Vinayak Damodar Savarkar | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Born | (1883-05-28)28 May 1883 |
| Died | 26 February 1966(1966-02-26) (aged 82) Bombay, India |
| Occupations |
|
| Known for | Hindutva |
| Political party | Hindu Mahasabha |
| Spouse | [1] |
| Relatives | Ganesh Damodar Savarkar (brother) |
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar[a] (28 May 1883 – 26 February 1966) was an Indian politician and ideologue. Savarkar developed theHindu nationalist political ideology ofHindutva while confined atRatnagiri in 1922. The prefix "Veer" (meaning 'brave') has been given by himself, when he penned his own biography under the pseudonym Chitragupta.[2][3] He was a leading figure in theHindu Mahasabha.[4][5]
Savarkar began his political activities as a high school student and continued to do so atFergusson College inPune.[6] He and his brother founded a secret society calledAbhinav Bharat Society. When Savarkar travelled to England for his law studies, he involved himself with organisations such asIndia House and theFree India Society. He also published books advocating complete Indian independence by revolutionary means.[7] One of the books he published calledThe Indian War of Independence about theIndian Rebellion of 1857 was banned in British India.[8]
In 1910, Savarkar was arrested by British authorities and sentenced to be extradited back to India as a result of his involvement with India House. Upon returning to India, Savarkar was sentenced to 50 years of imprisonment at theCellular Jail in theAndaman and Nicobar Islands. He was released in 1924 after writing a series of mercy petitions to the British.[9] Savarkar virtually ceased his criticism of British rule in India after he was released from jail.[10] After being released from his restriction to Ratnagiri district in 1937, Savarkar started traveling widely, becoming a prominent orator and writer who advocated for Hindu political and social unity. In his Ahmedabad addressal, he supportedtwo-nation theory.[11] The Hindu Mahasabha under Savarkar's leadership endorsed the idea of India as aHindu Rashtra (Hindu nation).
In 1939, the rulingIndian National Congress (INC) resigned en masse over Britain declaring India a belligerent inWorld War II. The Hindu Mahasabha under Savarkar formed alliances with theAll-India Muslim League and other non-INC parties to form government in many states. Subsequently, the INC, under Gandhi's leadership, launched theQuit India Movement; Savarkar boycotted the movement,[12] writing a letter titled "Stick to your Posts" and recruiting Indians for the British war effort.[13] In 1948, Savarkar was charged as a co-conspirator in theassassination of Mahatma Gandhi; he was acquitted by the court for lack of evidence.[3]
Savarkar was born on 28 May 1883 to aMarathi HinduChitpavan Brahmin family, to Damodar and Radhabai Savarkar in the village of Bhagur, near the city ofNashik,Maharashtra.[14][15] He had three other siblings: two brothers,Ganesh and Narayan, and a sister named Mainabai.[16] Savarkar began his activism as a high school student.[6] When he was 12, he led fellow students in an attack on his village mosque following Hindu-Muslim riots, stating: "We vandalised the mosque to our heart's content."[17][18] In 1903, in Nashik, Savarkar and his older brother Ganesh Savarkar founded the Mitra Mela, an underground revolutionary organisation, which becameAbhinav Bharat Society in 1906.[19] Abhinav Bharat's main objectives were to overthrow British rule and revive Hindu pride.[20]
_Narayan%2c_Ganesh_and_Vinayak%2c_with_Shanta%2c_sister_Maina_Kale_and_Yamuna.jpg)
Savarkar continued his political activism as a student atFergusson College inPune.Savarkar was greatly influenced by the radical nationalist leader,Lokmanya Tilak. Tilak was in turn impressed with the young student and helped him obtain the Shivaji Scholarship in 1906 for his law studies inLondon.[6][21] To protest against Bengal partition of 1905, Savarkar led foreign-clothes bonfire in India with other students in presence ofBal Gangadhar Tilak.[22]
In London, Savarkar got involved with organisations such asIndia House and theFree India Society. He also published books advocating complete Indian independence by revolutionary means.[7] One of the books he published calledThe Indian War of Independence about theIndian Rebellion of 1857 was banned by the British colonial authorities.[23]
Savarkar was influenced by the life and thinking of Italian nationalist leader,Giuseppe Mazzini. During his stay in London, Savarkar translated Mazzini's biography in Marathi.[24] He also influenced thinking of a fellow student calledMadanlal Dhingra. In 1909, Dhingra assassinatedCurzon Wyllie, a colonial officer. It is alleged by Mark Juergensmeyer that Savarkar supplied the gun which Dhingra used. Juergensmeyer further alleged that Savarkar supplied the words for Dhingra's last statement before he went to the gallows for the murder. Savarkar metMohandas Gandhi for the first time in London shortly after Curzon-Wyllie's assassination. During his stay, Gandhi debated Savarkar and other nationalists in London on the futility of fighting the colonial state through acts of terrorism and guerilla warfare.[25]
In India, Ganesh Savarkar organised an armed revolt against theMorley-Minto reforms of 1909, and was sentenced to life imprisonment on theAndaman islands.[26][27] Around the same time Vinayak Savarkar was accused of participating in a conspiracy to overthrow British rule in India by organising murders of various officials.[28] Hoping to evade arrest, Savarkar moved toBhikaiji Cama's home in Paris,[29] but against advice from his friends, returned to London. On 13 March 1910, he was arrested in London on multiple charges, including procurement and distribution of arms, waging war against the state, and delivering seditious speeches. At the time of his arrest, he was carrying several revolutionary texts, including copies of his own banned books. In addition, the British presented evidence that he had smuggled 20Browning handguns into India, one of whichAnant Laxman Kanhere used to assassinate the Nasik district's collectorA.M.T. Jackson in December 1909.[28] During the trial ofNasik Conspiracy Case 1910, government's advocate alleged that Savarkar was a moving part and inspiration behind assassination of Jackson. A Bombay court tried him in the Nasik conspiracy case and sentenced him for life-imprisonment and transported him to the notoriousCellular Jail of Andaman Island and forfeited his property.[30][31]
Although his alleged crimes were committed both in Britain as well as India, the British decided to try him in India. He was subsequently put on the commercial ship SSMorea with a police escort for his transport to India. When the ship docked in the French Mediterranean port ofMarseille, Savarkar escaped by jumping from the ship's window, swam to the French shore, and asked for political asylum. Local French port officials ignored his pleas and handed him back to the police escort onMorea. When the French government was informed of the incident, they asked for Savarkar to be brought back to France, and lodged an appeal with thePermanent Court of Arbitration.[32][33][28]
| Savarkar | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Permanent Court of Arbitration |
| Full case name | Arrest and Return of Savarkar (France v. Great Britain) |
| Decided | 24 February 1911 |
| Case history | |
| Prior actions | Accused of crime, evading arrest |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | M. Beernaert, president, elected by panel Louis Renault Earl of Desart G. Gram Alexander de Savornin Lohman |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Unanimous panel |
Savarkar's arrest at Marseille caused the French government to lodge a protest against its British counterpart, arguing that Britain could not recover Savarkar unless it took appropriate legal proceedings for his rendition. The dispute came before thePermanent Court of International Arbitration in 1910, and it gave its decision in 1911. The case excited much controversy as was reported widely by the French press, and it considered it involved an interesting international question of the right of asylum.[34]
The Court held, firstly, that since there was a pattern of collaboration between the two countries regarding the possibility of Savarkar's escape in Marseille and there was neither force nor fraud in inducing the port authorities to return Savarkar to them, the British did not have to hand him back to the French for the latter to hold rendition proceedings. On the other hand, the tribunal also observed that there had been an "irregularity" in Savarkar's arrest and delivery over to his police escort.[35]
Arriving inBombay, Savarkar was taken to theYervada Central Jail inPune. The trial before the special tribunal was started on 10 September 1910.[36] One of the charges on Savarkar was the abetment to murder of Nasik CollectorA. M. T. Jackson. The second was waging a conspiracy under Indian penal code 121-A against the King Emperor.[37][38] Following the two trials, Savarkar, then aged 28, was convicted and sentenced to 50-years imprisonment and transported on 4 July 1911 to the Cellular Jail.[4][better source needed]
Savarkar applied to the Bombay Government for certain concessions in connection with his sentences. However, by Government letter No. 2022, dated 4 April 1911, his application was rejected and he was informed that the question of remitting the second sentence of transportation for life would be considered in due course on the expiry of the first sentence of transportation for life.[39] A month after arriving in the Cellular Jail, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Savarkar submitted his first clemency petition on 30 August 1911. This petition was rejected on 3 September 1911.[40]
Savarkar submitted his next clemency petition on 14 November 1913 and presented it personally to the Home Member of the Governor General's council, Sir Reginald Craddock.[41] In his letter, he described himself as a "prodigal son" longing to return to the "parental doors of the government".[b] He wrote that his release from the jail will recast the faith of many Indians in the British rule. Also, he said
Moreover, my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail, nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise.[43]
In 1917, Savarkar submitted another clemency petition, this time for a general amnesty of all political prisoners. Savarkar was informed on 1 February 1918 that the clemency petition was placed before the British colonial government.[44] In December 1919, there was a Royal proclamation byKing George V. The Paragraph 6 of this proclamation included a declaration of Royal clemency to political offenders.[45] In view of Royal proclamation, Savarkar submitted his fourth clemency[46] petition to the British colonial government on 30 March 1920,[47] in which he stated that
So far from believing in the militant school of theBakunin type, I do not contribute even to the peaceful and philosophical anarchism of a Kuropatkin [sic.] or aTolstoy. And as to my revolutionary tendencies in the past- it is not only now for the object of sharing the clemency but years before this have I informed of and written to the Government in my petitions (1918, 1914) about my firm intention to abide by the constitution and stand by it as soon as a beginning was made to frame it by Mr. Montagu. Since that the Reforms and then the Proclamation have only confirmed me in my views and recently I have publicly avowed my faith in and readiness to stand by the side of orderly and constitutional development.[48]
This petition was rejected on 12 July 1920 by the British colonial government.[49] After considering the petition, the British colonial government contemplated releasing Ganesh Savarkar but not Vinayak Savarkar. The rationale for doing so was stated as follows[50]
It may be observed that if Ganesh is released and Vinayak is retained in custody, the latter will become in some measure a hostage for the former, who will see that his own misconduct does not jeopardize his brother's chances of release at some future date.
Savarkar signed a statement endorsing his trial, verdict, and British law, and renouncing violence, a bargain for freedom.
On 2 May 1921, the Savarkar brothers were transferred from Andaman to mainland India with Vinayak being sent to a jail inRatnagiri, and Ganesh to Bijapur Jail. During his incarceration in Ratnagiri jail in 1922, Vinayak wrote his "Essentials of Hindutva" that formulated his theory of Hindutva.[51] Ganesh (Babarao) Savarkar was unconditionally released from jail in 1922.[52] On 6 January 1924 Vinayak was released, but was restricted toRatnagiri District. Soon after his release, he started working on the consolidation of Hindu society or Hindu Sangathan.[53] The colonial authorities provided a bungalow for him and he was allowed visitors.[54] He also received a pension of 60 rupees a month from the British government.[55][56]Nathuram Godse, who later assassinated Gandhi, met Savarkar for the first time as a nineteen-year-old in 1929.[57] Savarkar became a prolific writer during his years of restricted freedom in Ratnagiri. His publishers, however, needed to have a disclaimer that they were wholly divorced from politics. Savarkar remained restricted to Ratnagiri district until 1937. At that time, he was unconditionally released by the newly elected government ofBombay presidency.[58]
Savarkar as president of the Hindu Mahasabha, during the Second World War, advanced the slogan "Hinduise all Politics and Militarise Hindudom" and decided to support the British war effort in India seeking military training for the Hindus.[59] When the Congress launched theQuit India movement in 1942, Savarkar criticised it and asked Hindus to stay active in the war effort and not disobey the government;[60] he also urged the Hindus to enlist in the armed forces to learn the "arts of war".[61]
Hindu Mahasabha under Savarkar's leadership organisedHindu Militarisation Boards which recruited armed forces for helping the British inWorld War 2.[13]
He assailed the British proposals for transfer of power, attacking both the Congress and the British for making concessions to Muslim separatists. Soon after independence,Syama Prasad Mukherjee resigned as vice-president of the Hindu Mahasabha dissociating himself from itsAkhand Hindustan (Undivided India) plank, which implied undoing partition.[62]
Under Savarkar, theHindu Mahasabha openly opposed the call for the Quit India Movement and boycotted it officially.[12] Savarkar even went to the extent of writing a letter titled "Stick to your Posts", in which he instructed Hindu Sabhaites who happened to be "members of municipalities, local bodies, legislatures or those serving in the army ... to stick to their posts" across the country, and not to join the Quit India Movement at any cost.[12]
TheIndian National Congress won a massive victory in the1937 Indian provincial elections, decimating theMuslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha. However, in 1939, the Congress ministries resigned in protest against Viceroy Lord Linlithgow's action of declaring India to be a belligerent in the Second World War without consulting the Indian people. This led to the Hindu Mahasabha, under Savarkar's presidency, joining hands with the Muslim League and other parties to form governments, in certain provinces. Such coalition governments were formed in Sindh, NWFP, and Bengal.[57]
In Sindh, Hindu Mahasabha members joinedGhulam Hussain Hidayatullah's Muslim League government. In Savarkar's own words:
Witness the fact that only recently in Sind, the Sind-Hindu-Sabha on invitation had taken the responsibility of joining hands with the League itself in running coalition government[63][64][65]
In theNorth West Frontier Province, Hindu Mahasabha members joined hands withSardar Aurangzeb Khan of the Muslim League to form a government in 1943. The Mahasabha member of the cabinet was Finance Minister Mehar Chand Khanna.[66][67]
In Bengal, Hindu Mahasabha joined theKrishak Praja Party led Progressive Coalition ministry ofFazlul Haq in December 1941.[68] Savarkar appreciated the successful functioning of the coalition government.[64][63]
Following the assassination of Gandhi on 30 January 1948, police arrested the assassinNathuram Godse and his alleged accomplices and conspirators. He was a member of theHindu Mahasabha and of theRashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Godse was the editor ofAgrani – Hindu Rashtra, a Marathi daily from Pune which was run by the company "The Hindu Rashtra Prakashan Ltd" (The Hindu Nation Publications). This company had contributions from such eminent persons asGulabchand Hirachand,Bhalji Pendharkar, andJugalkishore Birla. Savarkar had invested₹ 15000 in the company. Savarkar, a former president of the Hindu Mahasabha, was arrested on 5 February 1948, from his house inShivaji Park, and kept under detention in theArthur Road Prison, Bombay. He was charged with murder, conspiracy to murder, and abetment to murder. A day before his arrest, Savarkar in a public written statement, as reported inThe Times of India, Bombay dated 7 February 1948, termed Gandhi's assassination a fratricidal crime, endangering India's existence as a nascent nation.[69][70][71] The mass of papers seized from his house had revealed nothing that could remotely be connected with Gandhi's murder.[72]: Chapter 12 Due to lack of evidence, Savarkar was arrested under the Preventive Detention Act.[72]: Chapter 11
Godse claimed full responsibility for planning and carrying out the assassination. However, according to theApproverDigambar Badge, on 17 January 1948, Nathuram Godse went to have a lastdarshan (audience/interview) with Savarkar in Bombay before the assassination. While Badge and Shankar waited outside, Nathuram and Apte went in. On coming out Apte told Badge that Savarkar blessed them "Yashasvi houn ya" ("यशस्वी होऊन या", be successful and return). Apte also said that Savarkar predicted that Gandhi's 100 years were over and there was no doubt that the task would be successfully finished.[73][74] However Badge's testimony was not accepted as the approver's evidence lacked independent corroboration and hence Savarkar was acquitted.[citation needed]
In the last week of August 1974, Mr.Manohar Malgonkar sawDigamber Badge several times and in particular, questioned him about the veracity of his testimony against Savarkar.[72]: Notes Badge insisted to Mr.Manohar Malgonkar that "even though he had blurted out the full story of the plot as far as he knew, without much persuasion, he had put up a valiant struggle against being made to testify against Savarkar".[72]: Chapter 12 In the end, Badge gave in. He agreed to say on oath that he sawNathuram Godse and Apte with Savarkar and that Savarkar, within Badge's hearing, had blessed their venture.[72]: Chapter 12
On 12 November 1964, at a religious program organised in Pune to celebrate the release ofGopal Godse,Madanlal Pahwa andVishnu Karkare from jail after the expiry of their sentences, G. V. Ketkar, grandson ofBal Gangadhar Tilak,[75] former editor ofKesari and then editor of "Tarun Bharat", who presided over the function, gave information of a conspiracy to kill Gandhi, about which he professed knowledge six months before the act. Ketkar was arrested. A public furor ensued both outside and inside theMaharashtra Legislative Assembly and both houses of theIndian parliament. Under the pressure of 29 members of parliament and public opinion the then Union home ministerGulzarilal Nanda appointedGopal Swarup Pathak, M. P. and a senior advocate of the Supreme Court of India as a Commission of Inquiry to re-investigate the conspiracy to murder Gandhi. The central government intended on conducting a thorough inquiry with the help of old records in consultation with the government of Maharashtra. Pathak was given three months to conduct his inquiry; subsequently, Jevanlal Kapur, a retired judge of theSupreme Court of India, was appointed chairman of the commission.[76]
The commission's reinvestigation saw Savarkar's secretary and bodyguard to have testified that Savarkar met with Godse and Apte right before Gandhi was killed.[77]
The commission was provided with evidence not produced in the court; especially the testimony of two of Savarkar's close aides – Appa Ramachandra Kasar, his bodyguard, and Gajanan Vishnu Damle, his secretary.[78] The testimony of Mr. Kasar and Mr. Damle was already recorded byBombay police on 4 March 1948,[79]: 317 but apparently, these testimonies were not presented before the court during the trial. In these testimonies, it is said that Godse and Apte visited Savarkar on or about 23 or 24 January,[79]: 317 which was when they returned from Delhi after the bomb incident. Damle deposed that Godse and Apte saw Savarkar in the middle of January and sat with him (Savarkar) in his garden. The C. I. D. Bombay was keeping vigil on Savarkar from 21 to 30 January 1948.[79]: 291–294 The crime report from C. I. D. does not mention Godse or Apte meeting Savarkar during this time.[79]: 291–294
Justice Kapur concluded: "All these facts taken together were destructive of any theory other than the conspiracy to murder by Savarkar and his group."[78][80][81]
The arrest of Savarkar was mainly based on approverDigambar Badge's testimony. The commission did not re-interviewDigambar Badge.[79] At the time of inquiry of the commission, Badge was alive and working inBombay.
After Gandhi's assassination, Savarkar's home in Dadar, Bombay was stoned by angry mobs. After he was acquitted of the allegations related to Gandhi's assassination and released from jail, Savarkar was arrested by the government for making "Hindu nationalist speeches"; he was released after agreeing to give up political activities. He continued addressing the social and cultural elements of Hindutva. He resumed political activism after the ban on it was lifted; it was however limited until his death in 1966 because of ill health.
In 1956, he opposedB. R. Ambedkar's conversion to Buddhism calling it a "useless act", to which Ambedkar responded by publicly questioning the use of epithet ‘Veer’ (meaningbrave) by Savarkar.[82]
On 22 November 1957,Raja Mahendra Pratap moved a bill inLok Sabha to recognise the service to the country of people like Vir Savarkar,Barindra Kumar Ghosh andBhupendranath Datta. But the bill was defeated with 48 votes favouring it and 75 against it. This bill was also supported by communist leader likeA. K. Gopalan.[83][84]
On 8 November 1963, Savarkar's wife, Yamunabai, died. On 1 February 1966, Savarkar renounced medicines, food, and water which was termed asprayopavesha (fast until death).[85] Before his death, he had written an article titled "Atmahatya Nahi Atmaarpan" in which he argued that when one's life mission is over and the ability to serve society is left no more, it is better to end the life at will rather than waiting for death. His condition was described to have become as "extremely serious" before his death on 26 February 1966 at his residence inBombay (now Mumbai), and that he faced difficulty in breathing; efforts to revive him failed, and was declared dead at 11:10 a.m. (IST) that day. Prior to his death, Savarkar had asked his relatives to perform only hisfuneral and do away with the rituals of the 10th and 13th day of the Hindu faith.[86] Accordingly, his last rites were performed at an electric crematorium in Bombay's Sonapur locality by his son Vishwas the following day.[87]
There was no official mourning by theMaharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee or the central government in Delhi during the time of his death. Not a single minister from the Maharashtra Cabinet showed up to pay homage and respect to Savarkar.[88][note 1] The political indifference to Savarkar has also continued after his death.[note 2] After the death of Nehru, the Congress government, under Prime MinisterShastri, started to pay him a monthly pension.[90]
| Part ofa series on |
| Conservatism in India |
|---|
 |
Commentators |
In contrast withDayananda Saraswati,Swami Vivekananda andSri Aurobindo, who were "men of religion" who introduced reforms in the society and put Hinduism in front of the world, Savarkar formulated an extreme form of Hindu nationalism.[91]
During his incarceration, Savarkar's views began turning increasingly towards Hindu cultural and political nationalism, and the next phase of his life remained dedicated to this cause.[92] In the brief period he spent at the Ratnagiri jail, Savarkar published his ideological epigraph –Essentials of Hindutva in 1923.[93] In this work, Savarkar promotes a farsighted new vision of Hindu social and political consciousness. Savarkar began describing a "Hindu" as a patriotic inhabitant ofBharatavarsha, venturing beyond a religious identity.[92] While emphasising the need for patriotic and social unity of all Hindu communities, he describedHinduism,Jainism,Sikhism andBuddhism as one and the same. He outlined his vision of a "Hindu Rashtra" (Hindu Nation) as "Akhand Bharat" (United India), purportedly stretching across the entireIndian subcontinent.[94] He defined Hindus as being neitherAryan norDravidian but as "People who live as children of a common motherland, adoring a common holyland."[95]
According to Sharma, Savarkar's celebration and justification of violence against [British] women and children in his description of the Mutiny of 1857, "transformed Hindutva into the very image of Islam that he defined and found so intolerably objectionable".[96]
Scholars, historians and Indian politicians have been divided in their interpretation of Savarkar's ideas. A self-described atheist,[97] Savarkar regarded being Hindu as a cultural and political identity. He often stressed social and community unity between Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains, to the exclusion of Muslims and Christians. Savarkar saw Muslims and Christians as "misfits" in the Indian civilisation who could not truly be a part of the nation.[98] He argued that the holiest sites of Islam and Christianity are in the Middle East and not India, hence the loyalty of Muslims and Christians to India is divided.[98][99]
After his release from jail on 6 January 1924,[100] Savarkar helped found the Ratnagiri Hindu Sabha organisation, aiming to work for the social and cultural preservation of Hindu heritage and civilisation.[101]
Focusing his energies on writing, Savarkar authored theHindu Pad-pada-shahi[60] – a book documenting theMaratha empire – andMy Transportation for Life – an account of his early revolutionary days, arrest, trial and incarceration.[102] He also wrote and published a collection of poems, plays and novels. He also wrote a book namedMajhi Janmathep ("My Life-term") about his experience in Andaman prison.[103]
He was an ardent critique of a number of Hindu religious practices he saw as irrational and viewed them as a hindrance to the material progress of the Hindus. He believed that religion is an unimportant aspect of "Hindu identity".
He was opposed to thecaste system and in his 1931 essay titledSeven Shackles of the Hindu Society, he wrote "One of the most important components of such injunctions of the past that we have blindly carried on and which deserves to be thrown in the dustbins of history is the rigid caste system".[104][105]
However, in 1939, Savarkar assured that his party Hindu Mahasabha won't necessarily support entry of theuntouchables into temples. Savarkar said, "Thus the Party will not introduce or support compulsory Legislature regarding Temple Entry by the untouchables etc. in old temples beyond the limit to which the non-Hindus are allowed by custom as in force today."[106][107]
Savarkar in his book,"Women in Manusmriti", he wrote: "The worst about the new constitution ofBharat is that there is nothing Bharatiya (Indian) about it.Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worship-able afterVedas for ourHindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores ofHindus in their lives and practice are based onManusmriti."[108]B. R. Ambedkar, Chairman of the committee that drafted theConstitution of India, criticisedManusmriti as responsible forcaste system in India.[109]
In a speech before a 20,000 strong audience atPune on 1 August 1938, Savarkar stood byNazi Germany's right toNazism andItaly's to Fascism; their achievement of unprecedent glory in the world-stage and a successful inculcation of national solidarity justified those choices.[110] Savarkar criticised Nehru for denouncing Germany and Italy, proclaiming that "crores of Hindu Sanghatanists in India [..] cherish[ed] no ill-will towards Germany or Italy orImperial Japan."[110] He proclaimed his support for theGerman occupation of Czechoslovakia in the same breath.[110]
AsWorld War II become imminent, Savarkar had initially advocated a policy of neutralism centered on India's geostrategic equations but his rhetoric grew coarser with time and he expressed consistent support for Hitler's policy about Jews.[110][111] In a speech on 14 October, it was suggested that Hitler's ways be adopted for dealing with Indian Muslims.[110] On 11 December, he characterised the Jews as a communal force.[110] Next March, Savarkar would welcome Germany's revival of Aryan culture, their glorification ofSwastika, and the "crusade" against Aryan enemies — it was hoped that German victory would finally invigorate the Hindus of India.[110]
On 5 August 1939, Savarkar highlighted how a common strand of "thought, religion, language, and culture" was essential to nationality thus preventing theGermans andJews from being considerable as one nation.[110] By the year end, he was directly equating theMuslims of India withGerman Jews — in the words ofChetan Bhatt, both were suspected of harboring extra-national loyalties and became illegitimate presences in an organic nation.[110][111][112] These speeches circulated in German newspapers with Nazi Germany even allotting a point-of-contact person for engaging with Savarkar, who was making sincere efforts to forge a working relationship with the Nazis. Eventually, Savarkar would be gifted with a copy ofMein Kampf.[110]
Savarkar supportedHitler's anti-Jewish policy. In 1939, he deemed that "Germans and the Jews could not be regarded as a nation". In the same year, he comparedIndian Muslims with the Jews of Germany by saying "Indian Muslims are on the whole more inclined to identify themselves and their interests with Muslims outside India than Hindus who live next door, like Jews in Germany".[113][114]
In 1941, Savarkarsupported Jews resettling theirfatherland of Israel, in what he believed would defend the world against Islamic aggression.[111][115] In his letter dated 19 December 1947, Savarkar celebrated "the establishment of the independent Jewish State inPalestine on moral as well as political grounds" while adding that "the Jewish people bear no political ill-will towardsHindudom".[116][117]
It remains unknown whether Savarkar withdrew his support for Nazi Germany afterthe Holocaust became common knowledge.[111] However, on 15 January 1961 he had spoken favorably of Hitler's Nazism against Nehru's "cowardly democracy".[111]
In his earlier writings, Savarkar argued for "Indian independence from British rule", whereas in later writings he focused on "Hindu independence from Christians and Muslims".[118] In his 1909 bookThe Indian War of Independence, Savarkar emphasisesHindu-Muslim unity, stating that they worked together for "freeing their country" during the1857 uprising. In his introduction to the book, Savarkar states that the feeling of hatred against the Muslims was necessary duringShivaji's period, but it would be "unjust and foolish" to nurse such hatred now.[119]
By 1923, when hisEssentials of Hindutva was published, Savarkar no longer emphasised the Hindu-Muslim unity, and primarily focused on "Hindus" rather than "Indians".[120] His writings on Hindutva emerged immediately after he was moved from theCellular Jail to a prison in Ratnagiri in 1921, and therefore, later scholars have speculated if his stay in these prisons contributed to a change in his views. These scholars point to Savarkar's claims that the Muslim warders at the Cellular Jail treated the Muslim prisoners favourably, while mistreating Hindus; the pan-IslamicKhilafat Movement may have also influenced his views about Muslims while he stayed at Ratnagiri during 1921–1923. According toBhai Parmanand, his fellow prisoner at the Cellular Jail during 1915–1920, Savarkar had already formed his ideas about Hindutva before they met.[121]
Savarkar in 1937 during the 19th session of theHindu Mahasabha in Ahmedabad supportedtwo-nation theory.[122] He said:
There are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India. India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogenous nation. On the contrary, there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Muslims, in India.[123]
In the 1940s, thetwo-nation theory was supported byMuhammad Ali Jinnah and Savarkar.[124] Savarkar declared on 15 August 1943, in Nagpur:
I have no quarrel with Mr Jinnah's two-nation theory. We Hindus are a nation by ourselves and it is a historical fact that Hindus and Muslims are two nations.[125]
Savarkar not only talked of Hindudom, Hindu Nation and Hindu Raj, but he wanted to depend upon the Sikhs in the Punjab to establish a Sikhistan. Savarkar assured the Sikhs that "when the Muslims woke from their day-dreams of Pakistan, they would see established instead a Sikhistan in the Punjab."[126] Savarkar further instigated the Sikhs by claiming that Sikhs previously occupied Afghanistan when they were not many and now there are millions of Sikhs.[127]
Since his time in jail, Savarkar was known for hisanti-Muslim writings.[128][118] Historians including Rachel McDermott,Leonard A. Gordon,Ainslie Embree, Frances Pritchett andDennis Dalton state that Savarkar promoted ananti-Muslim form of Hindu nationalism.[129]
Savarkar saw Muslims in the Indian police and military to be "potential traitors". He advocated that India reduce the number of Muslims in the military, police and public service and ban Muslims from owning or working in munitions factories.[130] Savarkar criticised Gandhi for being concerned about Indian Muslims.[c]
In his 1963 bookSix Glorious Epochs of Indian History, Savarkar says Muslims and Christians wanted to "destroy" Hinduism.[118]
Historian Vinayak Chaturvedi writes that in a 1937 speech Savarkar said that "Kitchen and children were the main duties of women" and suggested that they have healthy children. UnlikeBal Gangadhar Tilak who said that women should not be allowed education at all as reading may make them "immoral" and "insubordinate," Savarkar held a less extreme view. Savarkar did not oppose the education of women but suggested that their education focus on how they could be good mothers and create a generation of patriotic children. In an essay titled "Women's beauty and duty," he stated that a woman's main duty was to her children, her home, and her country. As per Savarkar, any woman digressing from her domestic duties was "morally guilty of breach of trust."[132]
In his 1963 bookSix Glorious Epochs of Indian History, Savarkar advocated the use ofrape as political tool.[133] He accused Muslim women of actively supporting Muslim men's atrocities against Hindu women, Savarkar wrote that young and beautiful Muslim girls should be captured,converted and presented to Maratha warriors to reward them, stating that the Muslim rulerTipu Sultan had similarly distributed Hindu girls among his warriors. He further wrote:[134]
Let the sultans and their peers take a pledge that in the event of a Hindu victory our molestation and detestable lot shall be avenged on the Muslim women. Once they are haunted with this dreadful apprehension that the Muslim women too, stand in the same predicament in the case the Hindus win, the future Muslim conquerors will never dare to think of such molestation of Hindu women.
As per Sharma, based on Swami Ramdas's teaching, Savarkar justifies the killing of countless British women and children in 1857. Sharma has translated some passages from "Savarkar Samgraha" which is originally in Savarkar's native language into English to give examples.[135]
InJhansi, 12 women along with 23 children and 75 men were killed. Savarkar calls this killing of the British whites as aBali or "Holy Sacrifice."[135]
On page 202 of Volume 5,Savarkar Samgraha, in his native language, Savarkar writes (translated by Sharma):
Women had little children in their laps and these children were clinging on to their mothers. These women, infants and older children were guilty of beingwhite and were decapitated with ablack sword[135]
When some men, women and children were killed in the Ganga river, Savarkar describes this as a "celebration" of the anniversary of plassey on page 196.[135] In Kanpur, when 150 children and women were killed he quotes unemotionally as per Sharma in his native language that "the butchers entered Bibigarh ..and sea of white blood spread all over."[135] In another incident on 16 May, Savarkar describes the fate of English women and children as follows:
If some woman or child pleaded for mercy, people shouted: "Revenge for Meerut's chains, revenge for slavery, revenge for the ammunition shed." The vengeful sword then decapitated the pleading head[135]
He is known among followers by the honorific prefixVeer meaning "brave".[136][137][138] The airport atPort Blair,Andaman and Nicobar's capital was renamedVeer Savarkar International Airport in 2002.[139] One of the commemorativeblue plaques affixed on India House fixed by theHistoric Building and Monuments Commission for England reads "Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, 1883–1966, Indian patriot and philosopher lived here".[140]
In 1926, two years after the release of Savarkar from the prison, a biography titled "Life of Barrister Savarkar" and authored by a certain "Chitragupta" was published. A revised version was published in 1939 with additions by Indra Prakash of the Hindu Mahasabha. A second edition of the book was published in 1987 by Veer Savarkar Prakashan, the official publisher of writings by Savarkar. In its preface, Ravindra Vaman Ramdas deduced that, "Chitragupta is none other than Veer Savarkar".[146][147][137]
He wrote 38 books in English and Marathi,[153] consisting in many essays, two novels calledMoplah Rebellion andthe Transportation,[154] poetry and plays, the best-known of his books being his historical studyThe Indian war of independence, 1857 and his pamphletEssentials of Hindutva.[155]
It was Savarkar, and not Jinnah, who first propounded the two-nation theory. In his 1937 presidential address at the Ahmedabad session of the Hindu Mahasabha he declared: "there are two antagonistic nations... living side by side in India."
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)As one of the intellectual founders of Hindu nationalism, Savarkar has emerged as the most controversial Indian political thinker of the last century, gaining notoriety for his program to "Hinduize Politics and Militarize Hindudom", for his anti-Muslim and anti-Christian politics, and for his advocacy of violence in everyday life.
However , led by his blind opposition to the Congress he was willing to let Sikhs organize as a separate community and nation. He went to the extent of allowing them to have their Sikhistan or separate Sikh homeland.
Savarkar had acquired an important public reputation throughout India, especially within the Hindu Mahasabha, for his nationalist and anti-Muslim writings, for his patriotic actions in India and Britain, and for having spent the bulk of his adult life as a political prisoner.
Media from Commons
Quotations from Wikiquote
Data from Wikidata| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Academics | |
| Artists | |
| People | |
| Other | |
