Author: N S Rajaram
Publication: Organiser
Date: September 2, 2001
The surest symptom of decadence
is fear of truth, especially historical truth. This is what V. S. Naipaul
seems to have had in mind when he charged Indian writers like R.K. Narayan
of ignoring history. Leaving Shri Narayan aside, it is undeniable that
Indian intellectuals-not writers alone-live in a world of make believe
in which every invader was gentle and there were no horrors, even during
the Medieval (Islamic) period. The evidence against this fantasy is all
before us. Naipaul pointed to Hampi, the former capital of the great Vijayanagar
Empire, which was continuously vandalized for six months after its defeat
by Muslims. Or in our time one has only to look at the Pakistani jihad
in Kashmir, which has turned this once 'Paradise on Earth' into a living
hell. This is what the Islamic invasions were like. (In the face of this,
why are Indian authorities and 'scholars' suggesting that the proxy war
in Kashmir is "not a jihad," as if a 'real' jihad is noble enterprise?
Why make excuses for Pakistan, let them find their own.)
Horrible as this history is, like
most imperialisms it has acquired a constituency of its own that wants
to hold on to its symbols and deny its horrors. This came to the fore during
a three-day seminar (August 4-6) organized by the Leftist propaganda outfit
SAHMAT (Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust). Some 'eminent scholars' were said
to have "assailed saffronization of education' by the present BJP-led Government,
especially by the Human Resource Development Minister Dr Murli Manohar
Joshi. 'The topic of the seminar apparently was "the challenges to the
Indian education from the onslaught of saffronization". Who were the worthies
concerned about this 64 saffronization"? None other than Irfan Habib, K.
N. Panikkar, Satish Chandra and a few more-in short the very people whose
misdeeds fill the pages of Arun Shourie's book Eminent Historians.
Prominent among the complainers
was Professor Irfan Habib of Aligarh Muslim University. According to him:
"Distortion of history was a crucial weapon to induce irrational discourse."
Of course! This is precisely what the British did, especially with their
Aryan invasion theory, which Marxists like Irfan Habib, Romila Thapar and
others are trying desperately to preserve in the face of mounting evidence
against it. According to him, "the imaginary claims of the Sangh Parivar
about the Aryan civilization and that Homo sapiens originated in the upper
reaches of River Sarasvati brings it closer to the Nazi ethnocentric ideology."
Continuing distortions
So this apparently is their concern:
the idea of the indigenous origin of the Vedic civilization in the Sarasvati
heartland is equivalent to Nazi ideology lie truth of course is the opposite
of this: it is the foreign origin of the Vedic Aryans that was the basis
of Nazi ideology. It was German nationalists-not Hindu scholars-who came
up with the idea of the Aryan race, Aryan nation and the Aryan invasion,
which led eventually to Nazi ideology. It is this concoction that the likes
of Habib and Thapar are defending by holding up the threat of saffronization.
This is also what makes them go to any length like bringing in characters
like Witzel and Farmer to attack by any means, anyone who presents evidence
suggesting that the Harappan civilization was Vedic. In the words of Romila
Thapar: "... The article by Witzel and Farmer is a serious critique of
the claims that have been made by Rajaram and Jha about the Aryan identity
of the Indus civilization and the decipherment of the Harappan script."
The other part of Habib's statement
relating to Homo sapiens originating in the upper reaches of the Sarasvati
is a fraudent charge. The current understanding is that Africa is the original
home of Homo sapiens or the human species, which I have written about.
Habib is deliberately mixing up the scientifically sound data about the
origin of the Vedic civilization with speculations about origin of the
human species. The idea is to confuse the reader by painting everything
saffron.
Nazis and Marxists
So here is the truth: the Aryan
invasion theory, which in one form or another is the favoured position
of Indian Marxists like Habib and by the same people whose ideas gave rise
to Nazism! This should come as no surprise. Let us not forget that under
Stalin's command Indian Communists supported Hitler until Germany attacked
Russia. After that, when Britain and the Soviet Union became allies against
Germany, they turned agents of the British, reporting on patriots like
Subhas Bose. In the words of the great historian R. C. Majumdar, the Indian
Communists acted as "spies and stooges" of the colonial powers, especially
Britain.
This Nazi-Marxist-colonial cocktail
embodied in the Aryan invasion is what these 'Eminent Historians' are trying
to save in the name of fighting saffronization! There is another point:
how is one saffronizing history if one wants to look for Vedic imprint
in Harappan archaeology? Let us not forget that Harappan archaeology and
the Vedic literature both flourished in the same geographical region, thousands
of years before Islam and Christianity came to India. What is more natural
than looking for linkages between the two through the Vedic-Hindu symbolism?
This is precisely what Jha and I did in our work connecting Harappah archaeology
and the Vedic literature, an important part of which is the decipherment
of the Indus script. So this is saffronization? Would these 'Eminent Historians,'
have us call Harappan remains Islamic monuments and the Vedic literature
a derivative of the Bible?
Symbols of slavery
So what these scholars are calling
saffronization is nothing but correcting colonial distortions and fabrications.
This is part of the de-colonization process. Even this is only part of
the story, for Indian history lies concealed in two layers of colonization-the
first Islamic and the second European Christian. India defeated both politically,
but not yet spiritually. Symbols of slavery remain, especially in education.
These so-called secularist scholars are the remaining agents of slavery
created by Macaulayite education and Islamic imperialism before it. Their
mission in life is to defend these symbols of slavery-be it the disputed
structure at Rama Janmabhoomi or the Aryan invasion-imposed by foreign
invaders implacably hostile to the indigenous civilization and its values.
"By any nationalist group in any country, the history that glorifies them
would be seen as symbols of slavery. In India under the Congress, the education
system that sustained them was retained. Slaves loyal to past colonialisms
were given privileged positions. To quote R. C. Majumdar:
"...It is an ominous sign of the
time that Indian history is", being viewed in official circles in the perspective
of recent politics. The official history of the freedom movement starts
with the premise that India lost independence only in the eighteenth century
and had thus an experience of subjection to a foreign power for only two
centuries. Real history, on the other hand, teaches us that the major part
of India lost independence about five centuries before, and merely changed
masters in the eighteenth century."
Majumdar wrote this in 1962, with
the Congress sponsored Marxists firmly in control of the history establishment.
(Azad tried to suppress his book.) Today, their position is being challenged
by the rising tide of nationalism. A version of history that does justice
to the land and its heroes is coming into being. This has happened everywhere.
This is part of the decolonization process. But the secularists see themselves
as upholders of the colonial ideology. They see decolonization as a threat
to their positions. They want not only the Islamic vandals-from Muhammad
of Ghazni to Babur and even Aurangazeb presented as national heroes-while
presenting the victims as villains, they want even the Vedic civilization
to be credited to foreign invaders called Aryans. And now there are noises
that even the Harappan civilization was created by invaders from Mesopotamia
who came ten thousand years ago! In short they want to see India as a land
without civilization that owes everything to invaders. This is the secularists'
agenda.
There is nothing new in any of this.
Babar wrote: "Hindustan is a place of little charm.... The one nice aspect
of Hindustan is it is a large country with lots of gold and money." And
according to Kari Marx: "Indian society has no history at all, at least
no known history. What we call its history is but the history of successive
intruders." (The latest genetic evidence contradicts all these invasion
scenarios.)
Preserving these imperialist dogmas,
and, in the process, hold on to their perks and privileges, is the main
goal of the secularist scholars. As the brilliant American writer Tom Wolfe
put it in the context of American humanities scholars who our secularists
copy: "It's a simple business at the bottom. All the (secularist) intellectual
wants, in his heart of hearts, is to hold on to what was given to him in
a magical moment..." Sri Shankaracharya said the same thing centuries ago:
undara-nimittam bahu-krita vesham (to fill the stomach, many poses are
assumed). Anything that threatens it, especially the rising historical
awareness in the nation that seeks to unravel the truth, is denounced as
'saffronization'. It should really be called 'decolonization'.
