Vande Matram: The Imagination of History and the Reality of Politics

The 150th anniversary of Vande Mataram has once again revived the debate between history and the present, with its echoes in Parliament and growing tensions outside. The question is whether the politics of historical disputes has further weakened social harmony.

What was achieved from the 10-hour discussion on Vande Mataram in Parliament? Did anyone learn any lessons? Was there any effort to understand and explain harmony, mutual respect, and shared heritage anywhere in the country?

The ruling party, particularly the BJP, seems happy to have tarnished the Congress party and Jawaharlal Nehru with another stain, accusing them of being responsible for dividing the country, just like the partition, and also for dividing Vande Mataram. They are also satisfied with having an excuse to impose a song on the minority community, especially Muslims, which the Muslim society considers as idolatry.

On the other hand, the Congress and the opposition are happy to have proven once again that Prime Minister Narendra Modi is harming Indian unity by raking up controversial parts of history. Since the Sangh Parivar did not directly participate in the freedom struggle, they are trying to claim some of that legacy. The opposition has also convinced people that the BJP is trying to divide Bengal, just like Lord Curzon, by targeting the upcoming elections, essentially planning a new partition.

It seems that after the foundation stone of the Babri Masjid was laid by Humayun Kabir in Murshidabad and the discussion on Vande Mataram in Parliament, preparations have been made for a new partition in West Bengal.

Imagination of History vs. History of Imagination:
In this debate, many speakers, while calling it irrelevant, said some things that boiled down to the fact that politics should focus on present-day issues rather than getting entangled in historical disputes. Politics is distorting the present by fragmenting history.

Here, a historian's statement comes to mind, which says that historical debates should be left to historians. The fact is that history is an imagination, and no matter how hard one tries to prove it as truth or reality, it cannot be completely free of imagination. Every history has an element of imagination, and every imagination has its own history.

On the other hand, imaginations also have their own history, and when they become part of history, they make history and politics even more complex. The case with Vande Mataram is similar. This issue is more about the imagination of history and the history of imagination than the BJP vs. Congress.

The Indian independence movement has many such things, like slogans and narratives, which, if seen with an open mind, work to unite, but if interpreted with a narrow nationalist mindset, they become divisive. Vande Mataram falls into this category.

Vande Mataram and the novel 'Anandmath' are an imaginative representation of the historical fact of the Sanyasi rebellion.

Silence on the Real Sanyasi Rebellion:
Through this novel and the song, the human form of Banga Mata has become so ingrained in the Indian nationalist imagination that now no one discusses the real Sanyasi rebellion; instead, they only talk about the feminine form of Bharat Mata that emerged from it.

In Parliament, those who called Bankim Chandra Chatterjee a great poet and writer forgot to mention that Bankim had given a communal color to a joint heritage rebellion. Bankim was an employee of the British and tried to justify British rule through his novel.

It is also worth remembering that Bankim wrote an essay called 'Samya' against the British but later withdrew it. However, history is not confined to anyone's imagination. The novel written in favor of the British later became a slogan against British rule.

What a great irony that Bankim turned a rebellion against British rule, in which Bhawani Pathak, Debi Chaudhurani, Mujnu Shah, Musa Shah, and Chirag Ali fought together, into a rebellion against Muslim rule. Even greater irony is that an imaginative song became a living historical reality.

The British Policy of Divide and Rule:
In fact, the British policy of divide and rule started systematically when Hindus and Muslims united to fight against them in the first war of independence in 1857.

It is noteworthy that the Bengal infantry was part of this rebellion, and Mangal Pandey had revolted at the Barrackpore cantonment, but the Bengali elite (Bhadralok) stayed away from it. Similarly, Punjab was also away from this rebellion, which is why the British used Sikh and Gurkha regiments to crush the rebellion in Delhi.

It is also worth considering that in 1857, before Vande Mataram was written, the slogans 'Allah Hu Akbar' and 'Har Har Mahadev' were raised together. When the rebel soldiers moved from Meerut to Delhi, they raised these slogans together at the famous Shiv temple in Meerut.

These are the same slogans that led to riots before and after independence. The shared heritage of 1857 is the fundamental spirit of our freedom struggle, which we see in Gandhi's bhajan that was sung in his prayer meetings and which is now being opposed by the BJP at various places:
Raghupati Raghav Raja Ram, Patita Pavan Sita Ram, Ishwar Allah Tero Naam, Sabko Sanmati De Bhagwan.

The special thing about this shared heritage of 1857 is that it included Gosain and Sanyasi, as well as Peer and Faqir. It had Sanatanis and Arya Samajis, as well as Sher Ali, a Wahabi who killed Viceroy Lord Mayo in the Andamans.

This shared heritage is also visible in the Swadeshi movement in Bengal and later revolutionary movements. It is not a coincidence that Bhagat Singh, on May 10, 1857, considered it an auspicious day and demanded its recurrence.

This heritage continues in the revolutionary movement of India, where Ram Prasad Bismil and Ashfaqulla Khan chanted Vande Mataram as they went to the gallows. During this period, the slogans 'Allah Hu Akbar' and 'Vande Matram' were raised together.

Few people know that Ashfaqulla Khan talks about the worship of this land and quotes Krishna in the freedom struggle. He expresses his desire to be reborn, like Ram Prasad Bismil. On the eve of his execution, Ashfaqulla Khan said:
Jaunga khali haath, magar yeh dard rahega,
Jaane kis din Hindustan aazad kahlayega.

It seems that the British divided this shared heritage of 1857 by promoting the politics of the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha, making Vande Mataram controversial.

Gandhi's Sarvadharma prayer and Subhas Babu's Azad Hind Fauj are a continuation of this heritage, where the Jhansi brigade and the Lakshmi Bai brigade come into existence, and the slogan 'Dilli Chalo' refreshes the memory of 1857.

How will the understanding of this society increase?
Therefore, today, while acknowledging that the Sangh Parivar, which promotes colonial legacy, is dominant in our politics, the opposition and the broader society are, to some extent, rightful claimants of this shared heritage. However, this heritage can only survive if it is separated from immediate political interests and linked to long-term social and cultural unity.

In this task, left-wing circles that advocate for completely separating religion from politics may not be of much help, as they have also played a role in complicating the current disputes. However, some intelligent left-wing thinkers are now emerging who understand the importance of the proper role of religion.

However, the imagination of history and the history of imagination will continue to make this issue more complex. The solution can only be provided by conscious historians or statesman-like politicians. But the question is, where will they come from? And how will the understanding of this society ultimately increase?