The Wire - 19 May 2016
General Vijay Kumar Singh is a soldier and a Rajput. He has in
abundance a soldier’s perseverance and a Rajput’s pride. A soldier is
expected by training to do his duty unflinchingly, a Rajput is expected
by custom to speed to battle in a cloud of dust and determination,
returning only if victorious.
A general must retire when the time comes for him to do so. V. K.
Singh has retired from the Indian Army. But no Rajput retires from being
a Rajput. Singh is a Rajput forever.
The former army chief’s wish to have New Delhi’s Akbar Road re-named
as Maharana Pratap Singh Road has to be seen as a retired soldier’s
fascination for military history and an un-retirable Rajput’s untiring
Rajput chromosomes.
No one can fault a lion for roaring.
With no war declared, no one bugling him to battle, Singh’s instincts
and training have made him turn from the solatiums of the present to
the stimulations of the past. He has created a diorama of the battle
fought four hundred and forty years ago at Haldighati between Maharana
Pratap Singh and Akbar’s army commander Man Singh. There is true passion
in the box-scenes, true nostalgia, true kinship. To the former general
from the Rajput Regiment, I offer a salute for his miniaturisations of
soldierly courage and a khamaghani for the magnifications of Rajput
pride.
But the matter cannot be left there. His recommendation has been made
as a minister. To another minister. And that, in an official letter.
With that the idea goes beyond the cloisters of an individual’s
imagining to the chambers of public office. It makes the suggestion a
communication of a minister’s idea, made by him as minister, to another
minister who is thought by the ‘sending’ minister to be the right
‘receiving’ minister for that minister’s ministerial action. All this
anoints the recommendation with the governmental equivalent of
rose-water, which is, the official ink.
Unless withdrawn by him or officially disowned by the union
government, his recommendation cannot be taken as an individual’s stray
thoughts. It has to be seen as a reflection, howsoever individualised,
of this government’s ideological gradient, its historical mount, its
political axle.
And those are patent enough.
Hindutva
B.R. Ambedkar gave a now famous message to the All India Depressed
Classes Conference at Nagpur in 1942 – Agitate, Educate, Organise. That
can be re-worked in Hindutva’s vocabulary as ‘Regurgitate, Resuscitate,
Polarise’. Regurgitate old prejudices, resuscitate dying biases,
polarise communities. Of these, the first two are about methods, the
third is about policy. And the policy is to polarise India first, on
religious lines as between Hindus and Muslims and then, on thinking
lines as between those who want India to be plural and those who want it
to be Hindu-dominated, between those who want India to be liberal and
those who want it to be tersely majoritarian. In other words, polarising
India between India that is Bharat and India that is Bharatiya, between
India that is Hind and an India that is Hindu.
The re-naming of Aurangzeb Road as A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Road had
little to do with Aurangzeb. It had less to do with Kalam. It had
everything to do with polarising, with wanting to turn the knife in
India’s Hindu-Muslim duality. It had little to do with history and
everything to do with politics. It had little to do with social memory
and everything to do with communal manipulation. It was about
regurgitating memories of Mughal bigotry, resuscitating ‘Aurangzeb the
Bad’ and, above all, polarising Bharat and Hind.
Aurangzeb Road was renamed A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Road, ‘Bad’ Muslim to
‘Good’ Muslim, with a hidden snigger. The call for turning Akbar Road
into Maharana Pratap Singh Road, great Muslim to great Hindu, is being
made with an open sneer. The first re-naming idea was clever, this one
is morbid. The first caused a gasp of astonishment, this stifles the
breath of belief.
Akbar
Akbar is ‘Akbar the Great’ not because he was a great Mughal but
because he was, simply, exceptional. In his use of power for creating a
nation unified by a moral direction, Akbar ranks with Ashoka and with
Ashoka alone. Not just the Hindustan he ruled but the India of
subsequent centuries has recognised him as one who “died as he had
lived for many years, a man whose religion nobody could name” – an
ideal condition for the ruler of a country with many religious
traditions. Akbar stands at a rare intersection of scholarly esteem and
popular endorsement as a figure of national convergence.
His urbane treatment of India’s Hindu majority including his marrying
Hindu princesses, doing away with the outrageous pilgrim tax and the
appointment of Hindus to the highest possible military and civilian
commands can be interpreted as acts of political canniness as indeed
they were. But his extension of the same civility to Jains, Parsis and
Christians has to have had inner roots in eclecticism. If the
Din-i-Ilahi stabilised his throne and burnished his personal image, it
also becalmed the country.
Akbar sought to build trust. He tried to win and retain the
confidence of his people in his impartiality, his justice. Ashoka
erected pillars and carved edicts across his empire to proclaim the
Dhamma; Akbar built the Ibadat Khana (House of Worship) in his gardens
at Sikri to be used as a discussion hall to debate, in a free and
enquiring spirit, questions of religion and theology.
Does Singh not know this? Of course he does. But then he is captive, captive to the ideology of his political party.
Why, four and a half centuries on, should Akbar’s name on a road make
him want to erase it? Is pluralism threatening? Is debate unwelcome? Is
civility shown by a Muslim a challenge?
Or has it become necessary, urgently necessary now, to further
Hindutva consolidation, and here through the great veins of Rajput
self-pride?
The answer is patent.
Hindu consolidation
The minister could have asked for a brand new building, flyover or a
road to be named after the lion-hearted Maharana Pratap Singh of Mewar. I
do not know if Mansingh Road is named after Akbar’s commander or
another of the same name. If the former, that name could in some logic
though in bad form, have been sought to be renamed but that would not
have satisfied their Hindutva. Replacing Akbar’s name on the New Delhi
road by that of Akbar’s brave adversary, does. It does so by staging a
proxy Haldighati, a diorama battle in which the great Mughal becomes
‘the oppressor’ and the great Rana the liberator, the great Mughal
becomes the Muslim and the great Rana becomes the Hindu. It continues
Hindutva’s plan to un-ravel, strand by strand, the great weave of
India’s pluralism. It continues the self-deluding and India-defeating
agenda of Hindu consolidation.
It is not about the person any more. It is about the religion.
Babur Road, Humayun Road, Akbar Road, Jehangir Road, Shahjahan Road
have all been placed by road re-namers on a death row. They will all
have Maharana Pratap equivalents. Ashoka Road will be a harder case.
Unless of course someone suggests that it be re-named Kalinga Marg.
Supporting Singh’s recommendation, a BJP spokesperson has said that
road names such as Akbar Road’s should go because they represent India’s
oppressors. Imagine, she said, Israel having a road named after Hitler.
One can be sure that from ‘the other side’, there will be equally
intemperate and ill-tempered howls of protest comparing Hindus to the
Nazis, Indian Muslims to the Jewish victims of the second world war.
The re-namings do not have to be done, as they say, ‘actually’. It is
enough for purposes of consolidation that they be recommended. Twist
the lime-drop into the milk and wait for it to curdle. The khoya can
take its own time. And so, suggest, suggest, recommend, recommend. And
do nothing more. Sit back and let ‘them’ fight. The next re-naming
tranche could be recommended for places – Allahabad, Aurangabad,
Ahmedabad, Hyderabad, Secunderabad, Nizamabad, Shahjahanabad, Faizabad,
Ahmednagar, Fatehpur… And then for cultural signets. Soft power is a
phrase of dubious distinction used for another gambit of suspicious
intent, cultural diplomacy. This re-naming fever is about soft warfare,
cultural politics. If, in Pakistan and elsewhere the beautiful Khuda
Hafiz has been sought to be replaced by Allah Hafiz, Hindutva will want
to and try to replace Jai Hind! By Bharat Mata ki Jai!. And the simple
Namaste with Jai Sri Krishna! to be responded, do not forget, by Radhe!
Radhe ! But that will be tough, in Tamil Nadu certainly where, thanks to
Periyar and the Dravidar movement, speakers of that classical language,
despite all their piety, will not countenance replacing Vanakkam with
Jai this or that deity.
Rend, rend, that which time has stitched; tear , tear what time has
darned. And cut, cut what has stayed whole. This is what Muslim bigotry
and Hindu consolidation are about.
Sare Jahan Se Achcha
Sadly, however, for the zealots, and fortunately for India, its people, for Hum Bharat Ke Log or Hum Hind Ki Awam,
are just that many, that many too many, and too many too sensible, to
be bamboozled by the cultural demagoguery, political roguery and
emotional thuggery. We do not want to be good or bad Muslims, good or
bad Hindus. We just want to be fortunate citizens, fortunate in the
intentions of our rulers, fortunate in their wisdom not their
cleverness, in the honesty of their hands not the smartness of their
fingers. Our rulers cannot be Ashoka or Akbar. But they can try to be
their heirs. Nehru did, Ambedkar did. What did they re-name ? Nothing,
certainly not India. They kept that name, adding to it a grand synonym,
Bharat. And that is what Rakesh Sharma celebrated, I am sure, when
gazing down at the Time-carved peninsula of India from his sky-seat, he
answered Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s question of how India looked
from ‘up there’, with ‘Sare Jahan Se Achcha’.
Today’s rulers, in their mundane seat of brief office can never,
howsoever hard they may try, ever hope to erase the shape of Hindustan
from the name and style India that is Bharat.