepted the direct evidence of the senses as the only valid source of knowledge. He

rejected the sanctity of religious scriptures and maintained that all religious scriptures

were man-made and their teaching could not be applied to all societies at all times. He

44

favoured the pursuit of science and reason and criticized the irrational and superstitious

practices of Hindus.

12.6.1 Views on Social Reforms and Caste System

Savarkar was a believer in social change. He argued that a dynamic society needed to

keep on changing following the imperatives of the time. However, in perceiving the

idea of social change, he was highly impressed by the philosophical traditions of

European thinkers, from which he borrowed the three significant characteristics of

human life.

Savarkar was a votary of social reform in the Indian society to get rid of the evil social

practices on the one hand and imbibe the virtues of modern science and reason, on the

other. Criticising the evil practices of the caste system in the Hindu society, he rejected

the chaturvarnya system as the root cause of the caste system which had given birth to

such inhuman practices like untouchability and unapproachability. The caste system

encouraged and institutionalised inequality divided Hindu society into numerous

compartments and sowed the seeds of hostility and hatred among the Hindus. Hindus

constantly became defenceless at the hands of invaders because of the caste system.

Savarkar wanted the Hindus to reject blinded faith in the Vedas and customs and

suggested acquiring material strength. He argued that Hindus should accept the

supremacy of machines and technology and break all bonding with blind faith and

customs. Savarkar was a great supporter of social freedoms and he encouraged the

Hindus to accept modern practices based on science and reason and reject the religious

superstitions and customs which impeded social progress. He believed that all the

religious scriptures were created by man therefore these were subject to the scrutiny of

reason.

12.6.2 Interpretation of Indian History: Savarkar was a strong critic of the

occupation of India by foreign invaders such as the Muslim and English rulers. The

nationalist interpretation of history found its eloquent articulation in Savarkar’s work.

Hindu Pad Padshahi, was published in 1925 and was written to analyse the rise of

Maharastra, even in the face of Muslim predominance in other parts of the country. He

commended the superb military leadership of Shivaji and interpreted his victory as a

befitting reply to the policy of barbaric aggression, violent usurpation of power,

fanatical hatred and intolerance of the Muslim leaders. He praised the system of

governance adopted by Shivaji as conforming to the system of governance as envisaged

in the religious scriptures of the Hindus.

12.6.3 A committed social reformer

After his release from jail in 1924, Savarkar took up the task of social reform with full

sincerity. He waged a war against casteism and untouchability and eagerly wrote

against the taboos regarding inter-caste marriages, sea-crossing and re-conversion. He

carried on intense propaganda in favour of mixed-caste schools through the Press and

appealed to the authorities to set up such mixed-caste schools. He was able to ensure

just, civic, humane and legitimate rights for 'untouchable' children and made them sit

along with upper-caste Hindu children in public schools. He also demanded temple

entry for the 'untouchables'. He transformed the Ganesh festival started by Tilak into

a Pan-Hindu festival. With the efforts of Savarkar, the Vithoba temple of Ratnagiri, at

45

last, witnessed the historic entry of 'untouchables'. Later, the Patient Pavan temple was

constructed which became the centre of Pan-Hindu activities. Savarkar bravely and

whole-heartedly supported Dr B.R. Ambedkar's struggle for the liberation of the

'untouchables'. Savarkar distributed sacred threads among the so-called 'untouchable'

Hindus and declared: "The people who regard untouchability which has been a disgrace

to humanity as a part of their religion are the fallen people". As part of his efforts, he

successfully organised Sahabhojan, the first Pan-Hindu dinner. At the same time,

Savarkar urged the 'untouchables' not to abandon their occupations as every occupation

had its value. Along with his supporters, he visited the slums and towns were the

'untouchables' lived, guided them, and worshipped with them.

12.6.4 Economic Ideas of Savarkar

Savarkar suggested a few broad principles of economic policy which included:

(i) To give a boost to the peasantry and the working class and the villages

which are their cradle;

(ii) The national capital is under the present circumstances mainly at the

individual level and indispensable for the development of the national

industry; manufacturing,

(iii) It also will receive due encouragement and recompense but the interests of

both the capital and labour will be subordinated to the requirement of the

nation as a whole;

(iv) Some of the key industries or manufacturers and such other items may be

altogether nationalized if the Government can afford to do so and conduct

them more efficiently than the private enterprise can do;

(v) In some cases, the Government may take over the land and introduce State

cultivation if it can serve to train up the peasant class as a whole with the

use of big machines and introduce agriculture on a large and scientific scale;

all strikes or lockouts are meant or inevitably tend to undermine and cripple

national industry or production in general or are calculated to weaken the

economic strength of the nation as a whole and therefore these must be

referred to State arbitration and get settled or in serious cases quelled;

(vi) Private property must, in general, be held inviolable and in no case, there

should be on the part of the State any expropriation of such property without

reasonable recompense; and

(vii) Every step must be taken by the State to protect national industries against

foreign competition.

46

12.6.5 Savarkar, the rationalist

Savarkar's viewpoints were completely modern, scientific and secular. He wrote:

"Let an earthquake occur, public prayer is our remedy. Let a patriot fall ill, we go

to attend a crowded prayer meeting. Let a pestilence ravage our land, and we kill

goats in sacrifice to ward off the calamity. It was quite all right when we did not

know the causes of such things, but to stick to these superstitions even when science

has revealed the cause of such calamities is simply absurd." He wanted to uphold

the principles of science in every activity of human life.

12.7 THREE PREMISES

Savarkar’s social and political philosophy is based on a rational, utilitarian and

pragmatic outlook, which leads him to put forward his opinion on pragmatic programs

in all facets of life. The whole structure of Savarkar’s thoughts is encircled by a narrow

framework of agnosticism. Consequently, each study of his philosophy must recognize

these three main premises:

12.7.1 The supremacy of Western political and social thought in Savarkar’s

philosophy and worldview

Savarkar derived his ‘philosophy’ from a variety of sources, both Indian and foreign.

For him, the “Nature of the Self” was important. For this reason, the ‘classical Indian

thought’ or so-called ‘Brahmanical thinking’ is not the key to a proper understanding

of Savarkar’s social and political philosophy. Savarkar received inspiration, guidance

and practical advice mainly from the writings and activities of political and social

thinkers in Europe. Books are written by humanists and liberal authors of the West,

spreading messages of rationalism in religion, liberty in thought and equality in

fundamental rights, which influenced Savarkar enormously. Savarkar accepted the

significance of European culture which aimed at human development. He was one of

the first few Indian thinkers to accept the new ideas that flowed from European

countries. He was extremely influenced by the philosophy and ideas of Political

Economy of James Mill and J. Stuart Mill and studied both in detail. Their ideas of

liberalism, individual freedom, and ideas on democracy had a deep impact on

Savarkar’s mind. He also followed Herbert Spencer’s ‘sociological thinking and was

inspired by his philosophy of evolution in which all phenomena of every kind were

subject to the ‘law of evolution.’ From Herbert Spencer and Charles Darwin, he learned

the controversial idea of the ‘survival of the fittest, which is, without doubt, the basic

concept of Savarkar’s ‘Panch Sheela’ towards the social and political transformation

of the Indian society. In addition to this, he strengthened his philosophical outlook by

studying the works of Jeremy Bentham. Furthermore, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and

Francois Marie Arouet (Voltaire) prompted him to study the French revolution. He was

deeply influenced by their thoughts and ideas. From all these European authors, he

studied the fundamental values of social life, interpreted them through Indian eyes, and

47

used them to propose the best approach to the social and political problems of his

countrymen.

12.7.2 The ‘clash’ of two different worldviews

Savarkar’s ideas and worldview reflect his understanding of a ‘classical philosophical

conflict’ between two phenomena which could be described as (i) world and life

Negation and (ii) world and life affirmation. This is a battle which has influenced the

Western as well as Indian philosophical worldview and religious thought. Savarkar

devoted himself to exploring all religions. He had a wide knowledge of the religious

and philosophical trends of the world. First, according to Savarkar’s worldview, two

leading streams of thoughts are outlined, the world and life negation and the world and

life affirmation. Second, Savarkar aimed at understanding the conflict between these

two philosophical benchmarks. First of all, it is possible to state that, in comparison

with the Western development, there is a tendency in Indian thought toward a world

and life negation. This does not mean that Indian thought is completely governed by a

world and life negation and Western thought are purely governed by the notion of world

and life affirmation. In both of these, there are elements of these philosophical streams

existing side by side. But in Indian thought, the ‘tendency to negation’ is the

predominant principle and in Western thought, the ‘tendency of affirmation.’

12.7.3 Savarkar’s agnosticism

Savarkar was neither a religious man nor an atheist. He did not discard religion but

accepted nothing irrational. Metaphysical statements and theological debates

concerning religious beliefs were of no interest to him. There we find a profound

influence of Bentham on Savarkar. Similarly, Spencer ‘thought it impossible to have

an appearance if there was nothing which could appear. There must be a reality

independent of thought and independent of ourselves–the Absolute.’ Savarkar’s

agnosticism finds its best expression in the following examples:

(I.) Scriptures should not be considered divine: Savarkar did not consider the

scriptures divine because these were written by unknown thinkers. It was

not to be assumed that what was written in the holy books are the last words

because according to him all religious texts are written by humans and for

humans and were, therefore, time and space-bound. Therefore, they were to

be treated as human products fulfilling human needs. The people had to be

told that they were a divine revelation for otherwise they would not have

accepted the scriptures as holy. All this religious property, however, was

meaningless to Savarkar and worthless in the age of reason which held

science and technology as the forces of progress. Savarkar concluded that

in various old texts it was possible to discover some writings that were quite

useful to the present as well as for the future. They needed to be recognised

as beneficial because they could provide valuable guidance to contemporary

48

problems and not simply because they were found in ancient texts. But for

that, ‘every thought and idea, principle and ideal found in the religious

books must be subjected to rational scrutiny and scientific test’.

(II.) Savarkar’s views on the Universe and Nature: Savarkar had unique

views about the Universe, Nature and the place of human beings within the

universe and nature. In his opinion, human beings live in this world and not

in a supernatural one. The universe had nothing to do with individuals and

how they arranged their worldly life. He argued that “the forces in the

universe are to a little degree for Man, but to a greater extent they are against

him”.He further explained, that the ‘universe exists and continues to

function by certain rules. We have to find out what they are and use them

for the benefit of mankind. We must consider that what is beneficial for

mankind is good and what makes us suffer is bad. It is strange to say what

God likes is beneficial for a man or vice versa, because they are false

notions. We live in the Universe but the Universe does not belong to us’.

To a great extent, it is unfavourable and to a very small extent favourable to

us. We must understand this and face the heavenly happenings. That is true

Nature. That is the real worship of the God of the universe. Savarkar tried

to learn the laws of Nature and those of the Universe as best as a human

being could. The need of the time is to apply them for the benefit and

welfare of the people. He remarked: “Man is the maker of his fortune and

cause of his misfortunes. No divine power does any good or evil to human

life. Man himself is responsible for the successes and failures, sweets and

bitters of his life. Reason and intelligence lead one to light and ignorance to

darkness.”

(III.) On the relation between religion and politics: Savarkar’s views on the

relations between religion and politics are another evidence of his

scepticism. Understanding religious beliefs particularly Hinduism was not

only crucial to Savarkar’s thinking this was also instrumental to his social

as well as political struggle. Against this background, Savarkar’s

application of a stronger version of Hinduism in politics was not based on

an orthodox outlook. It is also not the spiritual conviction or religious

traditionalism but it was more worldly, material and strategic. It should be

seen as a strategy, the use of elements from an already existing value-based

system guiding the greatest number of his countrymen, to create a feeling

of belongingness amongst them. He did not advocate introducing Hinduism

as a state religion, but merely as a method of defining a collective identity.

Politics was defined as the means of serving the nation and contributing to

the welfare of society.

From the above discussions we found the following viewpoints of Savarkar

on Religion:

49

(A) For him, religious worship and national and civil service are separate and distinct.

If Savarkar believed in the spiritual aspects of life, it was purely at the individual level.

(B) According to him religion is a private affair; therefore he defended religious

freedom in principle, enshrining them in the constitution of Independent India.

(C) According to him, all citizens shall have equal rights and obligations irrespective

of caste or creed, race or religion on the condition that they affirm, oblige and become

loyal to the Hindusthani State.

(D) The fundamental rights of conscience, worship, association etc. will be enjoyed by

all citizens. If there will be any restrictions imposed on them that would be in the

interest of the public peace and order. A national emergency will not be based on any

religious or racial considerations but the common national ground; and

(E) ‘One man one vote’ will be the universal principle irrespective of creed, caste, race

or religion.’

IV.) Punyabhuor Holyland: Another example of Savarkar’s agnosticism is apparent

in his use of one of his most critical terms, Punyabhu, or ‘Holyland’. The definition

‘Holyland’ is one of the most misunderstood conceptions in Savarkar’s political

thoughts on ‘Hindutva’ and leads both his antagonists as well as his protagonists

towards remarkably wrong perceptions of its meaning. Generally accepted, Punyabhu

or Punyabhumi is defined as a country where you earn your ‘religious merits’. But

Savarkar interprets this more in a patriotic way than in a religious sense. In this context,

his sense of patriotism is expressed by his notion of ‘martyrdom’, conceived as heroism

and hero-worship. If one deconstructs his attempt to define this term, it is possible to

find elements that are formulated in a religious as well as a ‘patriotic-cultural’

language. For instance, Savarkar describes Punyabhu as ‘the land of [his] prophets and

seers, of his godmen and gurus, the land of piety and pilgrimage.’

12.8 THE FIVE PHILOSOPHICAL DIMENSIONS OF SAVARKAR

From the above-mentioned framework of Savarkar’s three philosophical premises, five

main features or touchstones can be highlighted: utilitarianism, rationalism,

humanism (and universalism), pragmatism and realism.

12.8.1 Utilitarianism

Savarkar’s ‘strategic agnosticism’ is profoundly rooted in his utilitarian outlook.

Savarkar was a dedicated follower of the Utilitarian school of England, also called the

Philosophical Radicals. The objectives of this school were: the greatest good of the

greatest number, rationalism, secularism, individual freedom, and equality, the

omnipotence of education and simple living and high thinking. Savarkar understood

social and political convenience and utilitarianism are the only variables of

50

measurement for development strategies to push the society in India to a higher level.

The notion of utility, and not the sanctity of social structures through ancient documents

and tradition, was the guiding principle underlying Savarkar’s ideal of a transformed

Indian society. Furthermore, ‘the greatest good of the greatest number’ was to be not

only the ethical and moral touchstone for his countryman but also the guideline for

policymaking. In applying the tenets of utilitarianism, Savarkar did not regard them as

being of foreign origin. In his view, the concept had already been taught by Lord

Krishna. Savarkar argues this at length concerning the teachings of the Bhagavadgita

and considered Lord Krishna to be the greatest, ‘ideal utilitarian’. The sphere of

Savarkar’s utilitarian attitude is best illustrated in his extensive discussion on the place

of the ‘cow’ in Hindu society and his defence of non-vegetarianism.

(a) On the utility of the cow: Savarkar argued that what India needed was cow

protection and not cow worship. He pointed out that his demand for cow protection was

based on the notion that the cow was a remarkably useful animal. Announcing a

practical and rational view he stated, ‘the cow is neither God nor mother but purely a

useful animal. We should not worship it but we must breed and nurture the animal

because we can reap the best advantages from it. Savarkar emphasised at various times

the crucial role that cows played in a country like India where the development process

was so dependent on the performance of the agricultural sector, highlighting the

economic measurement of the cow’s role in Indian society. For that, it was necessary

to transform the Hindu mind to accept that science and not religious devotion toward

cows, was a key condition for economic growth.

(b) Defence of non-vegetarianism: His strong defence of cow slaughter combined

with non-vegetarianism is a powerful example of Savarkar’s application of utilitarian

directives. Savarkar was firmly convinced that the lack of food and the unbalanced

nourishment of his countrymen could be solved by taking to non-vegetarianism

including the consumption of cattle meat.

12.8.2 Rationalism and Positivism

As a result of his rational and positivist attitude, he was sceptical of any religious or

metaphysical propositions and excluded them from his logical reasoning. All thoughts,

comments and arguments needed to be based on logical inference and applied to

propositions grounded in observable facts. Savarkar’s social thought is based upon the

essence of science, technology and modernisation. His espousal of positivism may be

described as ‘rational-scientific materialism’, which also reflected his deep admiration

for the modern technological and scientific civilization of the West. This kind of

materialism was a ‘theory of time, change and progress’ and presupposed that one’s

intelligence ought to be the final reference point for moral and ethical values. As a

rationalist and a believer in science and technology, he rejected the idea of human

beings surrendering to Nature which he witnessed in response to phenomena such as

earthquakes, floods, eclipses of the Sun and Moon, and droughts and famines. The

51

logical truth of a tenet had to be ultimately grounded by the (physical) material world.

Savarkar also identified the limits of rationalism. In his point of view, a boundlessness

of rationalism also signified a kind of ‘bigotry’. If that happened, rationalism, instead

of being useful to the people, could harm.

12.8.3 Humanism and Universalism

Savarkar’s thinking was based on humanitarian values and he subscribed to a belief

structure founded upon faith in science, equality and liberty and not on charity or

religious considerations. Savarkar’s message was that liberty and equality were of

equal value and importance. His concern for liberty and equality should also be seen in

the light of his definition of liberty. His definition of liberty left a certain amount of

flexibility for reciprocal obligations among the members of society. Furthermore, at the

core of his notion was the concept that liberty must not be separated from duty towards

the Indian nation. Savarkar claimed not only to be rational and scientific but he also

professed devotion toward humanism and universalism as ethical values. Savarkar’s

scientific outlook was not opposed to universalism.

12.8.5 Pragmatism

Savarkar was not merely a disciple of utilitarianism but he was also a pragmatist in his

approach to the social and political challenges of his time. Following his ‘directive of

activism,’ he pursued the motto ‘be practical, not philosophical,’ stating, ‘I accept that

there is a need for philosophical and intellectual debate. I love such debates. But we

have been wasting so much of our time in such debates that we have become feeble in

practice, we have lost our kingdoms time after time. We have succumbed to foreign

aggressors. I feel more strongly about that loss’. Savarkar identified a deep

contradiction between the fatalism found in religious or philosophical doctrines and the

need for action or practical advice for the progress of Indian society.

12.8.5 Realism In addition to the pragmatism

The essence of Savarkar’s social and political philosophy lies in his distinctive sense

of realism. No thought, tradition, method, mechanism, institution or organization can

effectively serve the people of all countries, at all times and under all circumstances.

For Savarkar, human conduct had to adapt to the needs and necessities of the time and

could not remain the same forever. Savarkar was realistic enough to realize that certain

conditions were necessary for social and political progress to be possible and was aware

of the fact that carrying out reforms was a difficult and complex challenge.

Processes of change in each society did not happen ‘overnight’. Besides, for the Indian

context, he suggested that his countrymen were usually not ready or had been retarded

by too many repressing powers that had dominated the socio-political landscape. The

most excellent illustration of Savarkar’s version of realism is his firm belief in the

maxim, ‘might is right as the leading principle in International Politics’. According to

52

Savarkar, protecting the interests of one’s own country and its people had to be right.

That was the law of Nature or what Herbert Spencer expressed in his general idea of

the ‘persistence of force’. The one who was powerful and had material strength would

win kingdoms, authority and wealth. It did not matter whether he believed in the

Puranas or the Koran. We are only concerned with what happens on earth. We are not

discussing ‘life after death. Following Spencer, Savarkar argued that the state or

government needed to promote physical force more than moral feelings. ‘If you want

success on earth, you must acquire earthly power and strength. If your movement has

material strength you will succeed whether or not you have a divine blessing for it.’

12.9 SUMMARY

Savarkar welcomed the prospects of reforming society along with modern and

egalitarian principles. Therefore, he interpreted various concepts like utilitarianism,

rationalism, humanism (universalism), pragmatism and realism and tried to apply them

in the Indian context as cornerstones for the progress of his countrymen. He attempted

to compose a worldly philosophy of life consisting of a portfolio of elements drawn

from ‘classical Indian thought’, western social and political philosophy and his own

experience and observations. Therefore, the abandonment of religious scriptures and

the rejection of symbols of traditional religiosity like idol-worshipping or the theory of

rebirth as the basis of social reconstruction were necessary. Savarkar used religious

language to a tremendous extent, but at the same time, he could not agree with various

aspects of the Hindu faith. Religion and spiritualism were to him entirely personal

affairs based on faith and belief while science and technology were the constituents and

common variables in the individual’s social life as well as at the national level.

According to Savarkar, for the survival of the Indian nation in this competitive world,

some of the prevalent religious concepts and social customs that were outdated and

worthy of rejection needed to be modified. He was neither a liberal nor a socialist and

was never entrapped by a specific school of thought or any ‘Grand Theory’. Against

the background of his agnosticism and the strategic use of religion, it is truly difficult

to categorise him in terms of being ‘secular’ or ‘anti-secular’ as seen from a Western

point of view. Despite that, it is possible to state that Savarkar, given his affection

towards ‘Occidental Philosophy’, was influenced by Humanism. This emphasized the

importance of rationalism, a secular worldview, scientific materialism and a belief in a

humanistic morality and universal values as the main foundations for a progressive and

developed society.

12.10 EXERCISES

a) Write an essay on Savarkar's theory of social change.

b) What, according to Savarkar, is the role of social reforms in strengthening the

Hindu nation?

53

c) Bring out Savarkar's views on nation and state.

12.11 REFERENCE

Anand, Vidya Sagar. 1989. “Savarkar”, in Phake, Sudhir/Purandare, B. M. and

Bindumadhav JOSHI. (Eds.). 1989. Savarkar. Savarkar Darshan Pratishtnah (Trust):

Mumbai, 89-100.

Godbole, V.S. 2004. Rationalism of Veer Savarkar. Itihas Patrika Prakashan: Thane.

Jodlekar, J. D. 1994. Veer Savarkar’s Critics Answered. A reply to a Marxist calumny.

Veer Savarkar Wangmaya Pratishthan: Hyderabad.

Keer, Dhananjay. 1988. Veer Savarkar. Third Edition. (Second Edition: 1966). Popular

Prakashan: Bombay (Mumbai).

Phadnis, Pankaj K. 2002. Freedom Struggle. The Unfinished Story. Festschrift

(Dedicated to the Nation in Memory of Swatantryaveer Vinayak Damodar Siegfried O.

Wolf Savarkar). Abhinav Bharat registered Charitable Trust: Mumbai (Bombay).

Rao, Vandematharam Ramchendra. 1989. Prince among Patriots. Veer Savarkar. U. G.

Publications: Hyderabad.

Sharma, Sita Ram. 2007. Life and works of V.D. Savarkar. Book Enclave: Jaipur.

Srivastava, Harindra. 1983. Five stormy years: Savarkar in London (1906- 1911) - A

centenary salute to V.D. Savarkar. Allied: New Delhi.

Trehan, Jyoti. 1991. Veer Savarkar. Thought and Action of Vinayak Damodar

Savarkar. Deep & Deep Publications: New Delhi. Siegfried O.

V.D. Savarkar. Political Thinkers of Modern India. Volume 14. Deep & Deep:

Publications: New Delhi (revised edition: Grover, Verinder. 1998.

V.D. Savarkar. Political Thinkers of Modern India. Volume 14. Deep & Deep:

Publications: New Delhi, pp. 579-636.

Varma, Vishwanath Prasad. 1985. Modern Indian Political Thought. Eighth Edition

(First Edition 1961). Volume II. Laksmi Narain Agarwal Educational Publishers: Agra,

pp. 386-391 (Section Five: V.D. Savarkar).

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar: A biography of his vision and ideas. Deep & Deep:

Publications: New Delhi).

Wolf Vaidya, Prem. 1996. Savarkar. A Lifelong Crusader. New Age International (P)

Limited: New Delhi.