At the turn of the last century, on a day in early spring, an assembly of the elites of Calcutta drew full house to the Hall of the Indian Association. The eminents had turned up to listen to the invigorating speech of an overseas guest from Japan. The gentleman, dressed in a black silk kimono, was a riveting orator. He was introduced to the august gathering by Sister Nivedita, as a professor and critic of traditional Japanese art.  

Kakuzo Okakura, as his name goes, came to India to meet Vivekananda. Okakura was a stark believer of spiritual union of the Asians as a whole and a sympathiser of India’s liberation from  British supremacy. Nivedita was a pen friend of Okakura since she was introduced to him by a common friend and her American fellow-disciple, Josephine MacLeod. Okakura’s political rhetoric and his radical thinking of oriental unification against westernisation impressed the intellectual audience.  The Japanese speaker threw up a veritable question to the Calcuttan elites, “You are such a highly cultivated race. Why did you let a handful of Englishmen tread you down? Do everything to achieve freedom, openly and well secretly. Japan will assist you”. On a later occasion Okakura made clear of the meaning of “secretly” and explained that, “political assassinations and secret societies are the chief weapons of a powerless and disarmed people, who seek their emancipation from political ills”.  

Bengal has always played a special role during watershed years in the colonial past. The battle of Plassey in 1757 provided the colonial lords with a firm foothold on Indian soil and 1857 was the year of the first Indian uprising. While both the events took place and sparked within the geographical boundary of Bengal, the archetypal Bengali bhadralok could hardly claim a role in the pages of history. The protagonists standing face to face in the mango-orchard of Plassey were neither Bengali nor belonged to a pure Indian stock. In 1857 too, the sepoy whose bullet popped out from the musket to kindle the fire of rebellion in the country, was also not a Bengali. No matter how the events sensitised the future trajectory, the Bengali Hindu gentries opted to live a docile existence under colonial sky. The victory of Robert Clive not only sown the seeds of the British Empire on Indian soil but also espoused the rise of a genre called Bengali bhadralok who remained happily ever subservient to the whites till the end of British occupation. The opulent zamindar of Calcutta,Raja Nabakrishna Deb, commemorated Clive’s victory by organising Durga puja in his palace, which he boastfully had referred to as “company’s puja”. Needless to say, loyalties and subservience also paid dividends.  On to 1857, when the colonial interlopers were almost on the verge of being thrown out from different parts of the country, the Bengali bhadralok frothed at their mouths to drum up support for the brighter side of British reign and how it would save the Hindu culture and civilization from the oppressive Muslim infidels. The same Bengali bhadraloks who were trying to spread their wings in the western sky and rubbing shoulders with the European elites, turned a blind eye to the nationwide political stir which was brewing against the Raj in the later decade of the nineteenth century.

But Bengal once again came under the spotlight. It was the same archetypal Bengali bhadraloks, who were known to the progressive-minded jingoists as compradors of their white masters, suddenly took a turn.  Bengal and the same Bengali bhadraloks featured a dual existence in colonial history and strongly espoused militancy in nationalism which was never thought of.  The faithful sycophants overnight turned into “terrorists’ in the eyes of the British masters. It was not just a happenstance, but the upshot of a cogent deliberation of two pathfinders who took the plunge because of their natural abhorrence against the British. Yet again, the pathfinders were neither Bengali nor belonged to any Indian race.  One was the Irish disciple of Swami Vivekananda whose hermitage-name was Sister Nivedita, and the other one was a Japanese art connoisseur - Kakuzo Okakura who came to India to meet the monk. Both had two common interests – Swami Vivekananda and India’s liberation from British yoke.

Okakura’s discourse at Indian Association Hall was graced by some notable Bengali gentries at the behest of Nivedita, whose mere presence in the audience could inspire a sweeping change. Nivedita introduced them to Okakura. Amongst them was Surendranath Tagore whom Okakura met on a previous occasion.  Suren babu was the nephew of Rabindranath. Others were Pramathanath Mitra – an influential barrister and a burly looking gentleman whose four successive attempts to organise a revolutionary society in Bengal failed; and Rabindranath’s niece,Saralabala Ghoshal, who was the daughter of a Congress secretary Janaki Ghoshal. The trio, along with Nivedita, would be known in the history as pioneers of revolutionary terrorism in India. The seed was sown in the Indian Association Hall and Mitra was assigned to head a network of secret societies, which would soon be brought up in the disguise of fitness centres. Incidentally Mitra was approached by one Satish Chandra Basu, a devotee of Nivedita and Vivekananda, who opened a gymnastic club in the name of Anushilan Samiti at Madan Mohan Lane for physical fitness and practising the art of self-defence using cane sticks. The name Anushilan Samiti was coined by one Narendra Nath Bhattacharya, who later metamorphosed into M. N. Roy, the founder of the Communist Party of India. Saralabala Ghoshal made the “Lathi khela” (as the martial art was known by) popular and she was encouraged and sponsored by P. Mitra with the idea to keep the youth physically active for militancy for a national cause. Mitra’s acceptance of Satish’s proposal was a stepping-stone towards building a revolutionary organisation in Bengal.

Mitra’s dream came true when Aurobindo Ghose made an attempt from Baroda to organise secret societies in Bengal and sent his envoy, Jatindranath Bandhopadhyay, to Saralabala. Jatin, meanwhile, opened an office in Upper Circular Road and started recruiting young aspirants to form secret societies in disguise of gymnastic clubs. Jatin came in contact with Mitra and merged his office with Anushilan Samity’s arkra in Madan Mohan Lane. The secret society networking finally brought Nivedita, Mitra and Aurobindo into a single lane. The ball was set rolling by Okakura in the Indian Association Hall, which finally ended up in forming the Bengal Revolutionary Society under Barrister Mitra.  An active member of Mitra’s Bengal Revolutionary Society was Bhupendranath Datta – the younger brother of Vivekananda and a youth full of radical sensibilities.

The seed of militancy was sown in Bengal explicitly by the crème de la crème of Calcutta, Sister Nivedita being the earliest proponent, and led the armed insurrection to a conspicuous level. Other exponents were Saralabala Ghoshal, Barrister P.Mitra and Bhupendranath Datta. Several secret societies in the disguise of physical training mushroomed all over ndivided Bengal. Sarala’s own gymnasium at her residence at 26 Ballygunge Circular Road was virtually a fencing club where youths were trained to wield swords and daggers. Sarala engaged at her cost a Muslim trainer named Murtaza to coach the boys[1]. Rabindranath’s most favourite niece was the first to hit the bull’s eye and vowed to erase the stigma that the Bengalis were cowards. Dogs have teeth, cats have talons, even insects have a sting, and they all retaliate when attacked. Only Bengalis do not; when they repeatedly hit they do not return even a single blow. Why are they such poor specimens of humanity? Why are they so week?” Sarala goes on. “Possession of a weapon does not necessarily rid one of pusillanimity, but with appropriate skill in use of weapon, one knows where to his an adversary, not to kill him, but stun him. One can be charged of injuring a person, and not accused of murder”[2].

Sarala’s mental makeup was not unknown to Rabindranath; rather she inherited her militant nationalism directly from her culturally versatile maternal house. Janakinath Ghoshal was a Congressman of moderate breed.  The poet’s immediate elder brother Jyotirindranath founded a secret society called Sanjibani Sabha with Rajnarain Basu (grandfather of Aurobindo) in the line of Italian revolutionist Mazzini's Carbonari[3], which aimed towards political liberation of India. Young Rabindranath, who followed his elder brother intuitively, was a member of the secret society. The Sabha ‘held its sittings in a tumbledown building in an obscure Calcutta lane’, recalled Rabindranath in his memoir. The Tagores’ family magazine, Bharati, which was edited by the Tagores, gave Sarala a platform to write inflammatory articles on India’s liberation on extremist lines. “I started writing for Bharati and converted it into combative organ”.  Sarala’s autobiography further reads, “During my editorship of Bharati, it was not an organ of just literary and fine arts; it was also the mouthpiece of nationalistic evangelism”[4]. Sarala used her pen to evoke militant nationalism amongst the Bengali youths and invigorated them to retaliate against the tyrannical whites. Although Rabindranath censured extremism in Indian politics, he was somewhat charmed by his sister’s daughter and could not put aside her inflammatory writings from being published in his family’s literary periodical.

Sarala first met Vivekananda on the riverbank of Belur Math probably in the end of 1898. The monk was addressing his American disciples Sara Bull and Miss Josephine MacLeod – both dressed in black Japanese kimono. Sarala came with her cousin Surendranath and Nivedita introduced both to Vivekananda.  With all her progressive sensitivities Sarala discovered herself amidst a group of notables whose more pertinent identities nudged her progressive jingoism. Was that a happenstance? Ole (Sara) Bull the widow of a world-renowned Norwegian violist was an activist in Norwegian movement for independence. It was Mrs Bull who first introduced Nivedita with the leading Russian anarchist Peter Kropotkin and through Mrs Bull Kropotkin maintained contacts with the Indian revolutionists[5].  Nivedita met Kropotkin twice in London and was in close touch till her last. Kropotkin also acknowledged Miss MacLeod as his good friend in a letter dated July 1907. Swamiji’s brother Bhupendranath Datta claims that he was introduced to Kropotkin by his common friend Mrs. Ole Bull in August 1900.[6]   Miss Josephine MacLeod was a great sympathiser of the Indian cause for independence and sponsored many secret revolutionary circles through Nivedita. She regularly donated funds to import arms to organise armed revolution in India[7]. She maintained close contacts with Okakura since her first meet in Japan. Miss MacLeod introduced Okakura to Nivedita and insisted the Japanese revolutionist to pay a visit to Kolkata.   

(will continue)

---

[1] Chaudhurani, Sarala Devi, The Many Worlds of Sarala Devi: A Diary : Translated from the Bengali Jeevaner Jharapata, Socila Scince Press, 2010, page 148

[2] Chaudhurani, Sarala Devi, The Many Worlds of Sarala Devi: A Diary: Translated from the Bengali Jeevaner Jharapata, Socilal Science Press, 2010, page 149

[3] Carbonari or ‘charcol burners’ in Italian dialectics, means secret societies.

[4] Chaudhurani, Sarala Devi, The Many Worlds of Sarala Devi: A Diary: Translated from the Bengali Jeevaner Jharapata, Socilal Science Press, 2010, page 169

[5] Datta. Bhupendra  - Swami Vivekananda – Patriot-Prophet, Nababharat Publisher 1954, page 119

[6] Stavig, Gopal - Western Admirers of Ramakrishna and His Disciples, Advaita Ashrama, 2010, page 490.

[7] Basu, Sankari Prasad - Nivedita Lokmata, Publisher Ananda Publishers Pvt. Limited, 1968, vol 3 page 95

The Nitpicker’s Chronicle : Flip side story of Indian national movement

From time immemorial, India has been blessed with personalities who have not only left an indelible mark on its culture but also shaped its character. India is known to the world through the eyes of great pathfinders, and their wisdom in building up the modern nation is unanimously accepted. On the critical analysis of their views, one can find certain divergences, which in true sense, might be logical in the preceding circumstances. Although conflicting, the views are genuine and expressed with great solemnity.

The path of freedom, since the colonial days, encountered successive seismic waves before reaching the final destination in 1947. Controversies prevailed in the national politics during that time, and the nation was put to occasional strains of contradictions. As lines were drawn to delineate political controversies, positions became more polarised. The trailblazers strived to build up more rhetoric ideologies to put forth their rationale. The dichotomy that prevailed at that time can tell how the nation reached its destiny. Nitpickers might quibble that if the great men of yore were so great, why did they fail to build a great nation? How could the evils of religious bigotry occupy an enduring place in the heart of the nation when the great men decided to bisect the country on communal lines only to build India as a secular republic where religiosity would have no place in the statecraft? No wonder the great men fought a tough battle to break the shackles of subservience. They were great thinkers too. Traditionally India is hallowed by great thinkers, known not only for their sagacity but also their relevance in today’s world. The depth and diversity of their thoughts and the spectrum of issues they debated on, earned them a unique distinction worldwide.

About half a century before independence, in the era of nationalism and struggle against the colonial hegemony, Indian politics was flooded with ideas of great visionaries on subjects elucidating what India was and what she could or should be in the days ahead. Some of them were attracted to the Western models, while others relied upon the traditional culture and religion. Few expressed confidence on the British administration. The divergence of opinion owing to political ideologies of the political class was not new, rather expected. India is a land of diversity where lived seven times more people than those in His Majesty’s own country at the turn of the last century. There have been divisions on the grounds of religion, caste, creed, faith, custom, gender, colour and language. There was a time when leaders were indecisive and there were divergences of opinion on democracy, secularism, freedom of speech, solidarity, justice, stand on the princely states and, lastly, the inevitable partition of the country. Directions were many, including swaraj, ahimsa, satyagraha, terrorism, non-cooperation, poorna-swaraj and even declaration of war against the Crown. Despite their dissimilitude, the propounders had the same goal, which was to achieve freedom. But the conflicts of thoughts and egotism did not disappear; in fact, they multiplied, which further led to the fraction of the leading parties like the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League and that too many a time on the verge of attaining freedom. 

(will continue)