When Bharat is not India

T R JAWAHAR

When India committed it-self to a secular dispensation, by a combination of constitutional dictum and political rhetoric, the understanding that the well-meaning majority imbibed was this: that those who followed other faiths are free to do so. Not for a moment would they have believed that meant dilution, denial and even destruction of their own cherished national culture and its symbols. The recent controversy over Vande Mataram is perhaps the last nail on their naive belief that secularism would be fair to their heritage.

Not just the national song, but its sacrifice on the altar of political expediency is also a century old. In his presidential address at an All-India Muslim League in 1908, Syed Ali Imam said: ?... when the most advanced province of India put forward the sectarian cry of 'Bande Mataram' as the national cry, and the sectarian Rakhibandhan as a national observance, my heart is filled with despair and disappointment; ... Has the experiment tried by Akbar and Aurangzeb failed again? ... do they expect the Musalmans of India to accept 'Bande Mataram' and the Sivaji celebration..?? This spirit of Syed Ali Imam, has manifested itself several times over in the last one hundred years, leading to a truncated Vande Mataram first and now its virtual obliteration from national glory by rampant politicking of protagonists and antogonists alike.

Rajendra Prasad, who was the President of the Constituent Assembly gave this assurance in 1950: ?...and the song 'Vande Mataram', which has played a historic part in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honoured equally with Jana Gana Mana and shall have equal status with it ". Really? Rather, right from Mahatma Gandhi's days to the present Maino Gandhi's times, the secular bottomline is that Vande Mataram should not be imposed, and that singing it is voluntary. A proud and poignant gesture of secular deference, no doubt, though at the expense of the 'nationalness and the national status' of the national song; yet what has such indulgence elicited in return? Not similar secular reciprocity by way of singing the song just to warm the hearts of the 'bulk of Indians' who genuinely think of it as a patriotic national song and not a 'partisan' Hindu song; not even to render it as a mark of respect for the country's greatness that the song connotes. Insulting defiance, instead, in the form of alternative songs at the worst, or mere abstinence at best. Where does the problem lie, if a song that stirred multitudes and is still revered, is deemed taboo by a few? If the nation is absolute, so should nationalism be. Is it wrong to infer that those who are objecting to the symbolism of Vande Mataram are actually rejecting the nation itself? Or are those who think their culture is synonymous with their country deluding themselves?

So, not forcing Vande Mataram is deemed secularism. If we may ask, are the reasons touted by Imams from time immemorial for rejecting the song secular? From 1908, referred to above, to 2006, the mullah music has not changed a bit. The Shahi Imam Syed Ahmed Bukhari of Delhi's Jama Masjid had this to say in a recent press conference: 'Vande Mataram is against Islamic beliefs and asking Muslims to sing it would amount to suppression of the community. When it comes to worship only Allahis is given that honour, not the motherland ...'. Though we know it is futile searching for secularism in these words, secularism, however, can certainly be stretched to accommodate them. Reason why the writ of such bigoted mullahs have consistently prevailed and their injunctions have always been heeded, as now, not just by the faithful but even their secular apologists. Given such a secular trend, it would probably be appropriate to check notes with the Imam if saluting the national flag would also be deemed anti-Islam and so unsecular and also on where the Constitution of India stands vis-a-vis the Shariat. Also if Aurangazeb or Chattrapathi Shivaji should be the national icon. And if by Independence, he means restoration of Mughal rule. The Imam would be more than forthcoming with his fatal fatwas! And like Vande Mataram, more, but mere, for sure, symbols of communal Bharat can be de-nationalised ...voluntarily! And after thus secularising Bharat, we can then export our irrepressible Imam to Germany and France, where faithless Muslims are 'foolishly' singing the national songs of those countries, praising the respective Fatherlands.

But there is another crowd of secular zealots that would leave even Imams with an inferiority complex. If a song entrenched in the national psyche as a salutation to our motherland, by rote or conviction, is now being wrenched out from our consciousnes and torn to shreds, the undiminished credit for this unholy 'vastrabaran', goes to some national dailies and self-styled historians, working in tandem. A journalistic worthy calls Vande Mataram just a souvenir, while a historian says the song is downright communal and has no place in secular India! Now, these intellecutals dare not try their intelligence and research on Islamic beliefs. For them India was born in 1947, a naked nation bereft of history, heritage and heroes. The mullahs are better --they believe India was launched by Babar in 1526. Of course, the pride of the rest of India in its ancientness is pure communal superstition and Vande mataram is its symbol!

Indeed, singing of Vande Mataram may not be the true test or the final measure of one's patriotism. But rejecting it on religious ground is most certainly jarring on national sensibilities. And the vehemence with which the nation is being belittled in the face of a global god is most disturbing. If notions of nationalism, national identity and national culture, howsoever flippant and superficial they may seem in these troubled and materialistic times, are declared subservient to trans-national idologies and predatory faiths, where does patriotism figure? Or should we ask the Imam to clarify that too?