The Press Information Bureau of Government of India in its official magazine New India Samachar observed that "The freedom movement is not limited only to British rule, even before that India has gone through a period of servitude. The Bhakti movement acted as the foundation of the freedom struggle. As the Bhakti movement gave strength to the freedom movement, in the same way, the inspiration for the AatmaNirbhar Bharat is derived from those great personalities associated with it. Once again in the Amrit Kaal, the spiritual consciousness is awakening in the country. This spiritual consciousness is working to become the foundation for the reconstruction of the nation." In this context, Liberation spoke to Awadhesh Tripathi, a scholar of Hindi literature, to understand the Bhakti movement better.
Liberation: What does the BJP mean by seeking to associate "Bhakti movement" with "freedom from servitude"? What do they mean by "servitude" here? By drawing the "freedom struggle" line back to the 12th-13th century, is the BJP not undermining the importance and specificity of the anti-British freedom struggle?
Awadhesh Tripathi: This is a mischievous effort by the BJP to link Bhakti movement with their kind of notion of "freedom from servitude". By doing this they are maligning our past and our literary heritage. Bhakti movement originated in the southern part of India, where Mughal or Muslim rule was absent. Later it became a very influential literary and social movement throughout the country. If it had anything to do with Muslim rule it should have originated in the part where Mughal rule was influential. This is not the first time BJP/RSS have tried to do this. Earlier also they tried to propagate the idea of "servitude of one thousand years". By doing this they want to create a narrative of India's slavery by Muslim rulers. This narrative helps them to spread hatred against Muslims as well as justifies their hobnobbing with the British rule during freedom struggle. There are several examples when RSS and Hindu Masabha leaders took the side of British rulers and theorised that British rule in India has brought freedom for Hindus from Muslim rule. When rest of India was fighting for freedom, they were aligning with the British and saw them as ‘liberators’ from Muslims! In last few years of rule BJP/RSS has realised that their absence from freedom struggle is a point which will always be raised against them and despite all their bosting of being true patriots they will remain dubious. To get rid of their history of being traitors in the freedom struggle they did their best to adopt some of the freedom fighters but could not succeed much because anyone can throw some or the other statement of these freedom fighters which is against the politics of RSS/Hindu Mahasabha. By stretching the freedom struggle back to 12th-13th century they want to undermine anti-colonial struggle of India which was fought by the people of India. People from different religious beliefs, different castes and genders fought together for the freedom of our motherland and sacrificed their lives. This unity is an antidote of the venom spread by BJP/RSS.
Liberation: Was the Bhakti movement a response to "servitude" - i.e to Mughal Muslim domination over Hindus? If not, what was the actual impulse behind the Bhakti movement?
No, Bhakti movement was not in the response to Muslim domination over Hindus or Mughal rule. This is an established fact. Yes, Bhakti movement was in response to servitude of caste and patriarchy, it was in response to feudal social order. Bhakti poetry questions all the worldly inequality and establishes love and devotion as the way to freedom. As said earlier Bhakti originated with the Alvar and Nayanar saints of south India and later spread in the northern and other parts of India. If it was in response to Mughal rule one would have found criticism of Mughals in the poetry but it is not there. 14 century Bangla Bhakt poet Chandidas writes- O my human friend listen! Listen my brother human, the human is greater than everything, nothing is greater than that (shanuh maanush bhai, sabar upare manish bad, tahar upare nai). He is putting human essence in equivalence to God. Bhakti poetry made it possible to be friend/ lover/ seeker of God. Earlier God was restricted to temples and Brahmin priests were mediators; bhakti brought the God to the humble huts of poor, bypassing the Brahmins. The Bhakti movement had a kind of revolutionary role in those times and for the first time we see people coming from so called lower castes, women and from marginalised communities composing their grief, love, devotion in verses. With the coming of Islam in India, rebellious Sufis also came and they gave a new dimension to Bhakti. Their khankahs became popular among Hindu and Muslims both. From Akka Mahadevi, Lal Ded, Meera, Raidas, Kabir, Malik Mohhammad Jaisi, Chaitanya, Shankardev, Soyarabai, Muktabai, Eknath, Surdas to Tulasidas, you will not find any trace of reaction against Mughals or Muslims. Yes, there are differences in their point of views and they may represent different schools of Bhakti but they all have a dream of a good society: Sant Raidas calls it Beghumpura and Tulsidas calls it Ramrajya.
Though Hindutva ideology tries to appropriate Tulsidas, as he is an ardent supporter of varnashrama system, he is of no use to them when it comes to anti-muslim politics. This is well documented that Tulsidas also had to suffer in the hands of religious orthodoxy because he was making the Ramkatha available in people's language Awadhi. Once he retaliated to such reactionaries with these words:
Dhut kahau, avdhut kahau, rajput kahau, julaha kahau kou;
kahu ki beti son beta na byahab kahu ki jati bigar n sou.
Tulsi sarnam gulam hai ram ko jake ruchai so kahai kachu au
mangi ke khaibo maseet ko soibo lebe ko ek na debe ke dou.
(Let anyone call me a cheat or a mendicant, a Rajput or a Muslim weaver, I have no son to marry to anyone's daughter and defile their caste; Tulsi is well known as the slave of Ram; everyone is free to call him by any name. By choice he lives by begging for alms; he sleeps in a mosque and is free from any kind of liabilities either to give or to receive.)
I would like to emphasise that dream of egalitarian society based on love, not anti-Muslim hatred, is the impulse behind Bhakti movement.
Liberation: BJP and RSS define "Hindu-ness" as hatred of Muslims. Did the Bhakti poets define spirituality in this way?
BJP/RSS have this agenda of defining "Hindu-ness" as hatred of Muslims because this provides oxygen to their kind of hate politics. But you cannot relate Bhakti movement with this kind of hate politics. "Hindu-ness" of Bhakti has a range of contrary ideas coexisting together. One can find sanyasis, grihasthas, men, women, lower caste, and upper caste, cross dressers to naked people in the bhakti tradition. You will find Muslims singing to express their love for Krishna and composing love stories with Hindu protagonists. In other words Bhakti has no room for hatred and it has no boundaries of religion, caste, language or gender. Bhakti represents the whole of India, the diverse and composite India and it's aspiration for just social order. Bhakti represents the assertion of local languages and it challenges the authority of the Sastras (sacred texts). If BJP/RSS are trying to misrepresent Bhakti tradition and define it against Muslims it is our responsibility to resist it.
