A regressive march

State’s curbing of uncomfortable opinions diminishes Shivaji’s legacy and vision

Alok Tiwari

Time was when Maharashtra prided itself on its progressive ethos. Those lie in the dust today, trampled by a revanchist and revisionist regime. Just last week a legislator was suspended from the state’s legislature for what the powers that be thought was praise of late Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb. It did not stop there. There were calls for demolition of Aurangzeb’s tomb that lies in what used to be Aurangabad. This was supported by none other than state’s CM Devendra Fadnavis raising the possibility of the government actually going through with the move. If it does happen it would bring the state closest to the regime of Taliban in Afghanistan that blew up the magnificent Buddhas of Bamiyan. It did not erase the history of Buddhism in Afghanistan, it merely underlined the brutes that the Taliban were. At that time we thought, foolishly it turns out, that such things will never come to pass in democratic India.

To be fair, India never had a great record of protecting free speech. Maybe that is because of our propensity to indulge in mass violence at slightest provocation. We have banned books and plays and art exhibitions because some section or the other took offence at their content. It is just more convenient for authorities to ban the source of supposed offence, no matter how misplaced or misinformed, than to protect an individual’s constitutional right. That has extended to restriction on films and even comedy shows in recent times. Now even a comment on historical characters is not tolerated. Earlier the authorities gave in to threats by organized groups. As bad as that was, now the authorities themselves appear to threaten those whose opinions they do not like.

Now, the demonisation of Aurangzeb has gone on for some time. It is part of the Hindutva project to paint everything Islamic in ugly light. Maybe, he was a demon. I am not a historian to judge that. But there is not denying he is an important figure in Indian history. He is supposed to have persecuted Hindus and demolished temples. But I have read about him giving lands to temples and mutts too. Like always, I believe truth is more complex than what people with an agenda will make us believe. So, a frank discussion on his personality and role in history should be encouraged. This needs to happen with a spirit of enquiry and tolerance. There would be many who will deem him to be a villain. Some may consider him less so. There should be space for both opinions and arguments.

After all, we have a history of seeing despicable behaviour even among gods and appreciating the goodness among villains. No Ram katha in our villages is complete without some reference to good qualities of Ravan. Lord Ram himself is said to have admired his learning, his devotion to Shiva, and his qualities as a warrior. The same is true of Shivaji Maharaj in whose name Aurangzeb is vilified. Outside the fort of Pratapgarh stands the tomb of Afzal Khan, the man Shivaji himself slayed. But then honoured his vanquished enemy by building a tomb worthy of his stature. That tomb was safe during Shivaji’s time but is an eyesore to his less worthy followers. Would Maharashtra government remove this tomb that Shivaji built? Would Shivaji have wanted Aurangzeb’s tomb removed? Maybe CM Fadnavis can answer.

We are fond of calling ourselves a free society and Prime Minister Narendra Modi loves to call India as mother of democracy. The essence of democracy is rule by majority but not rule for the majority. Once a government is popularly chosen it must work to protect the rights of every citizen, including and especially of those who did not vote for it. The PM and his very loyal supporters need to ask how far his government and the governments of his party in the states are living up to the image he projects outside.

I am never tired of saying freedom in a society must be judged by how it treats its heretics. Freedom to only voice things that everyone approves is no freedom at all. True freedom exists where there is freedom to dissent, hurt, offend. It is only through expression of opinions that conventional wisdom accepted by the society rejects that a society progresses. A society that actively works to suppress unpopular opinions will forever be stuck in its own groove. It takes iconoclasts, those who are not afraid to go against the accepted norms, mores, and beliefs, to take the society forward. It is through interaction of competing opinions that we move closer to truth.

I realize sometimes we may need to curb expression of some opinions in the interest of keeping peace and saving lives. Such restrictions, though, should be minimal and temporary. The effort of state should always be to expand freedoms and act against those who seek to restrict them. It is exactly the opposite right now.

Finally, I have a word of caution to those to seek to remove symbols of history they are not comfortable with. They are setting an example for future rulers to do the same. Today’s government is naming things after and building memorials to those it considers its ideals. Would they like if some future government removes their names and obliterates the memorials because it considers them villains? Obviously, it would be wrong.

Every society, every community, every nation goes through ups and downs. We tend to celebrate the highs of history and downplay the lows. An enlightened society, though, preserves its past, warts and all. The triumphs as well as tragedies offer us valuable lessons. It is our responsibility to pass the entire knowledge to our future generations with all the signs and symbols that we inherited. Let us not seek to censor history for those who would follow us. Let them discover their own truths.

This column appeared in Lokmat Times on Mar 12, 2025