As my #WhoAmI continues, so is my learning of our national heroes.
As I am going through the book by the name "Pakistan or Partition of India" by B.R. Ambedkar sir, today I was going through the part dedicated to Hindu Maha Sabha. My salute to Savarkar sir for having such an uncluttered mind about Swaraj.
#HindusofBharat ... wake up before it's too late...
Mr. Savarkar lays great stress on a proper understanding of the terms, Hinduism, Hindutva, and Hindudom.
He says, “In expounding the ideology of the Hindu movement, it is absolutely necessary to have a correct grasp of the meaning attached to these three terms. From the word “Hindu” has been coined the word “Hinduism” in English. It means the schools or system of Religion the Hindus follow. The second word “Hindutva” is far more comprehensive and refers not only to the religious aspects of the Hindu people as the word “Hinduism” does but comprehend even their cultural,linguistic, social and political aspects as well. It is more or less akin to “Hindu Polity” and its nearly exact translation would be “Hinduness”. The third word “Hindudom” means the Hindu people spoken of collectively. It is a collective name for the Hindu World,just as Islam denotes the Moslem World.”
“Swaraj to the Hindus must mean only that in which their “Swaraj”, their “Hindutva” can assert itself without being overlorded by any non-Hindu people, whether they be Indian Territorials or extra-Territorials— some Englishmen are and may continue to be territorially born Indians. Can, therefore,the overlordships of these Anglo-Indians be a “Swarajya” to the Hindus ? Aurangzeb or Tipu were hereditary Indians, nay, were the sons of converted Hindu mothers. Did that mean that the rule of Aurangzeb or Tipu was a “Swarajya” to the Hindus? No! Although they were territorially Indians they proved to be the worst enemies of Hindudom and therefore, a Shivaji,a Gobindsingh, a Pratap or the Peshwas had to fight against the Moslem domination and establish real Hindu Swarajya.”
As part of his Swaraj, Mr. Savarkar insists upon two things.
Firstly, the retention of the name Hindustan as the proper name for India.
“The name “Hindustan” must continue to be the appellation of our country. Such other names as India, Hind, etc., being derived from the same original word Sindhu may be used but only to signify the same sense—the land of the Hindus, a country which is the abode of the Hindu Nation. Aryavarta, Bharat- Bhumi and other names are of course the ancient and the most cherished epithets of our Mother Land and will continue to appeal to the cultured elite. In this insistence that the Mother Land of the Hindus must be called “Hindustan”, no encroachment or humiliation is implied in connection with any of our non-Hindu countrymen. Our Parsee and Christian countrymen are already too akin to us culturally and are too patriotic and the Anglo-Indians too sensible to refuse to fall in line with us Hindus on so legitimate a ground. So far as our Moslem countrymen are concerned it is useless to conceal the fact that some of them are already inclined to look upon this molehill also as an insuperable mountain on their way to Hindu-Moslem unity. But they should remember that the Muslims do not dwell only in India nor are the Indian Muslims the only heroic remnants of the Faithful in Islam. China has crores of Muslims. Greece, Palestine, and even Hungary and Poland have thousands of Muslims among their nationals. But being there a minority, only a community, their existence in these countries has never been advanced as a ground to change the ancient names of these countries which indicate the abodes of those races whose overwhelming majority owns the land. The country of the Poles continues to be Poland and of the Grecians is Greece. The Moslems there did not or dared not to distort them but are quite content to distinguish themselves as Polish Moslems or Grecian Moslems or Chinese Moslems when occasion arises, so also our Moslem countrymen may distinguish themselves nationally or territorially whenever they want, as “Hindustanee Moslems” without compromising in the least their separateness as Religious or Cultural entity. Nay, the Moslems have been calling themselves “Hindustanis” ever since their advent in India, of their own accord.
“But if in spite of it all some irascible Moslem sections amongst our countrymen object even to this name of our Country, that is no reason why we should play cowards to our own conscience. We Hindus must -not betray or break up the continuity of our Nation from the Sindhus in Rigvedic days to the Hindus of our own generation which is implied in “Hindustan”, the accepted appellation of our Mother Land. Just as the land of the Germans is Germany, of the English England, of the Turks Turkistan, of the Afghans Afghanistan—
Even so, we must have it indelibly impressed on the map of the earth for all times to come a “Hindustan”—the land of the “ Hindus”.
The second is the retention of Sanskrit as the sacred language, Hindi as the national language, and Nagari as the script of Hindudom.
“The Sanskrit shall be our Deva Bhasha our sacred language and the “Sanskrit Nishtha” Hindi, the Hindi which is derived from Sanskrit and draws its nourishment from the latter, is our Rashtra Bhasha our current national language—besides being the richest and the most cultured of the ancient languages of the world, to us Hindus the Sanskrit is the holiest tongue of tongues. Our scriptures, history, philosophy, and culture have their roots so deeply embedded in the Sanskrit literature that it forms veritably the brain of our Race. Mother of the majority of our mother tongues, she has suckled the rest of them at her breast. All Hindu languages currently today whether derived from Sanskrit or grafted onto it can only grow and flourish on the sap of life they imbibe from Sanskrit. The Sanskrit language therefore must ever be an indispensable constituent of the classical course for Hindu youths.
What is to be the position of the non-Hindu minorities under the Swaraj as contemplated by Mr. Savarkar?
On this question, this is what Mr. Savarkar has to say :
“When once the Hindu Maha Sabha not only accepts but maintains the principles of “one man one vote” and the public services to go by merit alone added to the fundamental rights and obligations to be shared by all citizens alike irrespective of any distinction of Race or Religion .... any further mention of minority rights is on the principle not only unnecessary but self-contradictory. Because it again introduces a consciousness of majority and minority on Communal basis. But as practical politics requires it and as the Hindu Sanghatanists want to relieve our non-Hindu countrymen of even a ghost of suspicion, we are prepared to emphasize that the legitimate rights of minorities with regard to their Religion, Culture, and Language will be expressly guaranteed: on one condition only that the equal rights of the majority also must not, in any case, be encroached upon or abrogated. Every minority may have separate schools to train up their children in their own tongue, their own religious or cultural institutions and can receive Government help also for these,—but always in proportion to the taxes they pay into the common exchequer. The same principle must of course hold good in the case of the majority too.
“Over and above this, in case the constitution is not based on joint electorates and on the unalloyed National principle of one man one vote, but is based on the communal basis then those minorities who wish to have separate electorate or reserve seats will be allowed to have them,—but always in proportion to their population and provided that it does not deprive the majority also of an equal right in the proportion of its population too.”
That being the position assigned to the minorities, Mr. Savarkar concludes that under his scheme of Swaraj:
“The Moslem minority in India will have the right to be treated as equal citizens, enjoying equal protection and civic rights in proportion to their population. The Hindu majority will not encroach on the legitimate rights of any non-Hindu minority. But in no case can the Hindu majority resign its right which as a majority it is entitled to exercise under any democratic and legitimate constitution. The Moslem minority in particular has not obliged the Hindus by remaining in the minority and therefore, they must remain satisfied with the status they occupy and with the legitimate share of civic and political rights that is their proportionate due. It would be simply preposterous to endow the Muslim minority with the right to exercise a practical veto on the legitimate rights and privileges of the majority and call it a “Swarajya”. The Hindus do not want a change of masters, are not going to struggle and fight and die only to replace an Edward by an Aurangazeb simply because the latter happens to be born within Indian borders, but they want henceforth to be masters themselves in their own house, in their own Land.”
And it is because he wants his Swaraj to bear the stamp of being a Hindu Raj that Mr. Savarkar wants that India should have the appellation of Hindustan.
And here we go...
My unending love for Bharatmata - coming out of me naturally.
Enjoy my experience in a pretty early morning.
Hey Bharatmata - i bow down my head in front of you.
My Bharat - my love - my passion - my mother...
