Ashok Ogra
Why is it that in spite of pursuing an aggressive Hindutva agenda, the BJP has failed to retain power in Karnataka? How does one explain the defeat of those candidates who were in the centre of communal rows like hijab and halal ban and demonizing Tipu? Does it indicate limited appeal of a manifesto that is couched in ‘polarizing ideology’?
The larger question is why are there few takers of Hinduvta ideology south of the Vindhyas? Has it to do with the make-up of the southern states where regional, linguistic and cultural elements exert as strong an influence as religion across communities? Where regional identity is strong and any attempt to foster one religion, one language is unwelcome?
It is not that people from the southern States are less inclined towards religion. That is far from the truth. However, what distinguishes them from cow-belt co-religionists is fewer of them consider theirs to be the ‘one true religion’. Also, the Mandir- Majid has never been an issue in the region as temples were never destroyed by other religions. Hence religion as a political narrative has remained baseless in the region.
That explains why the communally sensitive pockets are far fewer in the South as compared to the rest of the country.
Let me frame this from a historical perspective and rewind to the time of the birth of Islam and its journey beyond the borders of the Arab peninsula. Islam came to South India much before to the north – during the time of the Prophet himself, as trade was flourishing between Arab and South India even before Islam started. Muslims in the North came as invaders who set up empires. In the South they came as traders and not through conquest. Accepting local cultures was good business as well as excellent public relations.
It was to facilitate the Arab traders to pursue their new religion that Cheruman Perumal, a Hindu nobleman, built a mosque for their namaz in 629 AD near Kochi, three years before the Prophet’s death, making it India’s first mosque and among the first six in Islam. Incidentally, kingdoms of the south, both Muslim and Hindu, fought against the Mughals.
It is, therefore, no surprise that both in Kerala and Tamil Nadu and, to a certain extent, in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, Muslims identify themselves as Keralites, Tamilians,Telugu and Kanadigas and are comfortable conversing in local languages- though in the case of Hyderabad and its adjoining areas Urdu/Dakhini/Hindustani is preferred by the minority community.
This is not to deny the violent conversions that took place during the reign of Tipu Sultan. Communal riots rocked Malabar. Fortunately, Tipu’s reign lasted for only 17 years. However, there is an acknowledgement, particularly in the old Mysore belt, that Tipu initiated major socio-economic reforms that benefitted the people of all religious groups. Thde muslim rulers in both Karnataka and undivided Andhra were less brutal than what we got to see in the north.
The story in the north is different where Muslims came through conquest and become rulers. Kings like Aurangzeb were very brutal and performed many forced conversions in the North. This might be the reason why Hindus in the North are vary or there is a historic fear against Muslims in North India. There was always communal divide in those regions which were grown and watered by both Mughals and the British.
The invaders succeeded to a large extent in imposing their culture, traditions on the dominant local cultures. One can find the traces of this inter-cultural interaction ( Ganga- Jamuni Tehzib) in music, dance, arts and crafts that flourish in the Hindi heartland.
However, noted Muslim scholar Prof. Suleman Siddiqui interprets it differently. According to him, the idea of a composite culture, where Hindus and Muslims live together in harmony, was developed in South India and not in the North. He adds “Muslims did not come to India because of Mohammed bin Qasim, but had already arrived in the country during the time of the Prophet in Kerala and performed trade there. The difference between the north and south is that in the south, the Hindus and Muslims lived side by side in peace with each other. Hindu kings provided the Muslims with opportunities for trade. While in the North, there was always a rift.”
An equally important factor has been the easy access to quality education across communities that facilitated embedding a liberal outlook and religious tolerance among the local people. A large number of Muslim- run -educational institutions came up in the region as early as 19th century. While North Indian Muslims are mostly less educated and more into vocational jobs, South Indian Muslims are reasonably educated and are visible across various sectors of the economy including IT, engineering, health etc…
Booker Prize winning author Arvind Adiga in his book WHITE TIGER aptly describes the North as “dark India” and the South as “bright India” in line with large-scale development.
It is true that for the last several decades a unique brand of hateful and divisive politics has come to pervade India’s south-western coastal districts in both Kerala and Karnataka. However, for reasons historical, the rest of the region has remained indifferent to the divisive ideology being propagated by extremist organizations. In fact, very recently the 350 year old Koraneshwara Sansthan Matha in Karnataka decided to anoint a Muslim as its head.
Local people take tremendous pride in their Dravidian ancestry, its history and culture. The sentiment of being a Tamilian, a Kanadiga, a Malyali, a Telgu is much stronger than any religious belonging.
It needs to be noted that Lord Shiva is revered in Tamilnadu much in the same manner as Lord Ram is in cow belt. That explains why the Ayodhya movement did not resonate with the region. In fact, Dravidian nationalists claim that Lord Shiva was a Dravidian God expropriated by the Northern Aryans.
Mostly because of their faith, a Hindu from Tamilnadu and a Pandit from Kashmir feel like part of the same community.
Also, the south is a much calmer place than North India. People are relatively polite. They generally live in spartan homes (immortalized by the Chetan Bhagat line ”a south Indian home looks like a north Indian home that has been burgled”. There are fewer calories in weddings there, literally and figuratively, unlike the fat weddings of Delhi. That perhaps explains why the loud and somewhat gaudy campaign of the BJP during the Karnataka elections didn’t impress the electorate.
Nirad Chaudhuri provides an interesting insight on why the South is more tolerant, inclusive and emancipated than the north: “The Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh are, of all regions of India and, in contrast to Bengal, Madras, Maharashtra, and to a certain extent, the Punjab, the areas which have been least affected by the impact of the West on Indian life; where during British rule Western ideas, values and ways of living took the deep roots; and where the idea of synthesis on which the culture of modern India was based never produced a genuine local form.”
To expand on what Nirad Babu has said, one can safely argue that Hindu culture in the south is not a mix. Because it has little influence of Islam, it retains its original character and purity. For instance, there is not as much secular music in Carnatic as there is in Hindustani. And yet, because of centuries – old interactions with different communities and nationalities – thanks to trade via the Arabian sea- celebrating diversity comes naturally to the people. That is why it is said that the South Indian imagination is like a banyan tree where the roots and the branches have constant interplay.
The socio- religious reformation movements of mid 19th and early 20th were mostly focused on negotiating the then prevailing rigid religious practices and obnoxious social systems, and partly directed at the foreign domination.
Post -Ayodhya movement, the religious component of this resurgence has gained traction in the cow belt. However, to ensure that the movement does not recede into ‘religious fanaticism’ it is important that its content and its articulation is rooted both in our rich civilizational base and in the modern scientific outlook. Only then will it resonate with the people in the south. Overplaying religious symbols of a particular religion will not work. Nor will imposition of Hindi language. Any move to impose homogeneity through cultural domination will be resisted. Remember, the south sees unity as a composite of diversities and believes in celebrating it.
Finally, for the Hindutva project to gain a foothold in the south, its advocates must first make serious attempt to understand both South India and South Indians.
(The author works for Apeejay Education, New Delhi)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
