Savarkar: Some Miscellaneous
Points to Ponder and Muse Over
Shrikant G. Talageri
This is what one wonders when one sees the extent to which these apostles of hatred go in order to malign and degrade him. I just saw an article by one such merchant of hate named Raju Parulekar:
https://rajuparulekar.wordpress.com/2023/06/03/real-savarkar-and-veer-bhakts/
Incredibly, see the very first paragraph of this vicious article:
“Two historical mistakes should be set right when we write and speak about Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. First, excessive glorification of his sufferings. There’s no point glorifying these sufferings as Savarkar had chosen this path himself, just like the other revolutionaries. Savarkar must have been fully aware of the fact that once we choose a path of life, we are responsible for its consequences, we must bear this in mind. Savarkar was not sent to the Andaman for leading a normal life. Neither by the people nor by the British. It was an unavoidable outcome of the path of life that he chose.
Second mistake that we must avoid is to compare Savarkar’s life with that of any of his contemporaries or from the current times leading a simple, normal life. His comparison shall be drawn with a similar person, who chose a revolutionary life like him. A revolutionary’s life can be compared with that of another revolutionary or a person who has led a freedom fighter’s life, not with a person sitting and writing in an air conditioned room. Even though his followers may not like this, it is a bitter truth that Savarkar does not score much in comparison with his contemporary revolutionaries. His followers purposely compare his life with those people who have led a comparatively quieter life. As a matter of fact, many of his contemporary freedom fighters and even those before and after him were tortured and executed in Andaman. Most of them belonged to the Bengal Presidency and Bengal State. Approximately 173 of his contemporary inmates were charged with capital punishment. Thousands died while serving ajail term. Freedom fighters like Sanyal were imprisoned at Andaman, twice. Many others went through indefinite torture. However, none of them sought mercy from the British, fell on their knees in front of them and none of them were released from the jail.”
When he can write this
about a man who “had chosen this path himself”,
not for any kind of personal monetary gain, then or at any later point of
time, then what must this vicious animal be saying about soldiers who fight
for the country when there is a war, and die fighting for their country, who
have also “chosen this path”
themselves, and who, when there is no war, have enjoyed all kinds of special
monetary and other privileges and facilities as members of the armed forces? I
mean, just what are monsters like this man made of?
I wonder what this
person would say if the government were to pass a law that anyone who writes
this kind of thing about Savarkar should be sentenced to exactly the same
sentence of isolated and rigorous imprisonment in the Andaman islands cellular
jail, in circumstances identical to those faced by Savarkar, and for the same
period of time? Would he “fall on his knees” to try to get out of the
jail or would he happily suffer 11 years of imprisonment in the cellular jail
because he himself had chosen to do what he was imprisoned for?
But no. he provides the
answer himself above: “A revolutionary’s life
can be compared with that of another revolutionary or a person who has led a
freedom fighter’s life, not with a person sitting and writing in an air
conditioned room.” As he himself wrote his article sitting in an air
conditioned room, naturally, it proves that he did not behave like Savarkar,
cannot be compared to him, and cannot therefore be considered worthy of similar
sentence and punishment!
Since Savarkar was a freedom fighter who did not end up “executed”, he apparently does not deserve any respect and he really deserved to rot in the Andaman jail till he died, but people like himself “sitting and writing in an air conditioned room”, who have contempt for Savarkar, deserve respect and clemency. He places Savarkar against “contemporary freedom fighters and even those before and after him [who] were tortured and executed in Andaman”: but people who have contempt for Savarkar necessarily have contempt for those freedom fighters as well. This sadistic maniac should visit the Savarkar Smarak near Shivaji Park at Dadar, Mumbai, to see the vast portrait gallery of revolutionary freedom fighters, and to see how people who respect Savarkar necessarily respect them with equal fervor.
It is incredible that
such people exist, and would biologically have to be classified as human
beings!
On the other hand, I
also just received the following mail from the BJP mouthpiece Swarajya
magazine, titled “This is Savarkar’s India…As Much as Gandhi’s − Your
bold purchase on Veer Savarkar’s Death Anniversary”, offering a poster
of Savarkar for sale:
“The cowards call Veer Savarkar a "coward".
The man who instilled such fear in the hearts of
British that they couldn't risk his freedom.
The man who faced solitary confinement, inhuman
labor, unimaginable horrors in Cellular Jail, not for days or months, but over
a decade.
The man who penned The First War of Independence.
The man who inspired countless freedom fighters
and dreamt of a Bharat unshackled, unapologetic, and united.
Let’s get this straight: This is as much
Savarkar’s India as it is Gandhi’s. More so today when Hindutva is the fulcrum
of India's politics.
Gandhi has been immortalised using a calculated
campaign for over 7 decades — from our currency to national holiday to our
foreign policy language. On the other hand, as calculatively, Savarkar has been
vilified in a deliberate malicious campaign.
Time to correct it. Time to give Savarkar his
due. Time to make Savarkar as much a part of our private and public lives as
Gandhi, if not more.
Swarajya's Veer Savarkar poster is a statement
towards the same.
Imagine this iconic frame adorning your study,
office, or living room—a daily challenge to history's half-truths and a tribute
to real patriotism. Gift it to someone who respects India's true heroes.
On the occasion of Savarkar's Punyatithi, this bold purchase can
be your declaration that this is Savarkar's Bharat
And yes, limited stocks.”
Yes, the BJP
loves Savarkar as much as it loves Gandhi.
But, apparently, not as
much as it loves the following people, all of whom (along with so many
others) have been awarded the two highest civilian honors, Bharat Ratna
or Padma Vibhushan by the BJP government:
Bharat Ratna: Pranab Mukherji (2019), Karpoori Thakur (2024),
Chaudhary Charan Singh (2024).
Padma Vibhushan: Parkash Singh Badal (2015), Dilip Kumar (2015), Karim al Hussaini Aga Khan (2015), Sharad Pawar (2019), P.A.Sangma (2019),
George Fernandes (2024), Arun Jaitley (2024), Sushma Swaraj (2020), Wahiduddin
khan (2021), Mulayam Singh Yadav (2023).
The number of other
political figures who have got the next two highest civilian honors, Padma
Bhushan and Padma Shri, will be too long to list here.
Savarkar has never been seen fit by the BJP government
to be awarded even the lowest of the four: Padma Shri! Of course,
the BJP government did not award any of these honors to Gandhi
either, and neither did any other government: apparently the Supreme Court
had once ruled that Gandhi was above any award:
Ergo: the BJP
feels Veer Savarkar is “much higher than any
civilian honor”, just like Mahatma Gandhi! This is proof
positive that in the eyes of the BJP, “This is Savarkar’s India…As
Much as Gandhi’s”.
Finally, in a lighter
mood, here is what is generally called a “fun fact”: or rather, a
photograph of one of my very favorite authors, Charles Hamilton,
(pen-name: Frank Richards, as the writer of Billy Bunter
books, and, according to the Guinness Book of Records,
“the most prolific writer” in the world, “estimated to have
written about 100 million words in his lifetime”, and that too, in the
pre-computer days):
Shrikantmaam, Raju Parulekar is really bottom-of-the-barrel trash - no surprises then, that he holds such views on Savarkar. Regarding Savarkar's petitions, I'll just say this: Shivaji Maharaj also signed the Treaty of Purandar, as well as aligning with the Adilshahi at times against the Mughals - does that make him a "maafiveer"? Going by Parulekar's opinions (and those of his ilk), he does qualify as one; but then anyone with a bit of sense and a basic grounding in Maratha history would immediately figure out that all this was calculated psychological warfare on the part of Shivaji Maharaj, and not some meek surrender to the sultans.
ReplyDeleteAlso, since this is about Savarkar, I have a question regarding the larger community to which Savarkar belonged i.e. the Chitpavan Brahmins: I have heard that Chitpavan Brahmins are actually an offshoot of the wider Saraswat Brahmin community, dating back to the 8th-9th century when our Saraswat ancestors left Kashmir and eventually landed up in Goa, Konkan and Kanara. Is this historically true, or is this just a pseudo-scholastic claim that is devoid of any evidence? If yes, then is the theory of Chitpavans being originally from the province of Seistan (in present-day Iran), and their subsequent exodus from there to India, in order to escape religious persecution under the Arab conquerors, true? Could you throw some light on this?
I have never heard this story. I only know that in my first book in 1993, I had written the following:
Delete“Chatterji can locate only one specific community which is noted for a combination of fair skin and coloured eyes: the Chitpavan Brahmanas of Maharashtra. This, doubtless, is expected to corroborate the theory that the "Aryan invaders" constitute the higher rungs of the caste hierarchy. Unfortunately for Chatterji, the Chitpavan Brahmana community of Maharashtra is in fact a community which, according to its own traditions, consists of people who were not Brahmanas to begin with, and who arrived on the scene long after the establishment of Vedic culture all over India. The Chitpavan Brahmanas are the subject of a thesis (ESP/20, University of Bombay, Kalina Campus Library, 1928) by Mrs. Iravati Karve (herself a Chitpavan). She points out that "as late as AD 1200, they were poor farmers leading a life of seclusion and poverty. The first Peshwa, himself a Konkanastha Chitpavan Brahman, was the first to make conscious attempts to give a lift to his own community... We are told that they were ignorant and despised, and were usually employed as cooks and peons... At first, the Deshasthas would not dine with these intruders" (pp. 1-2 of the thesis). She also relates (pp. 11-13) "an old and curious myth (which) is inextricably bound up with the Chitpavans and their land. It is widely accepted in Maharashtra as explaining the origin of the Chitpavans as also of their name." According to this myth, Parashurama, having donated all his land to Kashyapa, wanted land of his own. So he reclaimed land from the sea. He had no Brahmans to perform the rituals, since the Brahmans from the mainland refused to perform them. While wandering on the beach, he discovered a wrecked ship and 14 corpses of men washed ashore. He brought the corpses back to life (ciids:lone prabandh, hence "Chitpavan"), and made them Brahmans. Later, however, thcy disobeyed him, and he caused their land, Konkan, to become barren and unproductive. There is another version (p. 22), according to which Parashurama initiated into Brahmanhood a group of 60 families of fishermen. Disregarding the miraculous elements, the purport of this myth is clear: the ancestors of the Chitpavan Brahmanas were foreigners washed ashore after a shipwreck, and never really accepted as proper Brahmans for a long time by other more orthodox Brahman groups. This, therefore, disproves Chatterji's claim that the Chitpavan Brahmanas represent the purest racial strain of the "Original Aryan race".
Shrikantmaam, thank you very much for your answer that cleared things up. Interestingly, your mention of Chitpavan Brahmins not being "accepted as proper Brahmans for a long time by other more orthodox Brahman groups" reminds me of what Wikipedia says about us Saraswat Brahmins. To quote Wikipedia here:
Delete"Saraswats of western India claim to be part of the Saraswat brahmin community of the north based on the Sahyadri Khanda of Skanda Purana. As per the Purana, Parshurama brought Saraswats to Konkan. However, Sanskrit scholar Madhav Deshpande, Indologist and Sanskrit Scholar Stephan Hillyer Levitt and historian O'Hanlon consider the portion of the Sahyādrikhaṇḍa that describes Saraswats to be corrupted and recently interpolated by Saraswats themselves in order to improve their status".
Is this true? Are our ancestors also an example of upward caste mobility?
As I have written in all my articles, after coming south we (like all people who migrate) have got intermixed with all kinds of other communities especially from the Maharashtra-Goa-Karnataka belt. So, "ethnically", the original northern strand may be just one strand in our ancestry. But it is the strand which carries on the linguistic heritage brought from the north. If you read my article "Is or Was Konkani a Dialect of Marathi", you will see all the linguistic evidence for our northern origin (tonal accents, complex inflectional morphology in the conjugation of verbs, nasal vowels, many items of vocabulary such as the words for dog and water, etc.). Whether the Sahyadri Khanda is original or not is a matter for experts in that field, but our northern origin case is not primarily based on the Sahyadri Khanda but on our own traditions and the linguistic evidence.
Delete