Society and Culture
Vande Mataram - To Sing or Not to Sing
BBC News is reporting that India is currently embroiled in a controversy over whether the song Vande Mataram should be sung in schools or not. For those not familiar with India this song embodied the spirit of the pre-independence nationalist movement, but lost out to the more secular Jana Gana Mana, as the post-independence national anthem.
The current controversy started when the Congress-led government decreed that the song be sung by students in all schools on September 7, marking its 100th anniversary. Muslim groups objected, saying the song was offensive to them as it referred to a Hindu goddess and to ‘bowing’ to said goddess. The Congress backed down, making the singing voluntary. Then, predictably, the ‘hindu fundamentalist’ BJP got into the act, making it compulsory in all states (including in Muslim madarasas) that it rules.
This whole affair is remarkable for the fixation of all players involved with the irrelevant.
First, the Congress government, could not leave well enough alone. In 1947, Jana Gana Mana was chosen as the national anthem, precisely for the reasons the current controversey has arisen. When the matter had been settled 60 years ago, why stoke a simmering fire now?
Next, the Muslims. Sure, the song refers to the goddess Durga, but more than anything else, it talks about India. When they object to singing the song, they can not be concerned about what the song is about, because it is - first and foremost - about India. The directive was not an attack on their identity - religious or otherwise. Yet, some muslims perceive it as such. But which identity are they choosing to be faithful to - that of a muslim or that of an Indian?
The song is, first and foremost, a homage to India - to their country. Ever heard of a simily? There are other reasons - freedom, to wit - to oppose a compulsory directive, but mixing religion and national identity is not one of them.
Finally, the BJP has proven yet again that it lacks any tact and can only survive by creating controversy. With the monsoon around, Mr. Advani could not go on a Rath Yatra so they cooked up this issue.
The problem with the BJP’s logic of making this song compulsory is that it is wrong. They say:
There are some things which are symbols of national pride and Vande Mataram is one of them. It can’t be made optional.
The second statement does not follow from the first. Yes, the song is a symbol of India’s independence movement. That, however, has nothing to do with it being compulsory. India is a free country, so singing this song - or any other - should be optional. The BJP is nobody to tell me what I should be proud of, or what my level of patriotism is based on their symbols of pride.
There are reasons why the current outcome is correct. Yet nobody brought these up. The song connects us to a struggle from 60 years ago, and we need to remind ourselves of that time. It should be sung. But the government cannot tell me I must. Citizens of India - muslims or not - should object to a compulsory directive on those grounds.
Finally, this controversy explains why moderate Hindu’s feel Indian secularism is nothing but pandering to the minority.
Muslim groups mix religious and national identity at will, when Indians are expected to keep them separate. They perceive every act as an attack on their identity. But as the BJP points out (in an inappropriate way) which identity? The Congress government, for its part, provides legitimacy to this mixing of identities, and giving prominence to the religious one, by retracting its directive for the wrong reasons. It should have backed away, not because Muslims objected, but because citizens of India are free to choose.
The tragedy is that in all of this, the song and our independence struggle seem to have been lost.
Discussion
6 comments for “Vande Mataram - To Sing or Not to Sing”
Post a comment
I must admit that I criticize muslims for mixing religion and nationalism, without understanding their objections to this song. Perhaps it is not possible in this case. For a muslim view of the issue, please see the following post by Mohib: What Is My Issue with Vande Mataram
What you say is true, the citizens must have a platform to voice their choice and it must not be forced upon them.
I agree that such symbols cannot be imposed onto the people of India. We are free to practise and follow such symbols or chose not to. No party or organization should ask a community to practise such symbols to prove their loyalty and patriotism towards India. Should every religious person prove their religiosity by reciting the prescribed prayers? Can he chose not to and still love his god?
More on this at:
http://sujaiblog.blogspot.com/2006/09/on-singing-vande-mataram.html
Sujai
If someone defines a practice of eating meating as one of the rituals of expressing one’s patriotism and makes it a national symbol, will the higher caste chaste hindus who practise strict vegetarianism be willing to eat meat just to prove that they are patriotic?
And if those hindus refuse to eat meat, arguing that patriotism has nothing to do with eating certain food item or the other, will others accuse them of mixing nationalism and religious-caste identity?
Just a thought!
Sujai,
Your comparison of eating meat with mixing identity is logically correct but contextually quite pointless. It doesn’t address whether my argument is correct or not, simply digresses from it.
The song has a historical relation to the independence struggle and its meaning is based on an intentional play on words. Eating meat is perhaps slightly different from an abstract imaginative song-based similey? Just a thought.
Dweep:
I agree with you that nobody should dictate how and in what way a person has to express his/her patriot feelings.
Now, I would like to comment on what you said:
“Next, the Muslims. Sure, the song refers to the goddess Durga, but more than anything else, it talks about India. When they object to singing the song, they can not be concerned about what the song is about, because it is - first and foremost - about India… But which identity are they choosing to be faithful to - that of a muslim or that of an Indian?”
There is a tendency in India (as elsewhere) to assume that the way we behave is the right way and that others should conform to it. For Hindus, may be, religion is secondary compared to nationality. For Muslims, religion is the biggest identity- which is constant, unchanging and permanent for millenia. For them, Nations, states, kingdoms and hence allegiances change with time while religion remains the same. They attach more importance to religion and its interpretation compared to nation and its interpretation. The failure to understand this will result in confusion. Being tolerant comes from the ability to understand why they behave the way they behave. Just because they consider religion to be supreme does not mean they are not patriotic to the nation. Allegiance to both religion and nation is quite practical and not mutually exclusive. Such misconceptions should be discarded.
Muslims have always opposed (not only in India but elsewhere) deification of nation. According to them it is idolatry. Calling rain a rain-god, monkey as monkey-god, or a nation as Goddess Durga (Bharat Mata), is something that is unIslamic. The very foundation of Islam was made on breaking away from such pagan worships- all forms of anthropomorphism are discarded. To ask them or request them to uphold a song or a ritual that deifies nation (as human) goes against these basic tenets. They shall respect Nature and the Nation, but they will not pray to it. While Hindus can pray to almost anything- including a rock, animal, natural event, or human, Muslims do not. The failure to understand this will result in confusion- it will result in false expectations and hence disappointment.
Sujai