Anurag Johari is an avid writer who delves deeply into various socio-political issues, often examining them through a historical lens. He is a researcher with a keen interest in Indian history, culture, and philosophy and regularly writes for numerous online platforms on these subjects. He works with think-tanks to analyze societal issues, aiming to find root causes and offer ideas for creating a more harmonious society. His research often focuses on a holistic view of contemporary socio-politic dynamics. He also probes the questions which are generally ignored by many other researchers. He examines historical events and circumstances from a strategic perspective, providing an understanding that goes beyond conventional narratives, revealing both radical and rational perspectives to uncover the truth. He also explores the interconnectedness of historical events and modern-day issues.
The Literature Times: Your book covers a broad historical period, from the middle ages to modern-day India. What inspired you to explore the complexities of Hindu-Muslim relations over such a vast timeline?
Anurag Johari: Since childhood, we have seen this issue cropping up in media, politics and social debates now and then. But our history texts don’t deal with the issue comprehensively and cover only narrow aspects which are contextual to the personality or event. I was intrigued by political mud-slinging and blame games around politics and focused on personalities. Thus, out of curiosity and with the urge to discover the truth, I comprehensively picked the relevant points over a broad period from the advent of Islam to the present and then analyzed the pattern. Interestingly, the pattern is consistent over centuries and there are pieces of evidence to underline the patterns.
The Literature Times: In your research, you discuss significant movements like the Deobandi, Barelvi, Aligarh, and Tablighi. How did these movements shape the relationship between Hindus and Muslims in India? Can you provide some insights into their impact?
Anurag Johari: These Muslim movements adopted different paths but all started due to the loss of Muslim political power. These Muslim movements had the objective of restoring the Islamic glory as it was during Muslim rule in India. The Aligarh movement emphasised Western education among elite Muslims. In contrast, the Deoband, Barelvi, and Tablighi Movements emphasised becoming a good Muslim to please Allah so that the Muslim hegemony could be re-established in India. On the other hand, contemporary Hindu movements such as Arya Samaj, Ramakrishna Mission, Radha Soami etc. had the objective of protecting Hinduism from Missionary designs to malign it. Hindu movements were socio-spiritual reform movements and had no political dimension. Since Hindu movements did not have a clearly defined and specific objective, thus they lost momentum in due course whereas Muslim movements had a very specific objective and their committed institutions have been keeping the flame alive.
The Literature Times: The Two-Nation Theory and the creation of Pakistan play a major role in your analysis. What do you believe are the long-term consequences of this theory on India’s socio-political landscape?
Anurag Johari: The Two-Nations Theory was pronounced by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. However, no prominent Muslim leader ever opposed the same during the freedom struggle. Later Jinnah used this to invoke the Muslim sentiments demanding partition. However, the Hindu leaders in Congress, instead of acknowledging the general acceptance of this theory among Indian Muslims, always remained in a denial mode. Even after the partition, those Muslim leaders who publicly supported the demand for partition and voted for it, did not migrate to Pakistan and many of them were politically rehabilitated in independent India. But, did that change their heart towards India or Hindus? The creation of Bangladesh was painted by the secular liberal intellectuals as the death of the Two- Nation Theory. However, later events in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh proved that as far as the Two-Nation Theory is concerned, the Muslim mindset in general has not changed. My book has covered many such instances with specific references.
The Literature Times: You mention the ‘fiasco of Hindu-Muslim unity.’ Can you elaborate on the historical and political factors that led to this breakdown, especially in the context of colonial India?
Anurag Johari: Historically, before the British Parliamentary rule in India, there was no question of Hindu-Muslim unity as rulers and chieftains controlled the polity as per their respective policies without any public pressure for representation in power. There was no popular demand for geographical or demographic representation during Islamic or Maratha rule. After the 1857 revolt, the Deoband Movement and the Aligarh Movement were focused on Muslim identity and well-being rather than the masses in general. At the grassroots level, both communities were compartmentalised and had limited social interaction. Between both communities, most interactions were economic or political. However, during British Rule, the opportunistic desire to grab limited power through Constitutional Reforms brought Congress and the Muslim League together through the Lucknow Pact. Opportunistic in the sense there was no change in the hearts of the leaders of the Muslim League. Then Gandhi further strengthened this political façade by mixing the Khilafat Movement with the Non-Cooperation Movement. But, that did not change the chemistry and dynamics between the two communities at the grassroots level as the Muslim leaders continued to undermine the national interests through religious indoctrination. During the Khilafat movement, the call for Jihad was given on the pretext that Islam was in danger. Hindus were attacked and killed. Mopila revolt in Kerala is just an example. After that, the Hindu masses lost faith in the political posturing of Hindu Muslim unity. Later Kashmir, Ram Temple Issue, Terrorism, Love Jihad etc. reinforced the subconscious thinking of Hindus in general.
The Literature Times: The book discusses key political developments like the Partition of Bengal and the politics of the Partition of India. How do you think these events influenced Hindu-Muslim relations in the years following independence?
Anurag Johari: The Partition of Bengal established the process of political dividends based on the demographic division of the land. Although it was annulled later due to mass resistance, but its strategic relevance was proved. After the 1937 election when the Muslim League and Congress both were completely rejected by Indian Muslims. Most Muslim seats were won by regional Muslim leaders. Still, due to the overall largest number of seats, Congress was a valid representative of Indians. However, Gandhi insisted the British Government to include Jinnah in all political negotiations while the latter used that opportunity to veto all possible political settlements, without his demands being met. This effectively gave the veto power to Muslims which was extensively used post-independence and the organized Muslim clerics network enabled it through mass communication during Friday prayers. The greed for Muslim vote bank gravitated all secular–liberal political parties to appease Muslim fanaticism. This led to the social polarization of Hindus to safeguard their socio-political interests within their own country.
The Literature Times: You emphasize the role of appeasement politics in post-1947 India. How do you see this strategy affecting contemporary Hindu-Muslim relations and the broader political climate?
Anurag Johari: Post-independence, appeasement politics became a zero-sum game. The exodus of Kashmiri Pandits, the Waqf Act, violence in various religious events of Hindus, unreasonable administrative restrictions on religious events of Hindus etc. substantiate this hypothesis. The overdose of appeasement led to attacks from the Hindus and their events and symbols to the symbols of national identity. This is evident from multiple instances like publicly disrespecting the national song ‘Vande Mataram’, the attack on Amar Jawan Jyoti in Azad Maidan in Mumbai and Firing on a Tiranga Yatra in Kasganj killing a person. Such events catalysed the social polarisation of Hindus. Now young Hindus are rejecting the concept of secularism and they formed aggressive units to stop cow smuggling, encroachment of mosques and Idgahs, and Friday prayers on the road. Hindu men and women are finding pride in claiming Hinduism and the table has turned.
The Literature Times: Your work often seeks to uncover both “radical” and “rational” perspectives on historical events. Can you share an example from your book where you challenge conventional narratives about Hindu-Muslim relations?
Anurag Johari: Our conventional narratives on the Hindu-Muslim issue are based on superficial aspects of personalities or events. At best, a third party ‘British’ is blamed for creating the issues through their ‘Divide and Rule Policy’. The trends of changing socio-political dynamics, socio-economic conditions, and the differences in their national perspective are often undermined. This book challenges the conventional narratives by highlighting the social aspects such as the ‘Creation of a rift between the two communities’, ‘Social bitterness’, and the Adoption of modern education’. Apart from that, the political aspects such as the ‘Persistent trust deficit’, ‘Institutionalization of fanaticism’, ‘Continuation of the Two Nation Theory’ and ‘Veto politics’ etc. are highlighted with a plethora of evidence. A historical work will always be rational if we can connect the dots and construct a big picture encompassing relevant pieces of evidence. To do that, we must not focus on specific personalities or events.
The Literature Times: As a researcher associated with the Bharat Punj Foundation, you are deeply connected to India’s history and culture. How does this connection shape your understanding of the socio-political issues discussed in your book?
Anurag Johari: That’s an interesting question. I’m not only a socio-political researcher using historical sources but also a keen observer and analyst of modern Indian society. Thus, as an observer, I continuously observe the changes happening around us but as an analyst, I don’t analyse those changes in isolation and rather look for the pattern through historical lenses and then connect the dots to draw the big picture. The hypothesis abstracted from this big picture must locally and reasonably explain the relations in the conditions before and after the chain of events.
The Literature Times: In your book, you trace the rise of Hindu nationalist groups. How do you think their political and cultural agendas have influenced the dynamics between Hindus and Muslims in contemporary India?
Anurag Johari: The rise of nationalism is a natural reaction to the violation of congruence between nation and state. The nationalist sentiments among Hindus have been ignited due to terrorism threatening the security of the state, appeasement politics undermining the rights of the majority (Hindus), Hindu culture and traditions being attacked and lacking legal and political support. The reaction against Hinduism crossed the boundaries and started the violation of symbols of nationalism like Vande Mataram, Bharat Mata, and Amar Jawan Jyoti etc. These issues have started neo-nationalism. There is no change in Muslim position as they continued to oppose nationalism pursuant to their political and religious agenda. Now Pro-Hinduism political leadership has supported celebrating Dev Diwali, organizing Yoga Day, and Geeta Divas. It also has rejuvenated pilgrimage sites into beautiful places as a symbol of Hindu pride.
The Literature Times: Given your focus on historical context and socio-political analysis, what role do you think education and cultural awareness can play in fostering better understanding and harmony between communities in India today?
Anurag Johari: Our education system needs to emphasise seeking the truth, and adapting Indian culture and values while giving due importance to the country and national icons and heroes. Every Indian must recognise oneself as of Indian origin unless the Indian citizenship is taken by grandparents. Second, respecting Indian culture and symbols of national identity should become mandatory and taught in school.
Buy Book: https://amzn.in/d/4oSkZ0V
