As a nation, India typically finds itself in a tug-of-war between the grandeur of its aspirations and the ghosts of its previous. One would think about {that a} nation poised as a worldwide energy – boasting nuclear capabilities, a pioneering house programme, a “Tech Stack” that’s the envy of the world and an bold bid for a everlasting seat on the United Nations Safety Council – has moved past debates over a Mughal emperor who breathed his final greater than 300 years in the past. But, right here we’re once more.
The current unrest in Nagpur over the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb is yet another reminder that in India, debates over historical past will not be confined to the distant previous alone. The turmoil underscores the enduring efficiency of historical past as a political software. Clashes erupted after Hindu nationalist protesters allied with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Social gathering (BJP) burned an effigy of Aurangzeb, the controversial Mughal emperor whose identify evokes various feelings throughout India’s various spectrum. The protesters demanded the destruction of his unassuming grave, a transfer that enraged many Muslims and secular Hindus alike.
Commercial – Scroll to proceed
Issues That Nonetheless Matter
Why does Aurangzeb, who dominated the Mughal Empire from 1658 to 1707, proceed to impress such fervent reactions centuries after his demise? To his detractors, significantly inside Hindu nationalist circles, Aurangzeb epitomises tyranny – accused of destroying temples, reimposing Islamic taxes on Hindus, executing Sikh non secular leaders, and imposing insurance policies that suppressed Hindu traditions. To some Indian Muslims, nonetheless, he’s remembered for his piety and army glory, having expanded the Mughal Empire to its zenith, encompassing areas from Kabul to Dhaka.
For secular historians, the case towards demonising Aurangzeb lies in context. He was, in any case, a product of his time, when non secular intolerance and political violence have been established norms. His file consists of grants to some Hindu temples alongside the destruction of others – a paradox typically neglected within the discourse. But, the argument that India must “transfer on” from Aurangzeb faces formidable resistance in a rustic grappling with its id.
Whereas conservatives, within the well-known phrase, are ‘standing athwart historical past, yelling Cease’, our Hindutva nationalists are yelling ‘flip again! Reverse!’ Their reinvention of historical past shouldn’t be anchored in a reverence for the previous, however of their need to form the current by reinventing the previous.
Historical past As Politics
Historical past has typically been contested terrain in India, however its revival within the context of twenty-first century politics is a sobering signal that the previous continues to have a maintain over the Hindutva motion within the current. Whereas the Mughals are being demonised as a approach of delegitimising Indian Muslims (who’re stigmatised as ‘Babur ke aulad’, the sons of the invader Babur quite than of the Indian soil), Hindutva zealots need to rebuild probably the most distinguished of the Hindu temples the Mughals allegedly destroyed. And a few in Nagpur need to destroy a easy grave due to what its contents symbolize: an emblem of the humiliation of their ancestors centuries in the past.
The ideological battle unfolding at this time – whether or not over Aurangzeb or the broader legacy of Islamic rule – displays the interaction between historical past and nationalism. The renaming of Aurangabad to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and the alternative of Aurangzeb Highway in New Delhi with a extra palatable different will not be remoted incidents. They match neatly right into a broader marketing campaign to overwrite centuries of Islamic affect on Indian tradition, names, and locations. The best of inter-faith co-existence in concord has been jettisoned; the marginalisation of Muslims from the nationwide narrative marches on.
Not Simply An Indian Drawback
In fact, historic revisionism shouldn’t be uniquely Indian. From the USA, the place radical leftist actions sought to dismantle statues and monuments deemed symbols of white supremacy, to European debates over colonial-era relics, and black and brown Britons toppling statues of colonial oppressors, the impulse to wield historical past as a weapon in modern politics is common. Nonetheless, there may be absolutely a case for India reconciling with the previous quite than searching for endlessly to undo it – for moderation over hysteria.
The issue lies within the unrelenting politicisation of historical past. If one faction tears down Aurangzeb’s legacy, one other rises to defend it. If one renames a metropolis to honour a Hindu king (Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar) or a Hindu civilisational custom (Prayagraj), one other questions the relevance of doing so, asking whether or not there is no such thing as a consolation available within the familiarity of place names established on our coil over centuries. The pendulum swings incessantly, with no decision in sight.
India’s path ahead should embody a mature relationship with its previous – one which neither erases nor glorifies, however contextualises. This journey requires empathy, introspection, and a willingness to transcend ideological boundaries. Historical past, in any case, ought to enlighten, not enchain.
The choice is a nightmare. Sooner or later, the Muslims of India will resist. As soon as once more, the violence will resume, spawning new hostages to historical past, guaranteeing that future generations can be taught new wrongs to set proper. The fanatics and extremists are blissful to make use of historical past as cannon fodder; however of their obsession with undoing the previous, it’s our future they’re putting in peril.
(Shashi Tharoor has been a Member of Parliament from Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, since 2009. He’s a printed creator and a former diplomat.)
Disclaimer: These are the private opinions of the creator
