“Next to the Vedas, if there is any text that has been a pillar for our Hindu nation, shaping our culture, practices, and way of life since ancient times, it is the Manusmriti. For centuries, this Smriti has primarily guided the regulation of both the material and spiritual journeys of our nation. Even today, countless Hindus lead their lives and conduct their affairs based on laws that are fundamentally rooted in the Manusmriti. The Manusmriti continues to serve as the fundamental Hindu law.”
Setting the Record Straight
This statement by Veer Savarkar is indeed written at the beginning of his article “Ancient and Modern Women” (in Marathi in Prachin Aani Arvachin Mahila). Savarkar wrote this article in 1933 and not after Independent India accepted the Constitution on January 26, 1950. So nowhere was Savarkar opposing the Indian Constitution and advocating Manusmriti. The statement given above was not Savarkar’s opinion. Because following this statement, Savarkar adds, “Our Hindu law has been established according to this respected text. The author Bruhaspati also says this,” (Samagra Savarkar Vangmay [hereafter abbreviated as SSV] i.e. Complete Works of Savarkar, Volume 4, Editor – SR Date, Samagra Savarkar Vangmay Prakashan Samitee, Maharashtra Prantik Hindu Sabha Publication, 1963-65, Page 254).
Historical Narrative of Society
This clarifies that the first paragraph simply reflects the belief that existed in Hindu society thousands of years ago, and Savarkar is merely stating this historical fact. Nowhere in the article does Savarkar support Manusmriti. Savarkar was merely stating facts but not advocating them. Just as a judge in a court may state while sentencing punishment that a person committed theft, it doesn’t mean that the judge is endorsing the crime. Similarly, Savarkar simply narrates the social reality of that era. In the same article, Savarkar further mentions, “I am not presenting the verses from Manusmriti as unchallengeable rules to be followed. We do not consider Manusmriti as a divine scripture, but as a social history text that gives us an insight into the society of that period.” (SSV- Vol 4, Page 257). Savarkar did not view Manusmriti as an infallible, divinely inspired scripture, but rather as a historical account of that society.
In September 1934, Savarkar wrote in an article in Kirloskar, a Marathi magazine, “Ancient scriptures like the Vedas, Smritis, Puranas, etc., should be respected as historical texts and stored in museums. But the pages of the Modern Science Age should be turned. Their (Ancient scriptures) value lies in understanding what was true in the past, not in blindly following them as religious laws today. The knowledge in these texts should be subjected to the test of contemporary science, and whatever is useful for the nation, we should embrace without hesitation!” This clearly shows that Savarkar was Science-oriented, true secular and truly committed to progress.
In 1944, Hindu Mahasabha, under the leadership of DV Gokhale established a committee, including LB Bhopatkar, KV Ketkar, and MR Dhamdhere, to draft a Constitution for a free Hindustan. This draft, titled “The Constitution of Hindusthan Free State”, was adopted during the 26th session of the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha held in Bilaspur between December 24 to 26, 1944, under the leadership of Dr Syama Prasad Mookherjee. Savarkar inaugurated this session. Congress leader NV Gadgil also quoted it during constitutional debates dated Nov 18, 1949. (Constituent Assembly of Indian debates (Proceedings) Vol XI, 11.159.61 11.159.63, Date November 18, 1949, Constitution of India) The draft laid out provisions for the Fundamental Rights of Indian citizens, emphasising equality, justice, and fundamental human rights for all citizens, regardless of religion, caste, creed, race or gender. It did not seek to discriminate against non-Hindu minorities.
Champion of Democracy
It is a pseudo-secular misconception that the revolutionary, Hindutva-vadi Veer Savarkar cannot be a proponent of democracy. But if Savarkar’s literature is studied, it is found that Savarkar was a champion of democracy.
Savarkar said, ‘The Hindu Sanghanists Party aims to base the future constitution of Hindusthan on the broad principle that all citizens should have equal rights and obligations irrespective of caste or creed, race or religion, provided they avow and owe exclusive and devoted allegiance to the Hindusthani state. The fundamental rights of liberty of speech, liberty of conscience, of worship, of association, etc., will be enjoyed by all citizens alike….. No attitude can be more national even in the territorial sense than this, and it is this attitude in general which is expressed in substance by the curt formula of One Man One Vote. This will make it clear that the conception of a Hindu nation is in no way inconsistent with the development of a common Indian nation, a united Hindusthani state in which all sects and sections, races and religions, castes and creeds, Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Anglo-Indians, etc., could be harmoniously welded together into a political state in terms of perfect equality.’ (SSV- Vol 6, Page 365-366)
Speaking at Ajmer on May 20, 1938, Savarkar said, ‘The Hindu Mahasabha says that all the people living in Hindustan should get equal rights. Hindu Mahasabha never says that Hindus should have maximum rights.’ (SSV- Vol 4, Page 345-346) ‘We, though we form the overwhelming majority in the land, do not want any special privileges for our Hindudom.’ (Savarkar, VD, Hindu Rashtra Darshan, Page 294) Despite Hindus being the majority, Savarkar did not seek any special privileges for them; Savarkar was offering the same rights to minorities as the ones he was demanding for majority Hindus; he wasn’t ready to give to anyone, nor to remove, any special privileges or rights as per population. It shows he was a proponent of equality too.
In 1950, Savarkar later printed a statement of his speech given in Kolkata in which he said, ‘India has become independent. To maintain this freedom, the people should support the party which is democratically elected without taking the laws into their own hands. In my Hindu Mahasabha Presidential speeches made from 1937 to 1943, I have clearly stated that the constitution of the state should not be based on Manusmriti, Bible, or Quran, but should be based on up-to-date rationale. Since all have equal rights in the new constitution, we should treat Hindus, Muslims, and Christians who are loyal to our state with brotherhood. (Savarkar, S.S alias Balarao. SwatantryaVeer Savarkar- Sangata Parva- Vol 4, Veer Savarkar Prakashan, Mumbai, 1986, Page 88) It should be noted that Hindutva-vadi Savarkar believed that nation-building should be based on scientific temper and not on any religious text. It’s necessary to take into consideration the above democratic thoughts of Savarkar who is denounced as Manuvadi, orthodox, regressive, etc.
Savarkar wired on August 5, 1949, to the President of the Constituent Assembly in which he said: ‘I congratulate you for proving the true national character of our Indian nation.’ (Sangata Parva, Page 88) further, he said, ‘I am voicing the sense and sentiment of millions of our countrymen when I beseech the Constituent Assembly to adopt Bharat as the name of our nation, Hindi as the national language, and Nagari as the national script.’ (Keer, Dhananjay. Veer Savarkar, Popular Prakashan, Mumbai, Second Edition, 1966, Page 422). It is necessary to note that Savarkar who proclaims Hindutva, Hindu Sanghatan, and Hindu Rashtra requests to name his country ‘Bharat’ and not ‘Hindustan’. Even while defining ‘Who is Hindu?’, Savarkar mentions ‘Yasya Bharat Bhumika’ (‘यस्य भारतभूमिका’) and not ‘Yasya Hindustanbhumika’ (‘यस्य हिंदुस्थानभूमिका’).
Savarkar was very much delighted when he learned that Bharat would become an independent republic state on January 26, 1950, and issued a pamphlet dated January 24, 1950, in which Savarkar says: ‘Every citizen whose loyalty to our motherland is above suspicion, unconditional and whole-hearted cannot but join rejoicingly [sic] the national celebrations on that day to commemorate the emancipation of our motherland from the British bondage. Let us sink our petty squabbles over provincialities, personalities and party platforms on that day and present a trailed front on the only one and common platform—the platform of our motherland—to proclaim our national victory to the world.’ (Savarkar, VD, Historic Statements, Pages 141-142).
Savarkar’s Organiser Interview
Savarkar in his last interview given to the Organiser magazine in 1965, said, ‘My India would be a democratic state in which people belonging to different religions, sects or races would be treated with perfect equality. None would be allowed to dominate others. None would be deprived of his just and equal rights of free citizenship, so long as everyone discharged the common obligations which he owed to the State as a whole.’ (Organiser, Diwali 1965) Until the end of his life, Savarkar’s faith in democracy, humanity, equality, and universal brotherhood was unshakable.
Savarkar never said that the nation should run on Hindus’ opinions. His only yardsticks to find out whether anything was good or bad were ‘human interest’ and ‘national interest’. In an article titled Don Shabdat, Don Sanskruti (Two Cultures in Two Words), he said, ‘Whether something is good or bad for the nation is easy to determine; we can prove it by actual experiment. However, to determine whether something is appropriate according to scriptures is not possible even for Brahmadev.’
Savarkar insisted that Bharat would gain the reputation of being a modern, advanced, and powerful nation only if the basic guiding philosophy for the nation was ‘a scientific temper’. Savarkar believed that scientific temper was not only important for the welfare of the nation, but also for social reforms, the human race, and moral development. And that is why we see that Savarkar’s social reforms stood on the strong foundations of humanity and scientific temper. The Constitution of India has also included the basic duty of Indian citizens in Article 51A (h) which states that ‘to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform.’ Therefore, Savarkar’s views were never contradictory to the Indian Constitution, on the contrary, consistent with it.
‘Untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. The enforcement of any disability arising out of untouchability shall be an offense punishable in accordance with law.’ (Constitution of India, Article 17). The day when this law was enforced, Savarkar called it a ‘Golden Day’. Additionally, he wrote two articles on this bearing the title, Janmjat Asprushyatecha Mrutyulekh (Obituary of Untouchability—Part One and Two). In this article, he says, ‘The great announcement is so important that it needs to be carved on an eternal column like the Ashok Stambha. All the efforts made by hundreds of monks, social reformers, and politicians over the past several centuries to demolish innate untouchability succeeded on the day this law was announced.’
In a Marathi poem Aik Bhavishyala (Listen to the future), Savarkar says: ‘I will liberate myself, and will liberate the world to protect the creativity, the love, the unity, and the equality.’ It means Savarkar’s dream was the freedom of humanity to liberate itself and liberate the world. However, despite having grand and sublime ideas and being a poet’s heart, he was very pragmatic. He comprehends that nationalism is the only path to achieve the goal of complete humanism. ‘We must first prove that we are all capable of surviving as a national or social union before supporting humanitarian values,’ he said. (SSV- Vol 6, Page 97)
Therefore, Savarkar’s nationalism is consistent with democracy and humanism. According to him, the ultimate goal of all political and social activities is to create and unite the whole world as one administrative unit, humanity as one religion, and the earth as one nation. This was always the core of his opinions. Democracy, equality, humanity, rationalism, utilitarianism, scientific temper, and practicability were Savarkar’s guiding principles. Therefore, Savarkar’s thoughts hold importance for humanity, even today.
Comments