Questions and Answers
This section deals with various aspects of Savarkar’s life, thought, actions and relevance in a question and answer format. Questions are raised regarding Savarkar and his place in Indian history. Some of these questions stem from genuine curiosity and willingness to understand. Some questions take the form of accusations born out of outright ignorance or sheer malice. This section aims to address some of these questions.
What is the significance of Savarkar’s contribution to the social reform movement?
What were Savarkar’s views on the caste system?
According to Savarkar, the Hindu society was bound by seven shackles ( bandi ). What were they?
Did Savarkar advocate separate schools and temples for ‘ untouchables’ ?
Was it the Congress, which repealed the restrictions on Savarkar in 1937?
What were the interactions between Savarkar and Dr. Ambedkar?
What is the significance of Savarkar’s contribution to the social reform movement?
During early years of British regime, there used to be two schools of thought, in Maharashtra. One school, led by Tilak believed that the political reforms should precede social reforms. The other school led by Agarkar held just the opposite view. Savarkar reconciled both viewpoints. Although in politics, as he himself once remarked, he belonged to the ‘sappers and miners’ of Tilak, in social problems he concurred with Agarkar. There have been many distinguished social reformers in modern India. Most of them were however aloof from the freedom struggle. Savarkar was a rare exception. As a rule, contemporary society used to be hostile to social reformers but the British Government was not against them. On the other hand, Savarkar had to face hostility of the society as well as the Government. In Ratnagiri, his house was searched by the police several times and his books were banned. People were scared to associate with him. Unlike many ‘reformers’ he practiced what he preached. He was a general as well as a soldier. He had to work with very meagre financial resources. The year ending balance of 1929 of the Ratnagiri Hindu Sabha, under whose auspices Savarkar worked, was a princely sum of a rupee and a quarter!
“Forget if you may, my jump into the sea, but do not forget my views on social problems”, spake Savarkar.
What were Savarkar’s views on the caste system?
Savarkar’s views on the caste system were as follows:
According to Savarkar, the Hindu society was bound by seven shackles ( bandi ). What were they?
Did Savarkar advocate separate schools and temples for ‘ untouchables’ ?
No. Savarkar emphasized on several occasions that there should not be separate schools or temples for the ex-untouchables. Savarkar and his associates used to visit schools to ensure that ex- untouchable pupils were not discriminated against. He strove for entry of all Hindus in temples.
What were the unique features of the Patitpavan temple which came into being in Ratnagiri under Savarkar’s leadership ?
‘Patitpavan’ means ‘one who raises the degraded’. Did Savarkar imply that the untouchables’ were degraded ?
No. In his articles, speeches and poems, Savarkar had declared that all Hindus were patit (degraded) because of British rule. According to him, Patitpavan is one who liberates these Hindus. The Gita conceives of God as a liberator –He forgives our sins and gives us salvation. Hence the name ‘Patitpavan’.
"Savarkar carried out social reform only because his political activities were forbiddenby the British. After his unconditional release, he forgot social reform and only did Hindu consolidation". Comment.
In a letter written in 1920 from the Andamans, Savarkar wrote, "Just as I feel that I should rebel against foreign rule over Hindusthan, I feel I should rebel against caste discrimination and untouchability." This letter was written before he had made up his mind to consolidate the Hindus. Savarkar continued his campaign for social reform after his unconditional release in 1937. His tours as president of the Hindu Mahasabha were never complete without a visit to the homes of the ex-untouchables. He used to deliver lectures in the Ganesh festivities only on condition that these lectures would be open to ex-untouchables. In 1947, he said, "Time and again, I feel that if my health recuperates and I gain enough strength to enter public life, I must devote at least one-two years towards the work of eradicating untouchability and scripture-based caste discrimination and launch a nation-wide campaign against this pernicious practice. This is the extent to which I feel this work is important not just from the point of view of Hindu consolidation but also of human consolidation as well" (Savarkar, Balarao; Akhand Hindusthan Ladha Parva; Veer Savarkar Prakashan; Mumbai; 1976, p 369).
To Savarkar, social and political reforms were equally important. They are two wheels of carriage. One cannot progress without the other. But, unless we have political power we do not have the means to make social changes. Therefore political activities took precedence.
We must also consider the situation in the country. In May 1937 when Savarkar was released unconditionally, the Congress Party had been existence for more than 50 years. It was in power in seven major provinces. But Gandhi’s policy of constant capitulation to Muslim aggression was leading to a disaster and Savarkar firmly stood against that capitulation. He had to start from scratch on the political front. In the Central Legislative Assembly, Bhai Paramanand had raised the question of Hindu women being kidnapped in NW Frontier Province. Some Congress member laughed and said, “Oh, it is just a matter of boys chasing girls.” Dr Khan, a friend of Nehru commented, “Those kidnapped Hindu women should be given away and Government should not take Police action.” Once again Congressmen in the Assembly laughed. Savarkar called them eunuchs. That was the level to which Hindus in Congress Party had stooped. Only Savarkar condemned them openly. He had a formidable task in front of him indeed. He had to give precedence to political struggle over social reforms.
"Savarkar carried out social reform not because he had any sympathy for the lower castes but because was politically motivated with a selfish view of winning their support to consolidate Hindus." Comment.
In a letter written in 1920 from the Andamans, Savarkar wrote, "Just as I feel that I should rebel against foreign rule over Hindusthan, I feel I should rebel against caste discrimination and untouchability." This letter was written before he had made up his mind to consolidate the Hindus. The following unambiguous statements of Savarkar made in 1927 ( Samagra Savarkar Vangmaya, vol. 3, p 483) debunk the notion that Savarkar had a narrow political reason for doing social reform. He says, "Untouchability should go mainly because unnecessarily considering our seven crore (seventy million) co-religionists "untouchables" and worse than animals is not only an insult to the human race but also a great insult to our soul. Eradication of untouchability is in the interests of our Hindu society and hence also it must go, but even if Hindu society were to be partially gain from that custom, we would have opposed it with the same vehemence….From the point of view of justice, dharma and humanism, it (fight against untouchability) is a duty…In the present circumstances, what will our gain in fighting it is a secondary question. This question of gain is an aapaddharma (duty to be done in certain exceptional circumstances) and eradication of untouchability is the foremost and absolute dharma.
NS Bapat, one of Savarkar's associates was an eyewitness when Savarkar composed his poem "Malaa devaache darshan gheu dyaa, dole bharun devas malaa paahu dya " ("Let me have a glimpse of god, let me see god to my heart's content") in 1931. He writes that Savarkar must have shed at least a handful of tears when he composed this poem (Smritipushpay, author and publisher Bapat, NS, 1979, p 63). It is worth mentioning that the same Savarkar had remained unmoved when he heard the judge sentencing him to two Transportations for Life!
In 1924, Savarkar said, "I am confident that I shall live to see the eradication of untouchability. It is my fervent desire that after I die, my dead body should be lifted by Dhends, Doms (ex-untouchable castes) along with Brahmins and Banias and they should all cremate my body. Only then will my soul rest in peace" (Savarkar, Balarao; Hindu Samaj Sanrakshak Savarkar (Ratnagiri Parva), Veer Savarkar Prakashan; Mumbai; 1972, p.67). Savarkar's words and actions confirm, if confirmation is needed, that Savarkar's commitment to social reform stemmed from his humanism and not from any ulterior motive.
Was it the Congress, which repealed the restrictions on Savarkar in 1937?
No. Savarkar was sentenced in 1911 to Transportaton for Life twice and confiscation of property. He was released from the Yerawada Jail, Pune in 1924, on the following conditions:
The restrictions initially stipulated for five years were extended from time to time to 13 years.
In 1937, the Congress won the elections to the Bombay Legislative Assembly but declined to form a government. In order to resolve this constitutional deadlock, Sir George Lloyd, the then Governor, invited Sir Dhanjishah Cooper, to form the ministry. Barrister Jamnadas Mehta, of Lokashahi Swarajya Paksha, a Tilakite Party, too had been elected as member of the Bombay legislative Assembly. He agreed to join the Cooper Ministry, provided all restrictions on Savarkar were revoked. The Governor accepted this proposal and hence Savarkar was freed from all restrictions in May 1937. The Congress had nothing to do with the ultimate release of Savarkar in 1937. If the Congress Party had agreed to form a government in the first place, one wonders if they had removed restrictions on Savarkar.
What were the interactions between Savarkar and Dr. Ambedkar?