The Savarkar rehabilitation project is taking ever-newer forms. The latest attempt (‘How Savarkar fought for a casteless society’, IE, February 28) is to claim that “he had imagined a nation free of malevolent social evils such as caste cruelty, untouchability, and injustice towards women. He advocated a casteless society based on notions of social justice coupled with social cohesion. He wanted to uproot the diversity of the caste system and build a nation based on Hindu unity, where Dalits could live with dignity and happiness.” It is also claimed that “he spoke out against scriptural injunctions that advocated caste, such as the Manusmriti. According to Savarkar, these scriptures are often the tools of those in power, used to control social structure and maintain their supremacy”.
Let us compare these claims with the writings and deeds of V D Savarkar as recorded in the Hindu Mahasabha archives. In 1923, Savarkar defended casteism in Hindu society, regarding it as a natural component essential for making a nation. While dealing with the subject, under the title ‘Institutions in favour of Nationality’, he declared that the institution of caste was the peculiar mark of identifying a Hindu Nation. “The system of four varnas, which could not be wiped away even under the Buddhist sway, grew in popularity to such an extent that kings and emperors felt it a distinction to be called one who established the system of four varnas… Reaction in favour of this institution grew so strong that our nationality was almost getting identified with it.”
Savarkar, while defending casteism as an inalienable constituent of a Hindu Nation, went on to quote an authority (not identified by him) who said: “… the land where the system of four Varnas does not exist should be known as the Mleccha country: Aryavarta lies away from it.”
Savarkar’s defence of casteism was, in fact, a corollary to his racial approach to the understanding of the Hindu nation. He argued that it was due to caste that the purity of the Hindu race was maintained:
“All that the caste system has done is to regulate its noble blood on lines believed—and on the whole rightly believed—by our saintly and patriotic law-givers and kings to contribute most to fertilise and enrich all that was barren and poor, without famishing and debasing all that was flourishing and nobly endowed.”
Interestingly, Savarkar also advocated for the elevation of the status of the untouchables in Hindu society for a short period. He conducted programmes against untouchability and denial of entry to “untouchables” in Hindu temples. This was not due to an egalitarian outlook but mainly due to the fact that he was alarmed at the numerical loss that the Hindu community had been experiencing due to the steady conversion of Dalits to Islam and Christianity, which guaranteed them normative social equality.
The most authentic record of Savarkar’s beliefs and actions on this issue is available in a compilation by his secretary, A S Bhide, titled ‘Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s Whirlwind Propaganda: Extracts from the President’s Diary of his Propagandist Tours Interviews from December 1937 to October 1941’. The book is an official guide for Hindu Mahasabha cadres. According to it, Savarkar declared that he was undertaking these reformative actions in his personal capacity “without involving the Hindu Mahasabha organisation into social and religions [sic] activities not guaranteed by its constitutional limits…” Savarkar assured Sanatani Hindus who were opposed to untouchables’ entry into Hindu temples in 1939 that the Hindu Mahasabha, “will not introduce or support compulsory Legislature [sic] 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”.
On June 20, 1941, he once again pledged that he would not hurt the sentiments of Sanatani Hindus so far as the issue of entry of Untouchables in temples was concerned. This time, he even promised not to touch anti-women and anti-Dalit Hindu personal laws: “I guarantee that the Hindu Maha Sabha shall never force any legislations regarding the entry of untouchables in the ancient temples or compel by law any sacred ancient and moral usage or custom prevailing in those temples. In general, the Mahasabha will not back up any Legislation to thrust the reforming views on our Sanatani brothers so far as personal law is concerned…”
Savarkar remained a great protagonist of casteism and worshipper of the Manusmriti throughout his life: “Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worshippable [sic] after Vedas for our Hindu 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 of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law. That is fundamental.”
Sadly, Savarkarites bent upon establishing Savarkar’s anti-untouchability credentials have no hesitation in playing mischief even with a letter B R Ambedkar wrote to Savarkar on February 18, 1933. They produce it as a testimonial to establish Savarkar as a crusader against untouchability, which according to the Savarkarites reads as: “I wish to take this opportunity of conveying to you my appreciation of the work you are doing in the field of social reform. If the Untouchables are to be part of the Hindu society, then it is not enough to remove untouchability; for that matter, you should destroy ‘Chaturvarna’. I am glad that you are one of the very few leaders who have realised this.”
Unfortunately, the sentences have been picked up from the letter deleting all the critical comments on Savarkar’s agenda. The letter is produced in full so that the intellectual dishonesty of Savarkarites is known to readers:
“Many thanks for your letter inviting me to Ratnagiri to open the Temple on the fort to the Untouchables. I am extremely sorry that owing to previous engagements, I am unable to accept your invitation. I, however, wish to take this opportunity of conveying to you my appreciation of the work you are doing in the field of social reforms. As I look at what is called the problem of the untouchables, I feel it is intimately bound up with the question of reorganisation of Hindu society. If the untouchables are to be a part and parcel of the Hindu society, then it is not enough to remove Untouchability, for that you must destroy Chaturvarnya. If they are not to be a part and parcel, if they are only to be appendix to Hindu society then Untouchability, so far as temple is concerned, may remain. I am glad to see that you are one of the very few who have realised it. That you still use the jargon of Chaturvarnya although you qualify it by basing it by basing it on merit is rather unfortunate. However, I hope that in course of time you will have courage enough to drop this needless and mischievous and jargon.”
In fact, Ambedkar came to the conclusion in 1940 that “If Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest calamity for this country… [It] is a menace to liberty, equality and fraternity. On that account, it is incompatible with democracy. Hindu Raj must be prevented at any cost”.
The writer taught political science at the University of Delhi.
