Parameswaran History

Matrubhumi Weekly (Malayalam) of 17-24 April 1999, carried an article said to be in response to an earlier article by writer Anand. This response is from a RSS “intellectual”. The article starts with saying that intellectuals (may be other than of RSS brand) get into a mess through their one sided thinking. Mr. P.Parameswaran is a well-known RSS scribe not known as a scholar in any branch of knowledge faculty. According to this scribe, the history of Indian National Struggle for Independence from British rule is that of Hindus alone. In his support, he wanted some of the extremists in the movement to be described, recognised and accepted as fore most fighters in behalf of Hindu. He makes a claim that the extremist past of the national movement to be taken back to the time of Pazhassi Raja and Veluthambi Dalawa. Here he conveniently omits to mention another contemporary Tipu Sultan who went down fighting the British domination. May be Tipu’s fight was not against British at all. This is a new reading of history that Pazhassi Raja and Veluthambi were fighting for Hindutva against British. Such reading of history is stock in trade with north Indian Hindutva historians. According to their reading both Swami Vivekananda and Maharshi Arabindo were Hindutva protagonists. They were advising and guiding the then extremists in Bengal. Today the Hindutva historian has appropriated all but few top national leaders for fighting for Hindutva. Really, there were few who spoke of Hindu past but never asked or worked for that. They all fought for a modern India. They have tried to appropriate the Mahatma himself to their side for his preaching Ram Rajya all his life. The Mahatma has clarified his position in every time that his Ram Rajya is not a Hindu Rajya but a regime of justice to all communities. The Hindu historian has done it in case of Dr. Ambedkar as well. Dr. Ambedkar in his days criticized and ridiculed Hinduism in his writings. While writing on the idea of Pakistan, Ambedkar raised a number of facts connected with Muslim rule in India from the past. It was part of his criticism of all kinds of fanatic ideologies being propagated in the name of nationalism. This Hindutva ideologue selected only those that are in tune with his own depiction of Muslim rule. The Hindutva vadi in him makes Parameswaran to claim that polytheism is a virtue in Hindu religion for every male god there is a female as well. This justifies the claim that in Hinduism there is sexual equality much the same way as in the present day feminist demand. He also claims that keeping in with the current socio-political developments and also to cultivate allies; Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism and other smaller sects. He says that all these are not separate but branches of Hinduism itself. He will surely will not admit that at one point of time both Buddhism and Jainism were predominant in all over India. But both disappeared from such a position for convincing reasons still to be ascertained. Dr. Ambedkar re-asserted Buddhism as more progressive to Hinduism but not accepted by the communal forces. The Hindutva group organised violent protests against naming theNagpur University as Dr. Ambedkar University. Though the RSS itself may not be directly responsible, its associated outfits were leading the agitation.

When Parameswaran speaks of birth and fate of Arya Samajists and Hindu Mahasabhaists one might assume that the current RSS and its Parivar also may disappear from the main scene in a future date.

Parameswaran accepts with one condition that freedom of expression does not include freedom to convert from one religion to another. The arguments against conversion are that others i.e. the Semitics wanted to bring their uniformed thought and faith not allowing any dissent. He quotes from a Semitic source book. The logic is less convincing in the light of claims for superiority to Hinduism.

One would like to take note of and underline the explanations for Hindu gods keep more than one weapon in their hands, is to fight evil. Parameswaran says that there is no non-violent Hinduism. According to him, the Hindutva forces are for polytheism including all female gods, which he agrees to be paganism and pre-historic one. But let us look at the actual practice. The Hindus at least among the higher castes never accepted the SC/ST as part of Chaturvarna. They are branded as Panjama, the fifth caste not part of Hinduism. They are still kept as un-touchable in their homes and villages. Even the high castes do not allow any freedom for their women. Widows are not to be seen when one starts a journey from home. They are evil omen. Whoever fought against such practices were denounced as infidel. Polytheism itself is a sort of compromise on the part Brahmin authority; with different castes but not with Panjama. Otherwise, the authority of ones own god was the norm. Shiva for Shaivaites and Vishnu for Vaishnavas etc. it is only very late in history, rivalries between gods subsided and mutual admission was put in to practice. Even then, there were pagan gods not accepted in Hindu pantheon. Only recently the efforts at Hinduising pagan gods taken up by Sangha Parivar as part of Hinduising the Dalits and tribals.

Another point that the writer was making out is that the early freedom fighters were Hindus and they naturally adopted violence in their fight against imperialism. He cites Chaphekar brothers of Maharashtra to support his contention. The brothers wanted to establish a Hindu Rajya in India. He also maintained that by excluding Hindu extremists from the pantheon of freedom fighters, the post freedom governments were family forums, without explicitly naming Nehru family. He keeps hidden the fact the whole families of Nehru were eminent freedom fighters on their own and not depended on the family line. This includes Indira, Rajiv and today Sonia. All of them fought elections and got elected in spite of the denigrating propaganda against them. The communal elements did not get any representations for many years until the frenzy of Mandal commission verdict dividing people on different caste basis. The Vajapeyee government came to power in alliance with regional and caste based parties.

Parameswaran seems to think that while fight for freedom was that of Hindus the fruits of freedom i.e. political authority went to secularists, Christian and western minded. He has not yet made a charge that the Indian National Congress was not fighting for freedom but manipulating the fight for freedom carried by Hindutva.

According to him, nationalism in India is Hindu nationalism and is deferent from that of west. Such nonsense is talked about only to defend the RSS ideology. There are several studies that found and recognized the worst parts of Semitic religions that were adopted and internalized by the Hindu fundamentalists in their ideology and practice while mouthing spiritual thoughts of Vedantin.

One thing was clear from Parameswaran’s diatribe that given a chance, they will paint freedom struggle fought under the leadership of Indian National Congress, a combined force of all major and minor communities in India, with a saffron brush and make only Hindus as real heroes. In the process, Sardar Patel and many other original leaders of earliest struggles will be assimilated as Hindu fighters. As said earlier even Mahatma is being grafted to their side. Parameswaran is hinting at the possibility of Indira and Rajiv as well. The point made by him that there is an underlying Hindu nationalism based on oneness of Hindu society from pre-historic times; is not shared by other intelligent people. He claims that RSS like Hindu organisations are making efforts to recapture or revive that elusive Hindu nationalism, a solid rock designed in past history. The Muslim intelligentsia who at the beginning of Indian national movement demarcated themselves from Hindu in various ways finally culminated in the demand for separate country Pakistan for Muslims. Parameswaran is silent or hiding all other developments and asserts a one sided Hindu nationhood. This may in future make way for further division of the country based on region and caste majority.

It will be interesting to see any follow up of these arguments in the future issues of the magazine.

About a week earlier, Matrubhumi weekly carried another article by the same Parameswaran RSS ideologue. He critically viewed the works of non-Hindutva historians writing history of Kerala. He gleefully quoted some eminent historians saying further that Marxist approach in writing history of Kerala was a failure. Marxist method is not applicable to Kerala. The RSS man was advocating an alternative approach that is national and one with traditions. He identified that the current approach to history is the result of western influences in effect Christian one. According to this gentleman Marxism and secularism are the outgrowth of Christian and therefore not suitable to us in India and Kerala. But he failed to point out any tradition of keeping historical records in this land, much less about writing history of their own times. He in fact may be advocating concoction of a national Hindu history, as he understands the tradition. What is the national Hindu tradition in writing history? Can we formulate an accurate history from the available sources on our ancient literature, philosophy, Ayurveda etc.?

We have no records of any one of the Vedic heroes and composers except the legends. May be according to the BJP ideologue, we must learn history through Vedic and Upanishad stories, myths and Puranas and several Sankara Vijayams, Sthalapuranas connected with temples and pilgrim sites or pure hearsays. These will give our history unique and inimitable greatness as special Hindu race destined to lead the world in all aspects material and spiritual. The Hindutva super race is inventing history not just for us but also for the whole world.

(Somewhere I read that Ketumalam, one of the seven dvipas mentioned on Puranas, is the same Guatemala in Latin Americas. In another place, some revered Shastri is said to have advised the Brahmins residing inAmerica to specify in their Sankalpa, Crouncha Dvipa in place of Jambu Dvipa where India is situated. By the way, Crouncha Dvipa is supposed to be surrounded by milky ocean.)

Some of these like Parameswaran, maintained and continue to do so that all of mankind are originally Hindu, later converted to Judaism, Christianity and Islam etc. etc. Only in India, such mass conversions did not take place. The India or Bharat remains Hindu. Parameswaran did not voice his views on these. May be that he kept them in reserve for the real Hindu history to be prepared in due course of time. In his earlier article, he attributed to Christian, naming certain Hindu rites and traditions as pagan. He did not give his own view about what is really paganism and not forming part of Hindu tradition. There are groups called pagan in many places, in Africa, remote parts of other continents as well as in many islands in Pacific.

K.N.Krishnan.

June/July, 1999.