Book Discussion
Nathuram Godse killed Mahatma Gandhi in order to save
Hindus from emasculation. Gandhi was making Hindu men effeminate, incapable of
retaliation. Revenge and violence are required of brave men, according to Godse.
Gandhi stripped the Hindu men of their bravery and transmuted them into “sheep
and goats,” Godse wrote in an article titled ‘Non-resisting tendency
accomplished easily by animals.’
Gandhi had to die in order to salvage
the manliness of the Hindu men. This argument that formed the foundation of
Godse’s self-defence after Gandhi’s assassination was later modified by
Narendra Modi et al as: “Hindu khatre mein hai,” Hindus are in danger. So
Godse has reincarnated now.
Godse’s hatred of non-Hindus has now become the driving force of Hindutva in India. It arose primarily because of the hurt that Godse’s love for his religious community was hurt. His Hindu sentiments were hurt, in other words. Gandhi, Godse, and the minority question is the theme of the first chapter of Neeti Nair’s book, Hurt Sentiments: Secularism and belonging in South Asia.
“Godse’s view on Muslim appeasement
forms the bedrock of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s ideology today,” writes Ms
Nair. From the time Modi became the prime minister in 2014, India's Muslims
have been victimized in ways that far exceed what the Mughals did to the Hindus
of their time. The Muslims have had to endure economic, social, and cultural
marginalisation. Their population remains disproportionately poor and
uneducated. They suffer from impediments in access to the scant social
resources available to the poor. Government, police, and the public all
discriminate against them whenever possible. They are not given access to jobs
in the police and armed forces where they used to find jobs earlier. It was
fashionable for certain state governments to bulldoze Muslim houses in 2022,
until the supreme court intervened in the matter. The Citizenship Amendment Act
particularly targets Muslims.
We can safely say that Godse has had
his revenge. The Muslims have become aliens in their homeland for all practical
reasons, except the wealthy and powerful few.
Who is right, however:
Godse or Gandhi? Neeti Nair explores that question in the first chapter of her book. I’ll
discuss a couple of subsequent chapters too in the coming posts. I’m not
summarising Nair’s content here. I’m discussing a few of her viewpoints and in
the process a lot of my own views make their appearance.
Nair underscores Gandhi’s sane view
that all people, irrespective of their religion, who have chosen India as their
homeland have an equal right to it as the Hindus. Godse’s view was that India
was for Hindus. Since Pakistan was created for Muslims, Muslims should leave
India. Godse had no sympathy for other religious communities as well.
Godse’s masculinity lay in hatred of
certain people on account of their religion. Nonviolence of the brave that
Gandhi preached remained beyond Godse’s puny brain.
It is quite absurd for anyone to
imagine that a country should belong to a particular religious community today
when people leave their own countries and settle down anywhere at all. More
than 200,000 Indians are giving up their citizenship every year now to
live abroad happily. Citizenship is relinquished, please digest that. There are
100 million Hindus living outside India. India, with a Muslim population of
approximately 200 million, has the world's largest Muslim community in a
non-Muslim-majority country. How ridiculously absurd is it to say that India
belongs to Hindus and only Hindus!
Even Jawaharlal Nehru wasn’t
interested in giving special privileges to the minority communities in the
country, Neeti Nair shows. She quotes Nehru: “As a matter of fact nothing can
protect such a minority or a group less than a barrier which separates it from
the majority.” In other words, Nehru wanted the Muslims and other religious
communities in the country to live in a symbiotic relationship with the
majority community.
The Muslims, particularly, chose to
stay apart, as Ms Nair quotes one K R Malkani who was the editor of The
Organiser [Hindu mouthpiece] in India’s toddler days. The Muslim chooses to
be different, Malkani argued, with his naming patterns, cow slaughter,
circumcision, dress, language… Take away these things from the Muslim, and he
is no longer very different from us.
Though Malkani was a hardcore
right-winger, there is some truth in what he wrote. The Muslims should make an
effort to integrate themselves with the others in the country instead of
insisting on being different. I’m not justifying Malkani because his motive
wasn’t quite good; he was trying to subsume the Muslim culture under Hinduism
which is not acceptable. Let every culture flourish. Let there be diversity.
Why are the Hindu right-wingers so much obsessed with oneness as in One Nation,
One Religion; and One Nation; One Election? At the same time, the Muslims need
to learn to live in harmony with others.
Ms Nair quotes B R Ambedkar: “The
minorities in India have agreed to place their existence in the hands of the
majority… they have loyally accepted the rule of the majority which is
basically a communal majority and not a political majority. It is for the
majority to realise its duty not to discriminate against minorities, whether
the minorities will continue or will vanish must depend upon this habit of the
majority. The moment the majority loses the habit of discriminating against the
minority, the minorities can have no ground to exist. They will vanish.”
The minorities will vanish by
attaining a symbiosis with the majority. That is the ideal way of solving the
conflict. Instead if we all insist on upholding our differences, which aren’t
substantial anyway, we will continue to fight ad infinitum, ad nauseam, ad
absurdum.
PS. Read a preview of Neeti Nair’s book here.
This post is part of
the Bookish League blog hop hosted by Bohemian Bibliophile
Hari OM
ReplyDeleteVery interesting. Being as much of Australia as of Britain, I can vouch for the melting pot of nationalities, cultures, habits and mores. OZ not a perfect example, but is as near to one as has been possible thus far on "Slice Earth." By allowing folk to live by their own codes, as long as permitted within the national codes of their accommodating country, seems to be the way. Share your cultures, but do not seek to impinge them upon others or disrespect those others who may have a different way. All too often, when we all sit down together, we find the things that are common to us all, rather than the differences. YAM xx
Instead of finding the similarities, we look out for differences and thus create problems. Politics is the actual reason. Then comes religion. As I said in the post, there are some people who insist on highlighting their differences.
DeleteOh, the old masculinity excuse. I wonder about those men. What they feel they need to compensate for. So, of course they would hide behind religion.
ReplyDeleteReligion is a good shield for people's cowardice as well as a lot of other vices.
DeleteInteresting, well written
ReplyDeleteI think we live in a stupid world, a peace order created after witnessing the first and second world wars has been steadily on the decline. This is thanks to the men who view life as their privilege and take the impoverished minds to be their slaves and not equals. Look at the US now. North Korea, Russia, Afghanistan...all with their idiotic inhumane acts in the world overrun by humans. I feel religion, population and inability to see beyond their own nose turns men like Godse heroes. All radical ideas should be chopped to bits, maybe this in itself is radical. But we need peace amongst humans and for that we need more Gandhis and Nehrus, the ideology of secularism. And Dr Ambedkar gave up his religion and turned to Buddhism in his quest for equality and goodwill.
ReplyDeleteThis was such an interesting read. The essence of India lies in its diversity. Not only is it impossible to make Indians one homogenous mass it is also completely undesirable. There's no end to it - first we talk of muslims, then other religions, then caste and region and gender and on it goes.
ReplyDeleteThe whole question of faith and religion is so complicated! Your review is compelling. I have not really studied or tried to know Godse, to me he was always the Mahatma's assassin not worthy of being glorified.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, the title of the blog post caught my attention. We have always seen the narrative of Godse vs Gandhi in India. Ofcourse in the past few years, Godse has been applauded and Gandhi villified. What we forget is that both were men, with their own flaws. Unfortunately in our country right now, there is no place for sane discourse, only bulldozers and violent rhetoric
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your review, I know very well that this book is not for me. I might just tear it apart.
ReplyDeleteI have seen a person (from a particular religion) being all religious and vegetarian (due to religion) at home, and outside the house he eats anything and everything. Why the double standards?
Also, being religious is one thing. Being violent, cruel, using foul language and betraying friends are vices that no God has taught. So why are people so obsessed with converting people to their religion? Is it ego?
Reading such books boils my blood and gives me sleepless nights. But what needs to be said, needs to be said I suppose? At least through such books and conversations about them we know what kind of people we aren't and would never be
ReplyDeleteThis book would make me so angry but I also see why its important to read it. I always wonder what our politicians are so afraid of. What does harmony threaten? Their own sense of grandeur I suppose. Its rather sad that for someone who is running a country, their vision is so narrow.
ReplyDeleteyour post reminded me of the talk I listened by Manu S Pillai in context of his book Gods,guns and missionaries. Puts the entire idea of religion, cultures, differences in perspective and the various creeds that play a role in the religion angle. I look forward to reading both neeti nair and manu pillai.
ReplyDeleteGodse, in my mind, has always been a small, scared man who could not stand up against the British and sided with Hitler and his destructive ideology. To see him glorified in recent years has been appalling. Across the world, though, right-wing ideology and fascism seem to be taking root again, which is also pretty alarming.
ReplyDeleteAs much as I feel this book is a must read, I will probably not pick it up any time soon since it is just going to make me angrier than ever. Honestly, the the concept of secularism is a sham in India. The target community may change. The perpetrators may change. Those in power continue to create a divide.
ReplyDelete