A Confession

Accumulated knowledge, ideas, thoughts, experiences make us what we are today. Wisdom that we gain, ideology and philosophy that we call our own are result of sometimes painstaking, sometimes effortless process of learning that starts at a very early age. All that we thus accumulate, makes our identity. As this is an ever ending process, we as thinking, learning human being keep changing till the last day of our lives.

And yet, there may be things that we hold dear and sacrosanct. Things that after a time, never really change. What we call values and ideology. And these constitute the core of our identity. We use these as touchstones for judging all other ideas and actions of self and others. These core values and ideology give us a unique identity.

When these core values are challenged, we feel uncomfortable. This is identity crisis. We can’t let that happen and must defend them with all our might. A defeat there will lead to a void that threatens our whole existence.

Recently, it has been an identity crisis like situation for me. First, it was embarrassing to know that all along I was being misguided and used by whole bunch of communist propagandists who claimed to be historians. Unfortunately all I ever read are Romila Thapar, D N Jha, R S Sharma, Bipan Chandra and some NBT (Mukherjees) and NCERT books (Adding to the shame is the realization that I carry with me many of those books even today). Fortunately, however, I never liked Mediveal India so could skip Irfan Habib and hence avoid the mortifying shame of following a communist who is also a Muslim!

(I must confess that when my daughter last week asked about a good book on ancient history, I was totally confounded as I could not recollect a single name other than these abhorrent communist thugs. I know there can be no excuse for such a despicable ignorance.)

Then, few days back I was told that Chandrachud, former CJI who I always admired as a champion and crusader for equality and justice, was a congress stooge or worse! Someone who, to use a friend’s words, ‘sold his soul’ to Indira Gandhi during the emergency. Never mind that he was made CJI by Morarji Desai government. The guy must have bought it back and resell to Morarji bhai.

Today I come to know that Padgaonkar was a congresswala! Now, he and Rajendra Mathur (Navbharat Times) were the two persons I grew up with. Most of my social-political thoughts were shaped back then by these two persons. I am wondering if Mathur was a congress guy or a communist. He died long back so this issue may remain unaddressed.

The question, however, that bothers me is what I am? A congressi? communist? Worse of the two, may be, as all these persons I tried so hard to emulate all my life turn out to be dishonest cheats camouflaging as something else. That is the identity crisis like situation I referred to.

A life wasted on these false ideas and ideals. A socio-political identity that turns out to be a mere mask. Surely a condemned life mine is.

Equality & Justice and What Kind of A Motherland We Want?

In everyday life we keep facing setbacks, disappointments, frustrations. What we need, and generally have, to overcome these mini-major crises are whole lot of support systems- set of persons, ideas, things we draw sustenance from. Family and friends and role models; Music, poetry, religion, politics.

When in doubt or challenged or just screwed up, they bring balance and sanity back to our life, get us some perspective: sometimes by consoling, sometimes by confronting and sometimes by just a graceful and kind acceptance of who we are. This process makes us wholesome and life worth living.

AIR once used to host various lecture series regularly on myriad of socio-political issues. Don’t know if they do that now. Publication Division used to publish these lectures and sell in the booklet format. One of my prized possessions that has travelled far and wide with me in the last 25 years (and survived) is one such booklet, the Sardar Patel Memorial Lecture 1987, delivered by Y V Chandrachud and titled, "The Basics of Indian Constitution: Its Search for Social Justice and the Role of Judges".

It's not just the role of judges that Chandrachud discusses in his speech. It's a complete critique of the functioning of the Supreme Court and tries to explain judiciary’s role in an ever changing socio-political landscape in a young aspirational nation.

As the topic is about social justice, the concept of equality, in its various shades, is the main theme. So much so that delivery of equality becomes synonymous with delivery of justice. Equality is not merely a legal or judicial concept; its much beyond that. Equality is the essence of all fundamental rights that the constitution grants us and soul of the directive principles.

I keep going back to this booklet just to keep myself reminded what justice is all about and why there can be no compromise on equality or any limitation allowed to be placed on the concept that is equality.

Chandrachud finishes his lecture quoting Camus from his "Letters to a German Friend":

"I should like to be able to love my country and still love justice. I don't want just any greatness for it, particularly a greatness born of blood and falsehood. I want to keep it alive, by keeping justice alive.”

History through "A Wrinkle In Time"

"Imagine how different India would be had Sher Shah ruled for couple of decades more and left able successors"

Now, this is a real difficult imagination for class 7 students. It presupposes that the students have not only a thorough knowledge of medieval Indian history but also a strong sense of history (pl also note that the problem has two hypothetical conditions that both need to be met for a solution to emerge; a tough proposition even for more matured persons).

One of the reasons I very often suspect the motive behind this decision to teach history in lower classes is that history can be (and often is) taught in a very subjective manner. Also, the quality of teachers, especially in lower classes, for an important subject like history needs consideration. Though it would be gross simplification, I believe that a portion of blame of Hitler's idea of Aryan superiority that finally ended up as homicidical also has to be shared by his history teacher in school who was effective and yet crooked.
Back to the Sher Shah problem. I wonder why the author of the book thinks it's an important issue for class 7! And why does the history teacher agree with the author so much so that she has given a project on this topic?
I mean, I do understand if a similar question is framed with Rana Pratap or Shivaji. They were Hindu so may be this thinking that their reign would have somehow rejuvenated the otherwise rotten Hindu society and united India to a path of prosperity and a common cause, thus evading the catastrophe caused by the marauding Europeans. This is a roundabout way to propose the concept of a Hindu nation-state for a time period when this modern idea of nation-state was not even conceived. Being a born Hindu I do understand this mindset, if not indulge it. But Sher Shah?

Is it that, in some strange way, Akbar is representing Muslims here in this problem and Sher Shah, an imaginary resistance? A less Muslim?  A more agreeable one, or a less dislikeable one? After defeating Akbar, he and his able successors would have established Ram-Rajya and served it in accordance with Manusmriti!

I am just thinking aloud; more a rambling than thinking really. Is this an over zealous author stretching the long dead idea of Hindu renaissance bit too far? Or perhaps a person with strong sense of humour, having a quite dig at the now fashionable again Hindu revivalism!  Also, want to understand why this problem was considered appropriate for a group of very young children!

ps: My daughter in her report has essentially explained why Akbar & co did alright and Sher Shah & co were probably not going to do much beyond what Mughals already did (all my fault; I am her guide). Does she run the risk of being branded a traitor in her school (a Hindu missionary one, I must add).