The history and politics of Vande Mataram

The history and politics of Vande Mataram




Anandmath
is replete with glorification of incidents of “cleansing” of Muslims
like the following one: "The rural people ran out to kill the
Muslims...they torched their houses and looted their everything. 



By Shamsul Islam

The
song Vande Mataram is in news once again, though for wrong reasons. The
current controversy started with a meeting organized by the minority
cell of the BJP in the city of Taj Mahal, Agra on February 25. This
meeting, organized in order to mobilize Muslims for the forthcoming
parliamentary elections, ended up with about 50 of Muslim invitees
singing Vande Mataram. Interestingly, singing of Vande Mataram in this
meeting was an exception as the BJP meetings in general do not have
singing of this song on agenda. The controversy started when a local
Muslim cleric (see MG, 1-15 April 2004) came out with a “fatwa”
decreeing that all the Muslim singers of the Vande Mataram by singing
it indulged in polytheism and as a consequence ceased to be Muslims.
The mufti also decreed that their marriages stood annulled and they
should re-solemnise their marriages. 

Vande Mataram Translation by Aurobindo Mother, I bow to thee! Rich with thy hurrying streams, Bright with thy orchard gleams, Cool with thy winds of delight, Dark fields waving, Mother of might, Mother free. Glory of moonlight dreams, Over thy branches and lordly streams, Clad in thy blossoming trees, Mother, giver of ease, Laughing low and sweet! Mother I kiss thy feet, Speaker sweet and low! Mother to thee I bow. Who hath said thou art weak in thy lands, When the swords flash out in twice seventy million hands, And seventy million voices roar, Thy dreadful name from shore to shore? With many strengths who are mighty and stored, To thee I call, Mother and Lord! Though who savest, arise and save! To her I cry who ever her foemen drive, Back from plain and sea, And shook herself free. Thou art wisdom, thou art law, Thou our heart, our soul, our breath, Thou the love divine, thou the awe, In our hearts that conquer death. Thine the strength that nerves the arm, Thine the beauty, thine the charm, Every image made divine, In our temples is but thine. Thou art Durga, Lady and Queen, With her hands that strike and her swords of sheen, Thou art Lakshmi lotus-throned, And the Muse a hundred-toned, Pure and perfect without peer, Mother, lend thine ear. Rich with thy hurrying streams, Bright with thy orchard gleams, Dark of hue, O candid-fair, In thy soul, with jeweled hair, And thy glorious smile divine, Loveliest of all earthly lands, Showering wealth from well-stored hands! Mother, mother mine! Mother sweet, I bow to thee, Mother great and free! 'Vande Mataram' translated by Sri Aurobindo. This note of his about this translation is very significant: "It is difficult to translate the National Anthem of Bengal into verse in another language owing to its unique union of sweetness, simple directness and high poetic force."  [Quoted in Bhabatosh Chatterjee (ed.), Bankim Chandra Chatterjee: Essays in Perspective, Sahitya Akademi, Delhi, 1994, p. 601.]

Interestingly, the Hindutva gang has been raking up this issue
periodically as part of Muslim-bashing since Independence, especially
on the eve of elections. As part of anti-Muslim propaganda they coined
the slogan "Iss desh maen rehna hae to Vande Mataram kehna hoga" (If
you want to live in this country, you will have to sing Vande Mataram).


The fundamental problem with Indian
nationalist symbols like Vande Mataram is that by simply adding
Muslim/minority angle to these, one can thwart any serious scrutiny and
worthwhile debate about the pre-Independence controversies over these
symbols. The Hindutva gang, especially the RSS which played absolutely
no role in the anti-colonial freedom struggle, now wants to cover up
its betrayal by posing as the sole guardian of nationalist symbols like
Vande Mataram.


A thorough scanning (undertaken by this
author) of the pre-Independence literature/documents published by the
RSS shows that there is absolutely no reference there to Vande Mataram,
what to talk of singing it. Startlingly, Vande Mataram as a term does
not appear in the writings of KB Hedgewar and MS Golwalkar either. And
after Independence the same gang wants to use this song to beat Muslims
with.



The protagonists of a democratic-secular India have failed in exposing
the Hindutva stalwarts who have been pitting Vande Matram against the
National Anthem, Jana Gana Mana and denounce Muslim and Sikh
fundamentalists for their non-allegiance to the Tricolour and the
National Anthem, the two symbols of Indian nationalism. The secular
India has miserably failed to corner the Hindutva gang which itself
wants to replace the secular National Anthem by Vande Mataram and the
Tricolour by saffron flag. This is abundantly clear from the practice
of the RSS shakhas, and the RSS vision of replacing the Indian
democratic-secular state with a Hindu rashtra.


A section of the so-called Muslim
leadership, devoid of common sense and ignorant of nationalist
heritage, reacted to the Hindutva game plan along expected lines.
Playing into the hands of Hindutva brigade 'Muslim leaders' like the
Agra Mufti simply provided legitimacy to its strategy of
Muslim-bashing. Unfortunately, even a section of secular Muslims have
shown panic reaction by declaring that Muslims should not object to the
singing of this song. They innocently believe that Muslims by not
singing this song are inviting wrath of Hindutva. They overlook the
fact that even Dalits, Christians, Buddhists and other minorities, who
have not raised objections against Vande Mataram, have not been spared
by the Hindutva gang. 



The need of the hour is that we should not run away from a serious
debate on the issue of the Vande Mataram under one pretext or the
other. In order to know the truth and understand the whole controversy
over Vande Mataram it is important to be familiar with the following
facts which have been gathered from wide pre-Independence sources.



Vande Mataram was dogged by one controversy or another from the day it
was first printed in Banga Darshan (edited by Bankimchandra Chatterjee)
in 1875. It was a strange composition in the sense that it was written
in two languages. The song consisted of 4 stanzas, the first two in
Sanskrit and the rest in Bengali. Poet Navin Chandra Sen, a close
friend, told Bankim after reading the song: "You see, it is all good,
but the whole thing is spoilt by your potpourri of half Bengali and
half Sanskrit. It reminds me of Govind Adhikari's Jatra songs. People
do not like it."1 In fact, this song was not known by many despite the
fact that Jadu Bhatt, a renowned singer of those days and a
contemporary of Bankim, liked the song and set it to an attractive
tune. The situation did not change even in 1882 when Bankim included
this song in his controversial novel Anandmath. Rabindranath Tagore
composed a new tune for this song in 1885 but despite its rendering by
a very popular Bengali poet it did not attract much attention.



Interestingly, Vande Mataram which came to be known as the “national
song” was composed by Bankim as a “Bengal anthem”, nothing more. The
imagery of the countryside and references to Durga were certainly
confined to Bengal. In this song he is seen concerned about Bengal only
aloof from any emotional attachment to India. Even Sri Aurobindo
(Aurobindo Ghose), propounder of Hindu nationalism in India, translated
it as the "National Anthem of Bengal".2 

Bankim, as we will see in the translation done by Aurobindo, referred
to “seven crores” [70 million] of people worshipping motherland. This
was the population of the then Bengal Province (which, besides what is
now Bangladesh, included Bihar and Orissa too). So the crucial fact
should not be missed that Vande Mataram touted as symbolizing “Mother
India” was in fact meant to glorify Bengal only, a rather narrow and
regional perspective.



Many are not aware that this song was scantly known during the lifetime
of Bankim himself. In his lifetime it did not capture popular
imagination though it was sung at all Congress sessions by people who
identified Indian nationalism with Hindu ethos. It remained confined to
a fringe group. 



In 1905 came Curzon's announcement of the partition of Bengal, and
suddenly Vande Mataram turned into a national mantra, renting the skies
with the protest against the partition of Bengal. Reacting quickly, the
British government banned the song or even raising it as a slogan.
People of Barisal in Bengal bore the brunt of police brutality for
singing this song. Peasant leader Abdul Rasul, was presiding over the
Bengal Congress provincial conference session of 1906 when hundreds
were struck down and grievously injured for singing Vande Mataram. This
brutality at Barisal popularized the song overnight. According to
Bengalee of May 23, 1906, "an unprecedented procession of Hindus and
Muslims singing national songs and crying Vande Mataram and
Allah-o-Akbar passed through all the principal streets of the town.
Both Hindus and Mussalmans carried Vande Mataram flags."3 It is
interesting to know that while Vande Mataram was banned in Bengal, the
British government allowed the Bengali Regiment to attack German
trenches during the first world war with Vande Mataram on their lips.



Soon Vande Mataram became the opening note of all the Congress
gatherings. And the two, Congress and Vande Mataram, became
inseparable, until the early 1930s, when a new controversy about the
song broke out within the ranks of the party. Sections of Muslims,
Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Christians, South Indians, secular groups and
even Arya Samajis, objected when the Congress decided to finalize it as
the “national song”. Vande Mataram glorified idol worship, they argued,
as it referred to only Hindu deities (it must be shocking for the
present-day Hindutva brigade that the song does not even once refer to
Ram), and that it expressed only a regional aspiration (it is partly in
Bengali and allegorically talks of “Bengal” as India).



Another objection raised by Muslims and secular Indians said that Vande
Mataram was part of the novel Anandmath, which glorified the
annihilation of Muslims and not the British rule in India. This
objection was very relevant, as even a cursory glance of the novel will
prove. The novel was replete with glorification of incidents of
“cleansing” of Muslims like the following one: "The rural people ran
out to kill the Muslims while coming across them. In the night, some
ones were organized in groups and going to the Muslim locality, they
torched their houses and looted their everything. Many Muslims were
killed; many of them shaved their beards, smeared their bodies with
soil and started singing the name of Hari. When asked, they said, we
were Hindus. The frightened Muslims rushed towards the town in group
after group. The Muslims said, Allah, Allah! Is the Kortn Sareef (sic)
(holy Koran) proved entirely wrong after so many days? We pray namaz
five times but couldn't finish the sandal-pasted Hindus. All the
universe is false."4



Bankim's novel simultaneously glorified the colonial British rule. It
portrayed the British masters as saviours of Hindus. This love for the
British masters and exploiters was clearly visible in the last few
lines of Anandmath. When the Hindu army (Santan rebels) was able to
defeat Muslim rulers and move on to fight the British too, a mystic
leader (Satyananda) appeared and told them: "Your mission has been
successful. You have performed the well-being of the Mother. The
English reign has been established. You give up the war and
enmity-mood. There is no more enemy. The Englishman is our ally King.
Moreover, none possesses such power who can win the war with the
Englishmen ultimately."5 Thus the great leader of Hindu rebellion was
finally able to convince Santans about the historic utility of the
British Raj for the resurrection of the Hindu kingdom and many of them
went to Himalayas renouncing this world. Anandmath, which heralded the
Hindu nationalist movement, is full of such perceptions.



The Congress, which under Jawaharlal Nehru's leadership wanted an
all-inclusive nationalism with special stress on Hindu-Muslim unity,
responded positively to these objections. The Congress Working
Committee (CWC) after long deliberations at Wardha and Bombay appointed
a committee consisting of Jawaharlal Nehru (president of the Congress),
MK Gandhi, Abul Kalam Azad and Subhashchander Bose in its Calcutta
meeting (Oct 26-November 1, 1937). 

This high profile committee on Vande Mataram issued a historic
statement on October 28, 1937 with the aim to resolve the controversy.
The statement made it clear at the outset that the first two stanzas of
the song had no religious allusions and only these were commonly sung
even in Bengal. It went on to observe that "the use of the first two
stanzas of the song [which] spread to other provinces and a certain
national significance began to attach to them. The rest of the song was
very seldom used and is even now known by few persons. These two
stanzas described in tender language the beauty of the motherland and
the abundance of her gifts. There was absolutely nothing in them to
which objection could be taken from the religious or any other point of
view."6

The CWC went on to emphasize that "the other stanzas of the song are
little known and hardly ever sung. They contain certain allusions and a
religious ideology which may not be in keeping with the ideology of
other religious groups in India. The Committee while recognizing the
validity of objections raised by Muslim friends to certain parts of the
song... recommend that “wherever the Bande Matraram is sung at national
gatherings only the first two stanzas should be sung, with perfect
freedom to the organizers to sing any other song of an unobjectionable
character, in addition to, or in the place of, the Bande Matraram
song."7



With this judgment the controversy should have been over. But it
didn't. It seems ironical that the present-day champions of Vande
Mataram did not figure anywhere in the struggle against the British.
They cannot name a single martyr for freedom, and their slogans for
Hindu Rashtra only helped the British masters’ divide-and-rule policy
and supplemented the services of persons like Jinnah. The propping up
of an old controversy thus seems to be only for playing the same old
game of dividing the Indian people. The truth of the matter is that
Vande Mataram is just another move in the dangerous game the
fundamentalists are involved in: confusing and dividing people.

NOTES:

1. Cited in P. Thankappan Nair, Indian National Songs and Symbols, Firma, Calcutta, 1987, p. 32.

2.Cited in Bhabatosh Chatterjee (ed.), Bankimchandra Chatterjee: Essays
in Perspective, Sahitya Akademi, Delhi, 1994, p. 601.

3. Cited in P. Thankappan Nair, p. 38.

4. Arabinda Das, Abbey of Delight (English translation of Bankimchander
Chatterjee's Anandmath in Bengali), Bandna Das, Kolkata, 2000, pp.
161-162.

5. Ibid, pp. 191-194.

6. AICC Papers on microfilms, Accession No. 8612 [Roll No. 51], Nehru
Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi, pp. 0852-0854.

7. Ibid.

Here is the original page

Should conversions be banned?

M Jamil

August 5, 2006

Recently, the state legislature in Madhya Pradesh has approved a law aimed at making religious conversions harder there.

The law says a person wishing to convert and the priest conducting the ceremony will have to inform the authorities in advance. The new law provides for a year in prison and cash fines to the person who converts and the priest who conducts the ceremony without informing the authorities.

This is hardly India's first instance of such a law.

In 2005, the government in Rajasthan introduced a law banning religious conversion. Three years ago, politicians in Gujarat approved a controversial bill ostensibly designed to stop forced religious conversions.

In 2002, the state legislature in Tamil Nadu passed an ordinance banning religious conversions-though the new government led by DMK announced in May that the law would be annulled soon.

Evidently, these laws are the state governments' reaction to the depressed classes pointing to the lack of socio-economic development as their reason for quitting the Hindu fold.

But does India want to be compared to Islamic states that are imprisoned by an impoverished idea that apostasy should lead to death or death threats?

Mass conversions by the Dalits, whether to Islam or Christianity, have always projected a political message. Mostly, it is an effort by the weaker sections to draw the attention of the government to their development needs.

In many cases, there are "re-conversions" after governmental intervention and promises of corrective measures by the district administration.

A section of the media and political establishment would claim that mass conversions or threats of mass conversions create social tension in the affected area and the government is forced to act in the interests of those threatening conversion.

More importantly one must ask: is banning religious conversion constitutional?
From a layperson's perspective, Article 25 (1) of the Constitution states that "subject to public order, morality and health and other provisions of this part (Part III), all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion."

Under the freedom of speech which the Constitution guarantees, any religious community is free to persuade others to join their faith. Thus, conversion by free exercise of the conscience has to been recognised and cannot be banned under the constitution.

Arya Samajists, for example, should be free to carry on "Sudhi" ceremonies, open to Buddhists, Christians, Jains, Muslims, Sikhs, and every other religionist, so long as they follow public order, morality and other conditions that have to be observed in any civilised society.

One may argue that the Constitution explicitly grants one the right to transmit or spread one's religion by an exposition of its tenets, but not the right to convert through force or social and economic "bribes".

It has to be remembered that Article 25 (1) guarantees "freedom of conscience" to every citizen and not merely to the followers of one particular religion.

Thus, there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion because, if a person undertakes the conversion of a person to his religion as distinguished from his effort to transmit or spread the tenets of his religion, that would impinge on the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens.

This specious reasoning which proceeds on the premise that a person's freedom of conscience gives him the right to practice his own religion ignores that the same freedom of conscience gives him the right to choose another religion and to be converted to another religion.

Sometimes when a person learns about the virtues of another religion and the advantages of following it, he may be persuaded to be converted.

In other words, propagation of religion with a view to its being accepted by a person gives an opportunity to the latter to exercise his right to choose his religion. Hence, the prevention of conversion infringes the right to be converted or to choose another religion and thereby infringes his freedom of conscience.

What is meant by the "ban on conversions?'"

The Constitution clearly empowers each individual to preach his own religion and each to choose his own religion. Based on this, if one chooses to change his religion, there can be no law preventing him from doing so. Apart from the legality, it goes against history and human nature to impose a total ban on conversions.

In addition to Christians, Hare Krishna's and Muslims proselytising, Buddhist monks went to Cambodia, China, Japan, Sri Lanka and other places in the Far East spreading Buddhism.

Though on a small scale, the Arya Samajists are converting or reconverting people of others faiths to Hinduism. Often conversion is a result of marrying outside a person's faith. For instance, when a Hindu marries a Jew or a Christian.

Of course, all these conversions are made peacefully, by persuasion.

Instead of a fracas on preventing conversions, there should be a national debate on why people choose to be converted. If it is by force, fraud or undue influence, such conversions can be prevented by legislation.

But one of the strongest motivations for converting to another religion is low socio-economic status. These individuals feel that they can live with more dignity as members of the religion to which they are converting.

Though untouchability was abolished by the Constitution, it still persists throughout India. For example, in many hotels water is served in separate glasses to the Dalits (who make up 250 million of India's population).

Although the Constitution provides certain safeguards to protect persons who suffer from low socio-economic status, the past 56 years since the Constitution came into being has proved that they are not adequate.

Measures have to be taken immediately to improve their economic and social status to such an extent that they do not convert in order to enjoy a better life as members of a new religious group, but because they genuinely feel convinced of the tenets of that religion.

Hopefully, we will see a day when every person voluntarily chooses which religion he wishes to practice and the expression "conversion" loses its meaning.

India, which is known for its tolerance, has lived with Christianity for almost two thousand years, Zoroastrianism for 1,400 years and Islam for over a millennium.

Let us all remember the words of Mahatma Gandhi: "I do not expect India of my dreams to develop one religion, i.e., to be wholly Hindu or wholly Christian or wholly Mussalman, but I want it to be wholly tolerant, with its religions working side by side with one another."

Maqbool Jamil is based in United States and can be reached at drj8666@hotmail.com.

Click here for Source