Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2000 11:49:25 -0800
From: "Kaushik Sen" <KSen@ruralaccess.net>
Subject: Towards Shetubondhon*************** A Shetubondhon Exclusive ****************
Dear Shetubondhon readers,
[Enclosed is an article I originally wrote in Bengali, trying to add my two-cent-worth to the spirit of shetubondhon. Dr. Farooq was so kind as to translate it and consider it worthy of sharing with you. So here is it. I went through the English version and made a few alterations myself. I hope it interests you.]
Quite some time ago, probably long before there was any trace of mustache on my facial geography, I came across a booklet with "red" cover. The very first line was: From the beginning to the end, the history of mankind is the history of class struggle." It was Calcutta of 1978 - one could still easily smell gunpowder in the air. In that environment how did the Communist Manifesto play on that 12-year old precocious kid, even he himself has hard time remembering it. That world, full of hope and assurance, was shattered in pieces right before his own eyes. Much of that period now appears too unreal. If not the class struggle, the struggle for mere survival forced him to travel through three continents. Often he still feels that if he could meet those two thick-bearded men, he would have said a few things to them. Since that won't be possible, those things to say are being thrown here at my unseen, Internet friends. It's comforting that at least no one is going to chase me with a stick.
After traveling through ancient India, Babylon, Egypt and Roman Empire, if any hypothetical time-traveler would settle in the imperialist 19th century Europe, then the human history might have appeared very boring to him - just the panoramic reflection of the same fundamental struggle. As if the same fight is being fought time and again since time immemorial; but that's not really economic class struggle. Let me clarify with a few examples.
The Vedic ancient India was a civilization deeply divided according to class, with the priests and warriors being the natural aristocrats. Their race-based society was the oldest, racist social system in human history. Later Jainism, Buddhism, Vaidantic reformers, Christianity and Islam have not able to make any dent in that ingrained racial discrimination. Hindu society had been broken or weakened; it had suffered many onslaughts, but in that one respect it remained perfectly intact. This might be amazing to non-Hindus, but in this paradoxical reality lies the root of a primary conflict of human history.
It's worth mentioning that the origin of Rig-Veda goes back to 2000 BC, and according to some, even earlier. Later German pundits have propagated that the human race who created the Vedic civilization called themselves ‘Aryan’ and the members of this race is the unqualified best in knowledge and intelligence, in appearance and capability. According to this theory the Aryans of India and Persia have later ruined themselves through mixing of blood of lower races. The Greek Aryans have survived to some extent, and their wisdom ultimately built the foundation of the European civilization. Finally, they have proclaimed that the Nordic, German and Anglo-Saxons are the upholders of the Aryan civilization and heritage in this contemporary world.
With the above prefatory remarks, let's now turn to the Indian-Aryan civilization of 2000 BC. Whether in the field of science, literature, sociology or philosophy, that civilization was enjoying its heydays around that time. The bountiful nature here has made life less demanding in terms of labor, which has also facilitated the growth of civilization. Ancient India and Persia were quite endowed with what we call classical qualities. Cultivation of thought and philosophies brought changes in their theistic thoughts. In some places, Monotheistic thoughts came up to challenge the multi-god pantheon. However, such changes did not affect the core framework of Aryan society. Whether in India, ancient Greece or Egypt, the privileged ones of the upper castes have retained the monopoly on the slave labor. Going beyond the logic of superior physical disposition, they even have a natural and divine argument in support of their racism. Thousands of years before even the birth of Darwin, Aryan pundits had solid realization of the essence of Darwin's theory. If any nation is lower than you are in civilization or power, then you have full right to attack them and turn them into slaves. The cosmic law justifies this. Extinction of the weak and unfit, while survival of the fittest, is the rule.
Therefore, one can identify five main traits of ancient, caste-based civilizations.
1. Dualism in regard to socio-economic-cultural and religious dimensions: They have thought of social justice, democracy, and all other good stuff for the superior castes. For the commoners and slaves the standard is different, law is different, and even if belonging to the same religion, they have no divinely recognized rights.
2. Emphasis on nation-state but at the same time promotion of individualism: Ancient Indian kings could not quite behave like dictators, as the individualistic saints-Brahmins would stand in their royal path. There are ample examples in Mahabharata. The rulers of Greece and Rome often would be humiliated in the hands of the aristocrats. Later, they conceived that instead of infighting, if they could built a powerful state and government, then those in the world who are not so good in getting organized can be easily ruled and exploited. With democracy and freedom in one hand and unsheathed sword in the other, these later Aryans went out to enslave the rest of the world. Many branches of humanity were simply wiped out.
3. Indifference about God: Who has what faith or religion was not a special headache of the ancient Aryans. Mahabharata emphasizes so many times that there was hardly any sage or saint that did not have a different opinion. Therefore, what is the essence of religion, or whether God even exists or not, that's a subject "nihita guhayang" - i.e., in simple words, no one really knows. In ancient civilizations, so many different types of religions were in vogue: some idol worshipping, some monotheistic, some agnostic, and some outright atheistic. Moreover, we also observe the tendency that if a human being was really powerful, then he was elevated to a god. Krishna has been mentioned as "purushottomo" (eminent man) and god-deity, even though his life and activities are not greater than just a great, talented human being. Even the Greek gods were fully human-like; they only had extraordinary power. This idea of a great intellectual and political genius (rather than any divine law) led to the conceptualization of "superman" by Nietzche and later exploited by Nazis. Similar to the ancient Aryans, modern Aryans also believe that "mohajono jeno goto sa pontha:" - that is, the real path is the one that has been treaded by the noble leaders.
The concept of a universal, kind, compassionate and nourishing God was rather nonexistent in Aryan religious thoughts. Even the ultimate Brahma of Upanishad is also without shape or attribute. He has no headache about what human being did or did not. Human beings are simply circling in the trajectory of their own life - like so many other things, humans are subject to well-detailed cyclic orders determined largely by themselves (the ‘karma’ theory). Therefore, the Brahma of Upanishad is noble, but indifferent. He doesn't have anything to do about the daily events; he is omnipresent; nothing is beyond him; however, he has not taken the burden of engraving any "Ten commandments."
4. Sexual liberty: How people will attain happiness or how an individual will derive pleasure, about this there was no rule or prohibition in ancient Aryan civilizations. Everybody would go for "pursuit of happiness" as they deemed appropriate. It is observed that in such ancient civilizations, homosexuality or bisexuality was not considered to be anything especially abnormal. Nobody thought of destroying city after city for such abominations. The extent of descriptions about promiscuity one observes in Sanskrit literature, the western literature still has not gone much beyond it.
5. Consciousness about skin-color and purity of blood: Both ancient Aryans as well as modern Aryans are not particularly fond of mixing of races and blood involving the non-Aryans.
At this point let's discuss a little bit about the ingrained racism of caste-divided Hindu society and the white nations. I have mentioned earlier that there is a Darwinian theory behind superiority complex of the white race. It comes from an innate belief that as a species the white Caucasian is superior to the blacks and the browns. Therefore, whites have a natural right not only to rule and exploit over the non-whites but also to make them civilized. It's like what one thinks about the cows and chickens in the farms- they are better as sausages. This might be an exaggerated example, but it's true that millions of white people still harbor similar thoughts deep in their hearts. I am not very fond of "quoting", but any one can easily verify this visiting the websites of the Aryan Nation or Ku Klux Klan.
Ancient Aryans established four castes: Priests (Brahmin), warriors (Khatriyas), businessmen (Vaishya), and workers (Shudra). Among them the Brahmins and the warriors are primarily white and adamantly against any mixing of races. Vaishyas were probably the mulatto, from inadvertent cross breeding and the shudras were the original colored inhabitants of the subcontinent (the anarya, - anthropologically Negroid or Australoid). The entire caste system was designed to keep the non-whites separate and subjugated. However toward the end of the Puranic ages, mixing of races has begun mainly due to decline of the older civilization through war and pillaging. We see in Mahabharata that during the battle of Kurukshetra almost all the males of higher castes are dead and the thugs have captured their women. That wholesale mixing of blood between Aryans and non-Aryans, and white and non-whites was inevitable right after the period of Mahabharata, this fear becomes evident from the conversation between Krishna and Gandhari (Streeparbo, Mahabharata).
Therefore, from the beginning of the recorded history of Bharatborsho, the inhabitants of this area are mixed races. The factor that caused division among the people was no longer there. However, division according to castes/nations continued as a persistent disease. Hindu society split itself into pieces and drew hatred of others – for absolutely no reasons Its white ‘Aryan’ ancestry makes no meaning as the purity of blood is already lost. However, the caste system remained like an insurmountable obstacle in the path of its unity and progress during the entire next to millenniums.
Let's now return to the 19th century Bangladesh. At first it may seem that the revival of Ram Mohan-Bidyasagar-Rabindranath-Vivekananda in Bengal is actually the rebirth of Hindu nationalism. And since that's "Hindu", there must be natural antagonism between that and Islam. Just think for a moment that whether the Bangla culture of the first half of the last century is really anti-Islamic? Or it is quite akin to the struggling heritage of Islam. Howevermuch romantically Bankim Babu described it, there was hardly ever any connection of heart between Bengal and the Hindu heritage of Northwest India. The conservative Indian Hindus have always characterized the Bangalis as irreligious. Actually, the real heritage of Bengal is its revolutionary spirit. Somehow to be Bangali means, more or less, to be rebellious, even though the rebellion has not always gone in the right direction. Being anti-establishment is the religion of Bengal. From the outside one may think Rabindranath is Zaminder, Vivekananda is Kali-devotee, and Bidyasagar is Sanskrit-expert, Brahmin pundit. But the thrust of their life has been toward breaking down the boundaries of the socio-cultural prison.
Bangladesh at one time turned toward Buddhism, at another time was carried away by the waves of Vaishnav religion of Sree Chaitanya, embraced Islam with open arm and nourished other mystic cultures like Sufi and Baul. Bengal loved simplicity and diversity and for the very same reason she abandoned the practicing Hinduism with all its rituals. Bengal’s Aryan heritage is nominal; her classical Hindu connection is thin; in reality, her heart and soul are filled with irresistible attraction toward her unique mix of folk cultures. Racial or national prejudice is not Bengal's character - it's neither of the Bangali Hindus nor of Bangali Muslims. The prejudice is externally planted; actually all Bangalis are the children of the same tender soil.
Take a look at both divided and undivided Bangladesh of the second half of the last century, you will see the message of revolution written on every wall. Sometime there was the clamor of religious purity, and we fought. Sometimes, the call was for political change, and we fought again, loosing our best generation of young people. May be we made many mistakes, but our main heritage has merged with the main spirit and heritage of Islam: egalitarianism, simplicity, brotherhood and social justice. The bloody history of Bengal is the testimony to that fact.
You all are aware that from both sides we don't hesitate to turn to slander to establish dominance of our own stance. The way our fence of mutual hatred and mistrust gains height, the more convenience is afforded to those who exploit you and me equally. Once upon a time we fought with each other leaving our common enemy, the English. Even now occupation of a few barren hills in Kashmir has become our biggest national prestige issue. Do we really care that we are equally hated, ridiculed, and pitied by the western world? These Anglo-Americans have established the greatest Aryan civilization in the history of the world, turned the third world into virtual slaves. They must be laughing watching us, two groups of beggars, fighting each other in the name of God.
Marx Sahib probably made a small mistake. The struggle is not of class, but of ideas. One might say, it's a struggle between the white supremacy and their victims’, struggle between Aryans and Semitic. Those of us, who believe in the true human liberty, simplicity, and brotherhood, have to struggle against those who believe that they can subjugate the greater part of the humanity by science, technology and wealth, while reserving unfettered freedom to be enjoyed among themselves. That's why we have to reach beyond our outer layer and search for inner harmony. Everything else is irrelevant today. The iron-traps of the scoundrels and fools have a strong hold surrounding our starving life.
Bangladesh is the name of an unified culture, the real heritage of which is the struggling legacy. Hindu-Muslim, whatever is the outer religious identity, has no conflict with that legacy. It is upon the shoulder of the educated Bangalis of the twenty-first century to shatter that awning of ignorance. You will see Buddha, Jesus, and Muhammad standing on your side. Just extend your hands, and you will touch their noble handholds. The flame that is burning in Bengal's heart is liberty. Bangali is not for the servitude of mere creed detached from the quest and struggle for liberty and dignity. In this market-oriented world, in his hand lies the true heritage of renaissance. Let Hindus be better Hindus and let Muslims be better Muslims, but not over the graveyard of Bangali's courage, and the spirit of freedom, struggle and dignity. As God himself is tolerating so many different religions, we ourselves also can be little bit more tolerant and harmonious toward each other. The foundation of real Shetubondhon can be built only on the firm ground of tolerance and mutual respect.