Ever since the breakdown of the Nehruvian consensus that shaped the country after 1947, a growing number of scholars have agonised over the ‘idea of India’. In part, this concern was a response to the rise of Hindu nationalism and a fear that India was being transformed into something fearfully different. Equally, it was also an attempt to grapple with the changes a market economy, particularly globalisation, would herald.
Ananya Vajpeyi’s contribution to this debate is refreshingly different. It is neither a comprehensive political history nor a thorough dissection of the Indian mind. It draws from these as well as theology and aesthetics to paint a tantalising picture of the ferment that gripped leading Indian minds in the 20th century.
The book proceeds on the assumption that major historical developments are accompanied by an introspection of the self, both at an individual and collective level. India, in her view, experienced this process sometime after the Swadeshi movement hit a brick wall and the moderate-extremist divide led to Indian nationalism losing its momentum.
She believes that Mahatma Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj (1909), with its revolutionary re-interpretation of the ‘Indic tradition’, was a ‘Galilean’ moment for India. Focusing principally on the doctrine of ahimsa and his engagement with the Bhagwad Gita, Vajpeyi projects Gandhi as an unlikely politician: “Gandhi was engaged in the search for a strong and virtuous Indic self, not so much in the quest for normatively exercised political power (rajdharma)”.
In a similar vein, Vajpeyi hones in on Rabindranath Tagore’s ‘viraha’, his conscious detachment from history and his alienation from public life after his experiences with the Swadeshi movement. Tagore’s rejection of nationalism as a ‘menace’ and his advocacy of a ‘life of simplicity, contemplation, and the cultivation of the soul, an ethic of social cooperation and not economic conflict’ also contributed to the ‘Righteous Republic’.
Vajpeyi’s inclusion of both Gandhi and Tagore as towering individuals who nudged the evolving India in the direction of righteousness is understandable. A little more curious, however, is that she has also included Jawaharlal Nehru and B.R. Ambedkar in that category.
Ambedkar did engage with Indic traditions to evolve his very distinct version of neo-Buddhism centred on a partial reading of traditional Buddhism. But, as the author concedes, Ambedkar’s Buddhism was more instrumental and a way of detaching Dalits from Hinduism, but not from the Indian nation. Ambedkar, she writes, “took the Buddha as his guru, and yet, in some fundamental way remained tone-deaf to the Buddha”. Little wonder then that Ambedkarite neo-Buddhism was easily transformed into Ambedkar worship.
Likewise, Nehru “saw himself as the new Asoka” and appropriated the majestic symbols of the Mauryan Empire for the new Republic. But apart from this expedient use of the past, there was little in Nehru to suggest that his vision of modern India was based on any meaningful engagement with the Indic inheritance. Nehru certainly shaped modern India, but his contribution to a righteous ethos was feeble. Vajpeyi’s description of him as a ‘scholar-statesman’ may be valid but not on the terms she has employed for the others.
Overall, this is a book that is original, insightful and quirky. Its political message is unequivocal: the occasion for another Galilean moment to reforge the idea of India hasn’t yet come. Many Indians would disagree.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
I don't think Mr.Dasgupta was paid much at all, to write this review.
Outlook if you pay his nothing, he will give you nothing.
> "Vajpeyi’s inclusion of both Gandhi and Tagore as towering individuals who nudged the evolving India in the direction of righteousness is understandable. A little more curious, however, is that she has also included Jawaharlal Nehru and B.R. Ambedkar in that category."
That is petty, but what else can we expect from Swapan Dasgupta?
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT