Communications
ARYA SAMAJ’S ROLE IN PUNJAB
By
M.L. Sondhi
Mainstream, October 13, 1962
I have read with interest Sri Balraj Mehta’s article. It is
refreshing to read an analysis in which the writer tries his
best to focus attention on the real factors which have
influenced relations between the Hindus and Sikhs in
Punjab. His research has led him to examine the
contemporary problem in the social and economic setting of a
century. Much of the discussion about communalism in the
Punjab has conspicuously failed to consider the policies of
the Akalis within a broad framework of historical
development. The writer has refused to identify himself
with a partisan approach and has expressed himself in a
spirit of objectivity. I would grant that his article is
both thought-provoking and timely.
Unfortunately, he has been unable to avoid
several one-sided assertions which have led him to make at
least one rather presumptuous judgement and a number of
sweeping statements.
While observing the characteristics of the
friction and rivalry between the two communities, the writer
has allowed himself to be guided by a deterministic
interpretation of the emergence of the Arya Samaj as an
organisation with expansive tendencies in violent encounter
with the rest. He would seem to subscribe to the view of
every Arya Samajist being a potential soldier working
against the integration of the communities.
This analysis is unrealistic for several
reasons. For one thing, the character of the entire Arya
Samaj movement, which even its worst critics will not deny
was a mass movement led by able leaders like Lajpat
Rai and Shradhanand, which based upon a tremendous advance
in concerted action, and developed purposes and objectives
far beyond the name and ideology with which it started. It
cannot be forgotten that Arya Samajists and Arya Samajist
sympathisers provided a platform for activities of Shahid
Bhagat Singh and Ajit Singh.
The assumption that the Arya Samaj was only
motivated by considerations of spreading its influence is
not borne out by facts. There is no evidence of a general
attitude of hostility among Arya Samajists towards Sikhs or
vice-versa. The Arya Samaj has respected limits on its
freedom to propagate its religious ideology. During the
struggle against British imperialism in which Punjab played
a leading role, the common values placed before the entire
country became more important than the “provincialism” of
the founders of sectional movements. The same applies to
the Arya Samaj. Under the pressure of events and the
conflict against the imperialist enemy, the general Indian
pattern was given the pride of place.
It would be totally unrealistic for us to
concern ourselves today with stray textual evidence if we
are seriously concerned with the wider range of problems
which were connected with Arya Samajist social thinking. It
would be preposterous to lift out stray examples of Arya
Samajist or Sikh thinking and declare that both were engaged
in some sort of vicious competition. Such an interpretation
cannot be consistent with a historical analysis which seeks
to understand the remarkable way in which both the Arya
Samaj and Akali movements were able to inspire strength and
unity in the masses of the Punjab, and awaken a response for
which the national leadership more than once complimented
the Punjabis.
When we survey the field of genuine Sikh
grievances, we cannot ignore the many examples where Sikhs
and Arya Samajists have worked shoulder to shoulder in
creating social organisations which, in spite of the
political friction in Punjab, are still acknowledged to be
second to none in the country in their strength and ability
to achieve practical results. In attempting to solve the
political problem of Punjab, we need not estrange the Arya
Samajists.
What is needed is to devise specific
measures which can comprehend the basic explanation of the
social and political distance between the two communities
which is being widened in the present “power” situation in
Punjab.
It is not possible for me in a short space
to give more than a few hints about the lines on which the
problem can be attacked. I would suggest three aspects
which should receive conspicuous attention. First, we
should remember that Punjab has been subjected to economic
and technological changes which have accompanied rapid
industrial development in a predominantly agricultural
region. Much of this development has been menaced by
obscurantist thinking. It is to the credit of the Punjabis
that they have overcome most of the barriers. There is no
reason for complacency, however, for the rate of economic
development must be accelerated. This would require higher
standards of public administration and the courage to
implement economic policies which in the short run will
conflict with the interests of powerful lobbies.
Secondly, a Herculean effort must be made to
bridge the alarming gap between economic and cultural
changes. At the present moment, the Punjabis seem to be
obsessed with economic and technological advance. This
often earns them the reputation of being “Westernised
materialists”. It is important to realise that for economic
advance to be sustained, it is of crucial importance to make
a minimum of cultural advance. Much of the future of Punjab
hinges on this. Language is a vehicle of thought. If
thought is there, it will break through all encrustations.
The language controversy in Punjab is in a sense a
camouflage. The hard and inescapable fact is that Punjab
has not so far produced a Tagore or a Vallathol. The
various manifestations of prejudice we see in today’s Punjab
are mainly the result of an increase in industrial and
commercial contacts without a corresponding acceleration in
the efforts towards creative cultural contact, by which I
mean primarily contemporary achievements in the field of
serious art, literature and music.
Thirdly, and finally, I would suggest the
need to modify a certain puritanical spirit which dominates
both the Akalis and the Arya Samajist elite which seems to
have served a useful purpose during the national movement,
but today is a negative influence on healthy emotional
expression of the Punjabis as a whole and especially of the
younger generation. The aggressive self-confidence we
notice in Punjabi youth is often the symptom of the
inability of the community to integrate its young men in its
social life. Feelings of resentment against hypocritically
imposed standards encourage a sense of insecurity and
frustration. The real success of young Punjabi men and
women in the fields of arts and sciences will spur them on
to pressing their rightful and fundamental protest in a
manner which will be the essential condition of Indian
progress instead of the unsympathetic conflicts of today
which express a cultural inadequacy which all Punjabis,
Arya Samajist and Sikh, feel intensely but may not care to
confess.
The most effective measure I can think of
would be to arouse public opinion and Mainstream which has
many Punjabi readers would do well to encourage a frank and
honest discussion without starting a “cold war” between Arya
Samajists and the Akalis. It is the task of political
wisdom, when things are going the wrong way, to create
circumstances for responsible political action.
Sociologists, economists and historians should come forward
with concrete proposals. There is still time to readjust
policies. |