There arc two dissimilar phases of Indian nationalism. The first one continues till the formation of the Indian National Congress in 1885 whereas nationalism, in its second stage, was articulated through popular mobilization approximately several types of anti-imperial ideologies. Of all the competing ideologies, Gandhian non violence' was perhaps the mainly popular ideology in organizing anti-imperial movements in India. Unlike the second stage when the national intervention was primarily political, viz., the capture of state power, the first stage was mainly dominated through the zeal of reform that appeared to have brought jointly several individuals with more or less similar ideological agenda. In these types of behaviors, individuals played decisive roles in sustaining the zeal of those who clustered approximately them. What inspired them was perhaps the thought of European Enlightenment that traveled to India simultaneously with colonialism. Drawn on the philosophy of Enlightenment, neither was the British colonialism condemned nor were there attempts to expose its devastating impact on India's socio-political map in the extensive run. In other languages, colonialism was hailed for its assumed role in radically altering the archaic socio-political networks sustaining the feudal order. It is possible to argue that colonialism in this stage did not become as ruthless as it was later. And, in contrast with the past rulers, the British administration under the aegis of the East India Company seemed to have appreciated social reforms either as a hatter of faith in the philosophy of Enlightenment or as a strategy to infuse the Indian social reality with the values on which if drew its sustenance. With this background in view, this element will focus on the early nationalist response to the British rule that was mainly appreciated in comparison with the socio-political nature of the past rulers. Not only will there be an argument seeking to explain the uncritical endorsement of the British rule through the socially radical thinkers, but there will also be an effort to focus on the changing nature of colonialism that also had a noticeable impact on their conceptualization of the British rule in India that became coterminous with use extremely soon.
EARLY NATIONALIST RESPONSE
It would be appropriate to identify the sources from which they seemed to have derived their thoughts in the context of an incipient colonial rule. The first formidable power was definitely the Enlightenment philosophy that significantly influenced the well-known 1832 Macaulay's minutes. Seeking to organize Indian society in a typical Western mould, Macaulay argued for all introductions of English education and British jurisprudence for their role in radically altering the feudal foundation of Indian society. What was implicit in his views was the assumption that the liberal values of the British diversity would definitely contribute to the required social transformation in India. So, the arrival of the British in India was a boon in disguise. Not only did colonialism introduce Indians to Western liberalism but it also exposed them to the socially and politically progressive thoughts of Bentham, Mill, Carlyle and Coleridge, which drew attention to a qualitatively dissimilar mode of thinking on issues of modern relevance. The second equally significant power was the thoughts of German philosophers, Schelling, Fichte, Kant and Herder. These thoughts gained ground as the intellectual challenge against the British rule acquired momentum. In information, there are clear traces of German thoughts in Bankim‘s writings. Unlike Ram Mohan Roy whose historical mission was to combat the social evils in the form of inhuman customs, including the sattee, Bankim sought to champion the goal of freedom through drawing upon the German philosophy and Hindu past. Conceptually, the notions of volk, society and nation seemed to have inspired the early nationalists, including Bankim presumably because they contributed to homogeneity despite differences in the context of foreign rule. So, the primary concern of the early nationalists was not uniform: for some, the introduction of the thoughts of European Enlightenment was unwarranted basically because that would destroy the extremely foundation of civilization of India that drew, in a considerable method, on the Hindu past; while there are others who adopted a extremely favorable stance vis-Ã -vis the English rule and its obvious social consequences. The third important power in the early stage of Indian nationalism was the French revolution and its message for Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Ram Mohan was swayed through the thoughts that inspired the French revolution. In his writings and deeds, Roy launched a vigorous attack on the archaic social mores dividing India beside caste and religious cleavages. For him, the priority was to make a society free from decadent feudal values that basically stood in the method of attaining the goal of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. The final source is of course the traditional Indian thought that was interpreted in the context of colonial rule. Not only were there writings of William Jones and Max Muller on India's rich cultural traditions, there were contributions from the renaissance thinkers, including Vivekananda, that provided the foundation for redefining India's past glossing mainly the stage of Muslim rule in India. Inspired through the message of Bhagvad Gita, the renaissance thinkers supported the philosophy of action in the service of the motherland. What they tried to argue was the thought that successes or failures were not as significant as the performance of one's duty with 'the purest of motives'. Their attack on fatalism in Hinduism and Buddhist religion clearly shows how realists they were in conceptualizing the outcome of human action. For them, life could be transformed in this world through individuals believing in the philosophy of action. So, it was nut surprising that both Vivekananda and Dayananda insisted on karma, or service to the humanity, as the best possible method of justifying one's subsistence as human beings.
The discussion of sources is extremely useful in underlining the importance of intellectual threads in shaping the nationalist thoughts of the early nationalist thinkers like Rammohan Roy, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Dayananda Saraswati and Jotirao Phule.
THOUGHTS OF RAMMOHAN ROY
Rammohan Roy was a social thinker par excellence. His role in doing absent with sattee in the middle of the orthodox Brahmins was historical. Through founding Brahma Samaj, Roy sought to articulate his belief in the Islamic notion of one god'. In his conceptualization, social reform should precede political reform for the former laid the base for liberty in the political sense. Given his priority, Roy did not appear to have paid adequate attention to his political thoughts. Although he despised colonialism, he appeared to have endorsed the British rule presumably because of its historical role in combating the prevalent feudal forces. Not only was the British rule superior, at least, culturally than the erstwhile feudal rulers, it would also contribute to a dissimilar India through injecting the values it represented. His admiration for the British rule was based on his faith in its role in radically altering traditional mental create-up of the Hindus. The sustained British rule, he further added, would eventually lead to the establishment of democratic institutions as in Great Britain. Like any other liberals, Ray also felt that the uncritical acceptance of British liberal values was almost certainly the best possible means of creating democratic institutions in India. In other languages, he appreciated the British rule as 'a boon in disguise' because it would eventually transplant democratic governance in India. The other region for which the role of Ram Mohan was, decisive was the articulation of demand for the freedom of press. Beside with his colleague, Dwarkanath Tagore, he submitted a petition to the Privy Council for the freedom of' press, which lie justified as essential for democratic functioning of the government. Not only would the freedom of press give a device for ventilation of grievances it would also enable the government to adopt steps for their redressal before they caused damage to the administration. Viewed in the liberal mould, this was an extra ordinary step in that context for two reasons:
The demand for freedom of press was a important development in the rising, though limited, democratization in the middle of the indigenous elite in India; and The thought of press freedom, if sanctioned, would act as 'a safety valve' for the colonial ruler because of the exposition of grievances in the public domain.
Rammohan Roy had played a progressive role in a scrupulous historical context. While conceptualizing his historical role, Roy appeared to have privileged his experience of British colonialism in excess of its immediate feudal past. Through undermining the obvious devastating impact of foreign rule on Indian society, politics and economy, he also clearly supported one system of administration in excess of the other rather consciously basically because of his uncritical faith in British Enlightenment in significantly transforming the prevalent Indian mindsets. One may discover it hard to digest his invitation to the British planters in India despite their brutalities and ruthlessness vis-Ã -vis the Indian peasants if discussed in separation. But this was perfectly rationalized if one is drawn to his argument justifying the stability of the empire on the foundation of its economic strength. The more the planters acquire 'wealth', argued Roy, the better would be their defense for stability in India. Given his historical role, it would not be wrong to argue that Ram Mohan Roy discharged his responsibility in tune with the historical requirement of his role in the scrupulous context of India's growth as a separate socio-political element. It would so be historically inaccurate to identify him as pro-imperial thinker basically because nationalism did not acquire the features of the later era. His thoughts whether supporting the British or criticizing the past rulers - were both historically conditioned and textured; he authored his historical role in the best possible method reflecting the dilemma of the era and the aspiration of those groping for an alternative in the social and political doldrums of incipient colonialism.
BANKIM’S THOUGHTS IN SHAPING NATIONALISM
Bankimchandra Chattopadhyay (1838-94) was almost certainly the first systematic expounder in India of the thought of nationalism. His unique contribution lay in conceptualizing nationalism in indigenous conditions. In opposition to the Muslim rule, Bankim elaborated the thought through drawing upon the Bhagavad Gita that was widely translated in Bengali in the nineteenth century. In his translated version of Gita, what Bankim provided was a reinterpretation in the light of Western knowledge to create the Gita more appropriate reading for the Western-educated intelligentsia in the newly appeared context of the nationalist opposition to the British rule. An entirely new Gita appeared reflecting the concerns of those seeking to give a national alternative to foreign rule.
What was primary in Bankim‘s thought was his concern for national solidarity for on it depend the growth of the Hindu society. National solidarity is conceivable, as Bankim argued, only when there is a change in one's attitude in the following two methods: first, the conviction that what is good for every Hindu is good for me and my views, beliefs and actions necessity is constant with those of other members of the Hindu society. And, secondly, one should inculcate a single-minded devotion to the nation and its interests. This was a thought that Bankim nurtured in all his novels and other writings because he whispered that without care and love for the nation (and implicitly for the country) one basically failed to justify one's subsistence as an element in a cohesive whole, described nation. Here lies a significant theoretical point. Unlike typical liberals, Bankim was in favor of society and the role of the individual was explained in conditions of what was good for the former. He admitted that the get in touch with the British enabled the Hindu society to learn its weaknesses not in conditions of physical strength but in conditions of what he defined as 'civilization'. Hindus lack the civilization basically because they are so diverse, separated through language, race, and religion and so on, and it would not be possible for them to make circumstances for national solidarity unless this divisive content of Hindus totally disappeared.
From the notion of national solidarity, Bankim now delved into anushilan or his concept of practice. Elaborating this notion in his 1888 essay entitled 'The Theory of Religion', Bankim defined it as a system of civilization', more complete and more perfect than the Western concept of civilization, articulated through the Western thinkers like Comte and Mathew Arnold. Critical of the agnostic Western view of practice, anushilan was based on 'bhakti' (devotion) that implied a combination of 'knowledge and duty'. In practical conditions, anushilan means that it simultaneously imparts knowledge of what is good for the society and what the society is supposed to do under specific circumstances. Anushilan implies duty that is the performance of an act for which one should not expect reward. In other languages, the society is duty- bound to perform sure acts not out of choice but out of devotion to a cause or a goal. From this, he derived the thought of duty towards the nation. There was no choice and the society had to work for 'the defense of the nation' that was totally crippled due to specific historical circumstances. For Bankim, this selfless and non-possessive notion of devotion lay at the base of dharma or religion.
Through underlining the importance of dharma in national solidarity, Bankim sought to make circumstances for a separate identity for the Hindu society. Not only was it necessary for a subject nation, it was also mainly appropriate for structure a strong society on the foundation of its inherent cultural strength and not merely through imitating the West. Superior in the domain of sciences and industry, the West represented a civilization that succeeded in conquering the East, Hence he argued for emulating the West in the domain of material civilization. But in the domain of spiritual civilization, the East was certainly superior and hence should not be bypassed. Combining these two thoughts, Bankim therefore suggested that the West could be emulated in the domain in which it was superior while internalizing the spiritual distinctiveness of the East. So, in the construction of a national identity, Bankim does not appear to be entirely xenophobic but a creative ideologue of the early nationalist movement appreciating the strength and weakness of both east and west simultaneously. In other languages, the variation-seeking project of Bankim constitutes what Partha Chatterjee defines as 'the moment of departure' in our national thought.
RELIGIO-POLITICAL THOUGHTS OF DAYANAND SARASWATI
While Bankim had a clear political message for the nation that lacked solidarity, Dayananda (1825-83) who founded the Arya Samaj had concerns similar to those of Rammohan. Primarily a social reformer, the latter whispered that the success of the British in subjugating the Hindu society was mainly due to its divisive nature and also the failure in realizing its strength. If Rammohan drew upon Upanishads, Bankim upon the Gita, Dayanand while articulating his nationalist response, was inspired through Vedas. The other contrasting point that marked Dayananda off from the rest lies in the utter absence of the power of European civilization and thought on him. Rammohan was fascinated through European enlightenment and his response was articulated accordingly. The power of the positivist and utilitarian philosophy was apparent in Bankim's conceptualization of national solidarity. Unlike them, Dayananda establish the Vedic messages as mainly appropriate for inspiring the moribund nation, plagued through many 'ills' that could easily be cured. Seeking to construct a strong Hindu society, Dayananda was strikingly dissimilar from other early nationalists in two specific methods: first, his response was essentially based on a conceptualization that is absolutely indigenous in nature presumably 'because he was not exposed to the Western thoughts. Secondly, his response was also an offshoot of a creative dialogue with the traditional scriptures, especially the Vedas - which appeared to have influenced the later Extremist leadership for its appeal to separate civilization features of India. Unlike those who were drawn to Western liberal thoughts, Dayananda was almost certainly the only thinker of his generation to have begun a debate on the relative importance of the ancient scriptures in inspiring a nation that was divided on innumerable counts.
Two thoughts stand out in Dayananda‘s The Satyarth Prakush (Light of Truth) that was published in 1875. First, the thought of God as an active agent of creation appeared to have appealed him mainly. He asserted that the empirical world was no illusion but had a self-governing and objective subsistence. His refutation of advaita and nirguna Brahman separated him from Rammohan and Vivekananda as his denial of sakara and avatara distinguished him from Bankim and Ramakrishna. On this foundation, he further argued that human action was an index of punishment and reward through God. Here a theoretical effort was made through Dayananda to assess individual acts in conditions of sure well-defined norms of behaviour in the name of God. This was what inspired Aurobindo who establish in this contention a clearly-argued theoretical statement not only for analyzing human behaviour at a critical juncture of history but also for mobilizing a vanquished nation for a goal that was to be rewarded through God. In other languages, through redefining God in a creative manner, Dayananda actually articulated the Old Testament God of justice and not New Testament God of love. Underling the importance of Divine in shaping human action, the Arya Samaj founder was perhaps trying to play on the religious sentiments for meaningful social behaviors. This was, in his views, the vital requirement for a nation to grow and prosper.
The second significant thought that stems from The Satyarth Prakash is actually a comment on the divisive nature of Hindu society. Just as to him, the British victory in India was mainly due to 'our own failings'. 'It is only when brothers fight in the middle of themselves that an outsider poses as an arbiter'. Furthermore, the Hindu society was inherently crippled due to practices like child marriage, carnal gratification that clearly defied the Vedas and the principles it stood for. In his languages, what caused an irreparable damage to our society was untruthfulness and neglect of Vedas'. Hence the first task was to grasp the substance of Vedas where lay the distinctiveness of the Hindus as a race. No attack on the British' would succeed till this was accomplished to our satisfaction. This was almost certainly the cause why the Arya Samaj was not allowed to involve in direct political campaign against the British.
These thoughts were unique given their roots in Hindu scriptures. Here lies the historical role of Dayananda who explored the Vedas primarily to inculcate a sense of identity in the middle of the Hindus who, so distant, remained highly fractured and were unable to resist the foreign rule. In other languages, he turned to the Vedas to discover a 'pure' Hinduism with which to confront the corruption of Hinduism in the present. He felt that the Vedas contained Hindu beliefs in their mainly ancient and pure form showing God to be presently and infinite creator. He described for the purging of the degenerate practices of Hindus in the present. He was critical of the present divisive caste system that had distorted the Vedic practices since social hierarchies of Vedic society was based on merit, skill and temperament of the individual, rather than on his birth.
Likewise, while conceptualizing God as a creative agency and not solely a spiritual being, he purposely redefined the Vedic notion of God to rejuvenate a moribund nation that appeared to have lost its vigor and zeal. Through defending reward and punishment as inevitable for good and bad 'deeds' respectively, Dayananda almost certainly sought to eradicate 'the evils', impeding the growth of the Hindu society. In other languages, for Dayananda the primary task was to strengthen the moral base of the Hindu society that, given its inherent weaknesses, remained highly divided. Like Rammohan, Dayananda was a social reformer with approximately no interest in politics. And, accordingly lie scripted the role of the Arya Samaj in a strictly non-political method. The reasons are obvious. In the context of a strong colonial rule, the evinced political role of the Samaj would certainly have attracted the attention of the government that was not desirable especially when the organisation was at its infancy. Through deciding to stay absent from politics, not only did Dayananda fulfill his historical role but also left behind a clearly-articulated nationalist response that drew absolutely on Hindu traditions and especially.
JYOTIBA PHULE: A SOCIAL REVOLUTIONARY
Jotirao Phule (1827-90), like Dayananda, had the desire for a form of social organisation that would reflect the merits and aptitudes of the individual, rather than enforcing birth as the foundation both for job and for religious status. The play, Tritiya Ratna (The Third Eve), which he published in 1855 is a powerful exposition of his ideology. The play is in relation to the use of an ignorant and superstitious peasant couple through a cunning Brahmin priest and their subsequent enlightenment through a Christian missionary. Three significant points stand out in this play. First, critical of Brahmin power, he made a wider point concerning the oppressive nature of Hindu religion that, in its present form, imposed an ideological hegemony on the shudras and through suggesting many purifying rituals, it also contributed to material impoverishment of the untouchables. Secondly, through underlining the role of a Christian missionary who rescued the couple from die clutches of the greedy Brahmin, Phule seemed to have explored the possibility of conversion as almost certainly the only practical device to get-out of the exploitative Hindu religion. Although in the play, Phule did not talk in relation to the conversion per se he through supporting the conversion of Pandita Ramabai, a Chitpavan Brahmin scholar, defended arguments in its support. To him, Christianity was not only an escape from Brahminical oppression but also a religion offering salvation, thirdly, underlying this story, there remained another major ideological point concerning the importance of education in sustaining the Brahminic hegemony in Hindu society. He was persuaded to consider that access to education, and particularly, literacy in English, conferred vital social possessions on the Brahmins as a social group. As a result, the Brahmins sustained to control the modern social, political and administrative domains. Through acquiring the new skills in the changed circumstances of the British rule, the Brahmins so sustained their power through redefining their soles in accordance with the necessities of the day. In other languages, through being English literate, the Brahmins appeared as the mainly useful social group that the British government could ill- affords to ignore given their obvious role in running the administration.
What historical role did Phule play? Similar to the early nationalists, the principal message that he conveyed was concerned with his model of a society free from Brahminic use. For him, the British rule was a boon in disguise for having struck at the base of the caste hegemony of the Brahmins. Presumably because of this dimension of the foreign rule, Phule appeared to have underplayed the exploitative nature of colonialism. It was also possible that Phule accorded top priority to his mission of securing a respectful lay of the shudrutishudra (untouchables) in the society in which the Brahmins held the hegemony. Phule was not so much against the Hindu scriptures per se as he was against the values and thoughts sustaining the prevalent Hindu system. In other languages, through deliberately articulating his opposition to Brahminical discourse and not Hinduism as such, Phule was perhaps trying to aloofness from the bandwagon against Hinduism. In his view, Hinduism is rooted in Shrutis (Vedas) and the Smritis and Brahmins distorted them to rationalize their hegemony. Likewise, the interpretation that the Varna system (the division of society into four dissimilar groups) was god-given and hence unassailable was derived from 'the selfish desire' of the Brahmins to perpetuate their power on the rest of the society. So, not only did he reject the Hindu system and its theoretical literature altogether but also argued, rather persuasively, against the dichotomous nature of the Hindu society nurturing Brahminic hegemony in excess of the shudras. This was an arrangement in which, he argued further, members of the privileged segment of the society, viz., the Brahmins, tended to justify their hegemony through reference to the religious tracts and distorted practices. On the foundation of his criticism of Hindu theology, he challenged the notion of avatara as an agency of change when the society was totally demoralized. In the Hindu conceptualization of avatara, Phule establish another design, quoted in a religiously-justified distorted version of 'good' and 'bad' to avoid friction in Hindu society. Drawn on his mission to make an equitable order striking at the roots of the dichotomous Hindu society, he never reconciled himself to the Brahminical gods and beliefs sustaining them. In other languages, through demanding the Brahminical exposition of Hinduism from the shudras perspective, Phule successfully articulated an alternative discourse of history and it‘s unfolding.
For Phule, literacy and especially English education, was mainly useful in considerably eradicating the Brahminic hegemony. Not only was literacy a powerful device in radically altering the existent social order it would also bring in relation to the gender equality. Phule was perhaps the first nationalist to have seriously pursued the women literacy and an exclusively girls school was recognized in 1842 at his behest. In this respect, he, like Rammohan, appeared to have appreciated the British rule for having laid the material and institutional base of a contemporary-equalitarian society. Though persuaded through liberalism of the Western diversity, Phule was not particularly happy with the British response to people's needs and demands. Like the other early nationalists, there was no doubt that what prompted Phule to endorse foreign rule was its role in creating a totally new socio-political system undermining the prevalent hegemony of the Brahmins in excess of the shudras.
The other distinctive dimension in Phule‘s response is that he stands out in the middle of the early nationalists for having implemented his thoughts, as distant as possible, into practice. The Satyashodhak Samaj (the Society of the Seekers of Truth) that came into being in 1873 was founded with this objective in mind. Not only was the Samaj involved in girls' formal education, widow remarriage and campaign against prohibition, it also led to vigorous debates on the nature of Hindu society and the scriptures, especially Vedas on which it was based. So, Phule was a forerunner of Gandhi in the sense that mainly of the major socio-political issues that the Mahatma raised were broached through him in a context when the British rule did not appear to be as oppressive as it later became. Through uniformly arguing against the orthodox Hinduism, denying a majority of their legitimate dues, he provided a powerful social critique of the prevalent Brahminical practices and values, justified in the name of religion and religious texts.
NATIONALIST RESPONSE: A CRITICAL APPRAISAL
Another major feature of the early nationalist response is the method the nation was conceptualized. Through avoiding reference to Muslims, these nationalist thinkers seemed to have clearly recognized the constituents of the proposed nation. Through drawing on exclusively Hindu traditional tracts like Upanishads or Vedas, the early nationalists recognized the sources of inspiration for the nation at its formative stage that clearly set the ideological tone in opposition to Islam and its supportive texts. Their thought of nation had so a narrow foundation since Muslims hardly figured in the conceptualization. The explanation almost certainly lies in the historical context characterized through the declining decadent feudal civilization, supported through the Muslim rulers on the one hand and the rising acceptance of the values of European modernity on the other. Separately from Bankim who had strong views on the Muslim rule, none of the early nationalist thinkers articulated their opinion on this issue in clear conditions. What drove them to embark on a nationalist project was the mission to revamp and revitalize the Hindus who failed to emerge as a solid block due mainly to the inherent divisive nature. Whether it was Dayananda or Bankim, the thought of consolidating the Hindus as a race seemed to have acted in a decisive manner while articulating their response. Given his interest in Persian literature and Islamic civilization, Rammohan held dissimilar views from Bankim. Since Phule was critical of the dichotomous Hindu society, he argued in a reformist language and reference to Muslims did not appear to be relevant. In his perception, the British rule was providential basically because it provided him with intellectual possessions to combat the archaic practices in Hinduism.
What is apparent now is that in articulating a nation, these thinkers discharged a role that was historically conditioned. It would so be wrong to basically label them as partisan due to their indifference or critical comments on the Muslims and their rule. Through critically endorsing the British rule as mainly appropriate for the nation they were persuaded in two methods: first, the Enlightenment philosophy provided an alternative system of thought to critically assess Hinduism and traditional scriptures on which it was based. Secondly, through drawing upon the civilization possessions of the nation, these thinkers had also articulated an intellectual search for a model that was socio-culturally meaningful for the constituencies it was conceptualized. In this sense, the thought of nation, though narrowly constituted, appears to be a product of historical circumstances in which they were placed.
There is a final point. Their response was hardly political. While Dayananda eschewed politics altogether for the Arya Samaj, Rammohan was concerned more with eradicating the evil practices in Hindu society. Bankim's historical novel, Anandamath, had a political message in his support for the sannyasi rebel against the ruler. Although his thoughts of state and state power are not so well-urbanized, his argument for the spiritual superiority of the East appears to have given him an intellectual edge in excess of other early nationalists. Phule was also reluctant to essay the role of the Satyasadhok Samaj in political conditions. What was central to him was to challenge the Brahminical hegemony in excess of the shudras who constituted a majority. Given this well-defined priority, Phule scripted the role of the Samaj accordingly. Furthermore, the avoidance of a clear political role was perhaps strategically conditioned in a context when an anti-British stance was likely to draw government attention. In other languages, apprehending damage to the mission they undertook, these thinkers were persuaded to adopt an agenda allowing them to pursue their ideological mission without governmental intervention. Despite all these, the thoughts they floated galvanized the masses into action when the nationalists confronted the British government for a final illustrate -down. Not only did they inspire the Extremists, they also provided intellectual possessions to Gandhi and his followers. So, the early nationalist response shapes an integral part of the nationalist thought that was differently textured in dissimilar historical circumstances depending on what was central in the nationalist vision.
Post a Comment