Amity and friendship among religious communities in India has always been associated with movements of social reform within those communities. In that sense, the perceptible slowing down of social reforms has strengthened communalism during the last decade. Much has been said about the role played by the Bhakti movement and the preachings of the Sufis in the middle ages, as also about Akbar's Din-i-llahi, to underline their contributions to the growth of Indian version of secularism. The second phase of social reform, launched in the Nineteenth century, also brought about the convergence between such movements and the strengthening of secularism. Since after the gradual approximation of the national independence movement with the advocacy for social reform, between 1885 and 1930s, secularism became an important ingredient of the nationalist quest.

That the revivalism of Hindu nationalist pride in the ancient glory of Indian culture did not impair the growth of these tendencies would underline their hold on the intelligentsia. In fact, this feeling of pride was sometimes used to give impetus to the social reforms as also to friendship between Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims. All the hate campaign based on a particular view of history in the Middle Ages, too, failed to click in that political climate. But, gradually, as the prospect of achieving political power brightened in the 1930s or primacy was given more and more to the political struggle to the exclusion of social issues, there was a reversion of these trends, Political leaders of the independence struggle had started to argue that the requirements of unity precluded advocacy of divisive issues related to social reforms. The earlier experience that the prospect of reform and thereby the amelioration of the status of the outcaste and the vulnerable sections helped to unify the society was forgotten. Therefore, Gandhiji's insistence on temple entry of the untouchables was the last assertion of social reforms. Congress Governments in various provinces, too, took no effective initiatives either in 1938-39 or in 1946-48 in promoting social reforms. After Independence, Dr. Ambedkar's eminently sensible proposals enunciated in the Hindu Code Bill met with stout opposition from a substantial section of the Congress Party, forcing him to resign from the Union Cabinet in 1951.

During the 1930s and later, the separatist tendencies among Muslims grew at a rapid pace; and the background to this phenomenon was the apprehension that political power after Independence would not be shared by the Hindus with the Muslims. The rigidity of the Indian caste system, the anxiety that Muslims would either be sucked into the Hindu caste pantheon or, otherwise, treated like the low castes, coupled with the opposition and resistance of several leaders of public opinion against social reforms in the Hindu society, enabled the separatist leaders of the Muslim community to mobilise the Muslim intelligentsia in favour of the demand for partition.

Opposition To Reforms
After Independence, opposition to social reforms has grown further. One aspect of this opposition is related to the democratic aspiration of the underprivileged sections for sharing of power, political and economic. Yet another aspect was the growing disavowal by the middle classes of the ideals of social justice and equity, in the context of their increasing hold on power and their new prosperity. The ideology of laissez faire in economic and social spheres was gaining support; and, obviously, during the last decade, it has emerged as the ruling ideology. This strengthening of social conservatism could not but be resisted by the underprivileged, just as their attempt at power sharing only fuelled conservative prejudices of the middle classes. 

The Mandal developments have only confirmed these trends. Mandal represented not only the quest for power sharing but had also witnessed what, for the absence of a better concept, can be characterised as Sanskritisation a la Professor M. N. Srinivas. To that extent, it was part of social reform too. In both cases, it was a signal for equity. The opposition to it has come to be linked with the phenomenal defection of the middle classes to the communalists bandwagon. Even if the assertion that Advani launched his Ram Rath Yatra as a reaction against the Mandal announcement by V. P. Singh not correct, there can be no doubt that the support his banner has secured during all these years owes much to the middle classes growing sense of power, on the one hand, and refusal to share it with others, on the other hand. The resulting tension, created a sense of insecurity  which the Sangh Parivar has been able to link with anti-Muslim hate campaign and prepare the ground for communal holocausts. Some observers believe that the Supreme Court's decision upholding the 27 per cent reservations for the socially and educationally backwards exercised the hard-liners on that side so much that they planned the demolition of the Babri mosque.

The same kind of opposition to social reforms on the side of Muslims has been in evidence. The Wahabi movement, which stood for purifying the practices current among Muslims, got identified in India with the struggle for freedom. Sir Sayyad Ahmed Khan was a great influence for reformas was Muhammad Ali Jinnah, later. But, the insecurity complex from which a minority community suffers has been used by the conservatives amongst Muslims to resist social reforms. While a large number of Muslim intellectuals accept the urgency of reforms, the old battle cry of the community being endangered inhibits them from organising themselves to launch a powerful social reform movement.

Diabolically, this weakness of the Muslim intelligentsia is made apretext by the Hindu communalists to further their anti-Muslim designs. The propaganda line pursued by them focuses on certain backward practices like the injustice implicit in a husband's right to divorce his wife just by uttering the word divorce thrice, a right which the scriptures have denied to Muslim husbands. Then, there is the issue of polygamy. Despite the fact that the proportion of Muslims having more than one wife is lower than that among Hindus, Christians and Buddhists, the false propaganda goes on. Whatever that be, communalists in these two, and probably all, communities would have a vested interest in opposing social reforms.

Joint Campaign Needed
Somehow, voluntary efforts to popularise and promote social reforms have received setbacks; the old glow of Arya Samaj or Prarthana Samaj went out long ago; and, among the Bahujans, who followed Mahatma Phule, a rising middle class has started to follow the middle classes among the forward castes in opposing social reform. Socialists who were pioneers in calling for man-woman equality have shown no particular concern about these growing tendencies. Even where socialist politics is popular, that is, among the backward castes, they have acquiesced in the general clamour against social reform. If the fact that Mandal could create a spin off effect for social reform had been utilised to mount an offensive for reform, much could have been gained. Consequently, the conservative sections tilt towards orthodoxy as preached by the Sangh Parivar in the name of Lord Rama whose own conduct would be an example for equity as the cases of Shabari and Ahilya would show.

A sustained struggle against communalism has therefore to be linked to the quest for social reform in both communities, Hindus as well as Muslims and among forward as well as backward castes. That Rational thinking will have to be joined by the traditions of the earlier social reform movements is needless to say. But, obviously, it cannot be based on atheism, or the denigration of the scriptures. The teaching of the saints in all religions have sufficient material for a coherent effort for reforming the society on the basis of equity. The art of persuasion will have to be cultivated, too. One could also try to assess the response that a campaign jointly organised by individuals from all communities for reforming the institutions of each one of the communities will solicit. It could be dubbed as interference; on the other hand it might carry greater credibility.
 

Tags: Ahilya Shabari Mahatma Phule Muhammad Ali Jinnah Sayyad Ahmed Khan Wahabi V. P. Singh M. N. Srinivas Mandal Akbar Sufi Surendra Mohan weeklysadhana Sadhanasaptahik Sadhana विकलीसाधना साधना साधनासाप्ताहिक