memories of different communities and reinterpreting them at the local level to suit the logic of a particular political group

[yogesh saxena]

Managing the memories of different communities and reinterpreting them
at the local level to suit the logic of a particular political group,
is an oft-observed phenomenon in the ongoing political processes of
the country. This entails digging out lesser known historical events
associated with particular communities and converting them into
popular memory, after making additions and deletions that suit the
political agenda of the concerned political forces. Sometimes
historical events are placed in confrontation with each other, and
commu-nities are mobilised by creating warring memories and warring
identities against other communities. In this process a space is
forged in the collective memory of the communities concerned.
Political forces that follow this strategy succeed in their efforts by
using arresting and powerful memory kindling devices like constructing
memorials, organising festivals, staging theatres and circulating
their stories in the form of popular literature for popularising their
own version of a historical event. Popular memory is created by
selectively remembering and conveniently forgetting. The Rashtriya
Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) or the Association of National Volunteers, and
its political wing, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) are the main
players of this gameand they have been following this strategy ever
since the BJP joined the political bandwagon. Even after the 2004
general elections held in which the party lost to the Congress and CPI
(M) combine, it reiterated its objective of following and implementing
its Hindutva ideology by creating warring memories among various
communities, especially dalit castes [Laxman 1994]. The method adopted
to mobilise these castes was by searching for lower caste heroes who
suited the Hindu way of thinking. Local histories were explored,
popular dalit heroes were dug out, and their stories were circulated
back among the people from whom they were originally taken. The
present article
tries to show that these stories are not always produced by the people
them-selves and should not be treated as original, primary and sac-
rosanct cultural and narrative constructions. They are constructed
through complex processes by outside socio-political forces and
diffused among the common people through various means of
transmission. Often these local myths are integrated into the grand
history of the community as a whole that is being created as a part of
the ideology of the party. This phenomenon can be commonly observed in
the political scenario of Uttar Pradeshin which BJP is trying to mould
and reinterpret the local historiesof various regions according to
their own political agenda and create a metanarrative of all the
communities in their political fold. This article studies one such
attempt of the RSS and BJP to search for space among dalits of Uttar
Pradesh (UP) by searching for heroes of their communities and
relocating them in their broader project of construction of communal
memories among Hindus as a whole. In the study that is based in
Bahraich and an adjoining village Jittora, we will document the local
history behind myths, and the politics of communalisation around these
myths. Bahraich is approximately 160 kilometres from Lucknow, the
capital of UP. In the north it touches the Nepal border. A famous
dargah (mosque containing a tomb) of a warrior called Salar Masood
Ghazi who is popularly called Ghazi Mian, is located here. This dargah
is visited by thousands of devotees each day and an annual fair is
held in May. Lakhs of devotees (jayren), the maximum being Hindus,
attend the fair to pray for the fulfilment of their wishes. In
Jittora, on the other hand, there is a temple built in the memory of
Suhaldev, a pasi (dalit) king who supposedly killed Ghazi Mian and
himself died in the battle. The BJP which is one of the many parties
active in the region also organises a festival in May each year around
the same time
as the one held in the dargah, to commemorate the memory of Suhaldev
and to emphasise among the dalits and Hindus together, that Suhaldev
was a Hindu warrior who sacrificed his life to safeguard the original
residents from Ghazi Mian. Thereby it is trying to create a warring
heroic identity of Suhaldev and positing it against a so-called Muslim
invader. This hero is then being used for asserting the identities of
the Hindus and dalits of that region, which the party hopes will
ultimately lead to the political mobilisation of these communities in
their favour.

Hindutva Rhetoric, Communal Politics and Dalits

The RSS, claimed to be a non-political Hindu nationalist organisation
but which is known for its politics of communalism based on Hindu
identity, was founded in 1925 in order to fashion India as a Hindu
nation. One of the important functions of RSS, also known as Sangh
parivar, is to build up a cadre base for the BJP, which is the
political wing of RSS. Jaffrelot (1996: 46), in his analysis of the
social profile of its cadres has shown that in spite of the tall
claims of the RSS as a vanguard of an egalitarian Hindu rashtra
(nation), it has a high brahaminical dominance in its structure and
politics. While analysing its ideological dis-course, Pandey (1993:
244) suggests upper caste racism. How-ever, when the dalit voice
emerged on the public and electoral scene, the RSS was compelled to
expand its boundary of Hin-duism to include them. For this they
started a multipronged strategy which included launching a campaign
called ‘samajik samrasta’ (social harmony) and
established a ‘samajik samrasta manch’ (social harmony forum). This
forum became active in the 1980s with a view to appropriating dalits
under their own fold. The basis of this forum was that social
inequality couldbe eradicated only by a change of heart of the upper
castes. Schools were set up in dalit ‘bastis’ (settlements), ‘samrasta
bhoj’ (com-munity meals) were organised and sensitisation campaignsto
link dalits with upper caste Hindus, were launched [Idate 1994].
Another strategy was to search for similarities in the symbolic images
of Hedgawar, one of the founders of RSS, and B R Ambedkar, to show
their close affinity with him.1 Narratives were also createdby them
for this purpose.2 In 1989 during the birth centenary cel-ebrations of
Hedgawar the RSS launched a network of ‘Hedgawar Sewa Nyas’ (Hedgawar
Welfare Organisation) to work in dalit hamlets, colonies and bastis
for linking the lower castes with Hindu identity and politics.
Organisations such as Dayanand Shiksha Kendra, Swami Vivekanand
Shiksha Kendra, Jaya Baba Ramdeo Kendra, etc, were also set up with
the same purpose [Bharat 2004].

When BJP entered the political scenario, it also started making
efforts to bring the dalits under its political fold. One way was by
involving dalit leaders in electoral processes. Another way was
supporting the reservation policy recommended by the Mandal
Commission, as decided at a meeting held in Bhopal onJuly 20, 1985
[Singh 2004]. Alongside, the Ram movement was startedto produce a
counter politics against the dalit mobilisation that had started over
the issue of the Mandal Commission. Theypropagated the concept of
‘Ramrajya’ (Ram’s land) in which upper and lower castes live together
in harmony. Ram was projected as a symbolof unity among dalits and
upper castes. The idea was circulated that the dalits had played a
monumental role in the entire life span of Ram. During the battle
fought in Lanka, Ram took the help of Sugriv, Angad, Jamvant, Hanuman
and the monkey brigade, who were actually the so-called deprived
communities of today’s period, to rescue Sita, the soul of India.
Hanuman was none other than a symbol of the deprived and the
underprivileged (ibid). In this manner, the RSS and BJP started
projecting dalits as the people who protected the Hindu dharma. The so-
called dalits and backward castes were said to have contributed the
most to keep alive the cultural heritage of Hinduism in the long
history of India. India was known as a golden bird in world history
only because of their contributions [Laxman op cit]. The BJP-RSS
combine further declared that even when the Mughals attacked India, it
was the vanvasis, bheels and so-called dalits of today who lent their
support to Maharana Pratap to fight against Akbar when no Rajput king
agreed to do so (ibid). Shivaji also fought alongside the dalit
communities of bhavlis, paharis and vanvasis, and established the
Hindu kingdom in the south with their help, which shook the
foundations of the Mughal monarchy. Thus the dalits had helped in
ending the Mughal rule and establishing Hinduism in the country
(ibid).

Coming to the present, the BJP said that in the communal riots that
have taken place in the last 45 years, the maximum number of people
who fought and died were dalits and backward castes. They were the
ones who stood their ground against the Muslims to protect Hinduism
(ibid). Through these and other such nar-ratives the party tried to
make it appear that the feeling that inspired the dalits to protect
this religion was that it was theirs but because of some historical
distortions they might not be getting their due respect and position
in society. In spite of this, whenever any danger falls on Hinduism it
is the dalits who save it. That is why Hinduism is their possession
and they are its true guardians [Thengdi 2004].

It is interesting to note that the Sangh parivar’s strategy to
appropriate dalits under their own fold is heavily centred on their
own interpretation of dalit identity and history. For this they are
creating their own propaganda literature through print and visual
media. A special issue of Panchjanya, their mouthpiece weekly
newspaper, called Samajik Nyay Issue, was published in order to absorb
the growing dalit dissent against brahminism and their growing
struggle for self-respect and equality. The purpose was to reinterpret
their past, history and identity in their own way and transform their
newly emerging dalit-bahujan identity into Hindutva identity (ibid).
Many newspaper reports can be found of lectures delivered by the BJP
leaders like Uma Bharati and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP; another
wing of RSS) leaders like Ashok Singhal who tried to interpret dalit
history as the history of Hindutva in dalit bastis, slums and jhopar
patties (resettlement colonies) in the
urban fringes and in villages, qasbas and small towns.

Contesting Histories, Warring Identities and Making of Popular Domain

An example of the strategy of BJP-RSS to search out local heroes of
dalit communities and create communal warring memories can be seen in
the Bahraich region of Uttar Pradesh. They did this by positing a
local pasi king called Suhaldev against Ghazi Mian, who is very
popular in the region, and giving him a warring identity. The reason
for creating this narrative was firstly to appropriate pasis who
consider Suhaldev as a hero of their caste and secondly to extend and
construct Hindu history against Islam to mobilise Hindus under their
own fold. This project was launched on May 2, 2004, when a Maharaja
Suhaldev Sewa Samiti, Uttar Pradesh was formed in Bahraich, which
organised a five-day celebration in memory of Suhaldev. The organisers
of the programme were Mahiraj Dhwaj Singh, the ‘pracharak’ of RSS and
Sureshwar Singh, also of RSS. The other members of the organising
committee were members of the BJP. The headquarters of the organising
committee was mentioned as Keshav Bhawan, Model House, Lucknow, which
is also the head office of the RSS in UP. Shri Yogi Adityanathji
Maharaj, a BJP MP from Gorakhpur inaugurated the function. The other
names mentioned in the invitation letter were mostly of local leaders
of BJP, Hindu Parishad and RSS. According to the letter, it was being
held to commemorate the memory of maharaja Suhaldev, the great warrior
who defended the Hindu religion and religious people from the foreign
invader Masood who despoiled Indian cultural traditions, ravaged women
and killed children and men without facing obstruction from anyone.
They proclaimed that it was essential to sing the glory of such great
sons of the nations otherwise the defender will be erased from the
pages of history while the cruel invader will be glorified.3 Many
programmes were organised as a part of the function, including a
‘kalash yatra’, ‘yajna’, sports competitions, a huge (virat) wrestling
match and a ‘Ram katha’ (discourse on Ram).

On May 6, 2004, another fair began in Bahraich at the dargah of Salar
Masood, who was claimed by RSS to be the foreign invader who had
caused ruin and desolation among the people. Surprisingly, he seems to
be revered more by Hindus than by Muslims since they attend the fair
in large numbers each year.4 According to a news report published in
the Hindi newspaper Amar Ujala on that day, the fair symbolises
communal harmony in the region. The report said that the
‘baraat’ (marriage cer-emony) of Ghazi Mian will be held on May 9
which will be attended by almost five lakh people, of which the
maximum will be from the majority community, ie, Hindus (Amar Ujala,
Lucknow, May 6, 2004). On the same day, another report was published
in the same newspaper saying that Kunwar Manvendra Singh, the
president of the legislative assembly and council and a leader of the
BJP, who had come to inaugurate the Ram katha on the last day of the
five-day fair of maharaja Suhaldev men-tioned above, termed the
worship of Salar Masood Ghazi as unfortunate. He said, it was tragic
that maharaja Suhaldev had been resurrected so late, but everyone
should attend the victory celebrations of such a great person.
Proclaiming maharaja Suhaldev as a great martyr he said that, earlier
governments had not understood his greatness. He appealed to the
people to follow his footsteps and emulate his ideals (Amar Ujala,
ibid). From these two reports it is obvious that two parallel, but
contesting and warring histories are being celebrated in the same
region which the two communities inhabit. The BJP-RSS is trying to
create a warring history of Suhaldev by projecting him as the defender
and saviour of the Hindu religion who had laid down his life to save
the people from the hands of the foreign invader who was ruining and
destroying the existing culture. Themanaging committee of the dargah
of Ghazi Mian, which organises the fair every year, on the other hand,
projects him as a symbol of communal harmony between Hindus and
Muslims. The commit-tee is a non-political one comprising members
affiliated to all political parties.5 The story about Suhaldev and
Ghazi Mian that is popular in the region is that Suhaldev was the king
of the bhar kaum (community) living there. He was also the leader of
17 small kings in the region but was very cruel and oppressive. At
that time that place was a jungle. Ghazi Mian, whose actual name was
Salar Masood, and who was the nephew of Mahmood Ghaznavi and also his
son-in-law, had come to the jungles tohunt. He set up his tent inside
the jungles and was supposed to leaveafter hunting. The Muslims of the
region, who had all been converted from Hinduism, went to him and
requested him to protect them. Ghazi Mian agreed. Suhaldev, suspecting
that Ghazi Mian was trying to overthrow him, attacked him and after a
fierce battle, killed him and his entire army. He himself died in the
battle.6 Another myth in circulation is that Salar Masood was in love
with a girl named Zohra, who lived in a nearby village called Rudauli.
Unfortunately he died before his marriage. The girl then built a tomb
for him and also built her own tomb. She died soon after that on a
Sunday, which was also Salar Masood’s death day. That is why a baraat
or marriage procession of Ghazi Mian is taken out from the dargah each
year on a Sunday as a part of the annual fair held there, and a
symbolic marriage ritual is performed in their memory. Even today
people from the Rudauli village pose as members of the bride’s family
and lay a ‘chadar’ (bed spread) on her tomb.7 The reason why Ghazi
Mian is so popular among the Hindus of that region is that when Ghazi
Mian’s tomb was built, it was believed to have acquired magical
powers. The local people narrate that both Hindus and Muslims are
blessed after praying there. According to the popular history of that
region, the first person to have experienced his miracle was a yadav
woman. She had no offspring but after praying there a son was born.
Since then many miracles have occurred. Lepers who come to pray at the
shrine during the annual fair get cured and people in whom ghosts
enter are exorcised there. More than 75 per cent of the visitors to
the annual fair are Hindus and all the political leaders standing for
elections visit the tomb to get Masood’s blessings both before filing
the nomination and after winning the elections (Yadav field diary
ibid).

Invention, Incarnation and Interpretations

Our purpose here is to see the process of myth making of the battle
between Suhaldev and Salar Masood and its transmission as popular
history among the people of the region. Our focus is on the political
processes being played at present and thereby to see the politics of
construction of hatred through history. The myth of Suhaldev is
developed around the story of the battle between him and Salar Masood.
According to the Gazetteer,8 Masood was a nephew of Mahmood of
Ghaznavi. He was born in Ajmer in 1015. At the age of 16, he started
on his invasion of Hindustan. After travelling through Multan, he
reached Delhi and from there he went to Meerut, Kannauj and Satrikh in
Barabanki. Before arriving at Bahraich, he sent two
‘kotwals’ (lieutenants) of his army Saiyad Saif-ud-din and Mian Rajab,
there. A confederation of the nobles of Bahraich threatened them and
tried to push back the army. Masood then himself marched to Bahraich
reaching there in 1033 AD. The chieftains of the region were at first
daunted by the young warrior but gradually took heart to fight against
him. But Masood defeated them repeatedly, until the arrival of
Suhaldev turned the tide of victory. He was overthrown and slain in
1034 AD and buried by his servants in Bahraich, where his dargah was
built in 1035. Suhaldev was the eldest son of the king of Sravasti,
called Mordhwaj. According to the stories circulated popularly he had
many names like Suhaldev, Sakardev, Suhirdadhwaj, Rai Suhriddev,
Suhridil, Susaj, Shahardev, Sahardev, Suhaaldev, Suhildev and
Suheldev. But in contemporary print culture he is referred to as raja
Suhaldev.9 It is popularly believed that he was the king of the bhar
community, from which emerged the pasi community, a dalit caste of the
region. Some people of the forward castes of Bahraich project him as a
vais kshatriya (suryavanshi kshatriya) [Shukla 2003] but there are no
historical records to substantiate it. In ‘Mirate Masudi’ he is
mentioned as bhar tharu. Boys, a British historian mentions him as
bhar rajput.10 Cunningham mentions him as tharu (Gazetteer 1903,
ibid). Some writers claim that he was pandav vanshi tomar; some say
that he was a bharshiv and some pasi.11 Gonda Gazetteer mentions him
as rajputvanshi jain. Gewail, in the Bahraich Gazetteer calls him
tharu kalhans. The paragana book of Bahraich mentions himas
nagvanshiya kshatriya and the Kaifiyat Paragana Ikauna writes of him
as visen kshatriya. Kanth Charitra and Shankar Vijaytexts refer to him
as suryavanshi kshatriya (Gazetteer 1903, ibid).

Gradually with the flow of time the pasis became convinced that
Suhaldev belonged to their caste and started glorifying him as their
caste hero. Just before the 2004 elections, Guddi Rajpasi, a pasi
candidate standing from Barabanki Lok Sabha region, a neighbouring
region of Bahraich, as a member of the Bharat Kranti Rakshak Party
(BKRP), appealed to the pasis in her election leaflet to vote for her
in the name of Rashtra Bhakt Maharaja Suhaldev and other heroes of the
pasi caste such as Maharaja Satandev, Bijli Pasi, Virangana Udadevi,
Ganga Baks and other dalit heroes like Jhalkaribai, Mahatma Buddh,
Mahatma Gandhi, Baba Saheb Bhimrao Ambedkar, Sardar Patel and Amar
Shaheed Abdul Hameed.12 As the second largest dalit community in Uttar
Pradesh, the pasis are the targets of various political parties who
would like to marshal them as vote banks. Understanding this the RSS
launched a campaign to search for heroes that suit their Hindu
political agenda. They found such a hero in Suhaldev and started
organising festivals in Jittora to evoke his memory among the common
people. Suhaldev is projected as a ‘rashtra rakshak shiromani’ who
defended Hindu society, culture and the country from Muslim intruders
by forming a confederation of local kings. In the narratives, Suhaldev
is depicted as an ideal Hindu king who protected cows (‘go rakshak’),
protected Indian culture, provided a respectful position to saints
(‘sant rakshak’) and worked for the uplift of Hindu culture (‘dharma
rakshak’).13 Cow as a symbol is used for glorifying both Suhaldev and
Salar Masood. In another version of Salar Masood’s story narrated by
the dafalis, a low caste Muslim community, whose profession is to sing
songs praising Ghazi Mian at his dargah, it is said that when Salar
Masood was sitting at his marriage ‘mandap’ (tent) just before his
marriage, a woman ran up to Salar Masood saying that some people had
unchained her cows. Hearing this, Ghazi Mian rushed to rescue them but
lost his life. He was thus unable to marry his lover and died before
consummating his marriage.14 The narrative glorifying Suhaldev says
that Salar Masood, realising the significance of cow in the Hindu
psyche, placed a herd of cows in front of his army as a shield. As a
counter strategy, Suhaldev unchained the cows on the eve of the battle
both to save the cows and so that Salar Masood would be forced to
fight man-to-man.15 Thus one narrative glorifies Ghazi Mian as a cow
protector while in the other narrated by RSS glorifying Suhaldev,
Ghazi Mian is depicted as being insensitive towards dumb animals, and
who used the sacred cow against Hindus. Through this narrative
Suhaldev emerges as a saviour of the cows that were being needlessly
killed during the battle. Through the print media also the BJP-RSS
tried to carve the image of Suhaldev as a pasi hero who was a pride to
Hindus. In the booklet ‘Hindu Samaj ke Gaurav, Pasi Veer Maharaja
Suhaldev ki Shaurya Gatha’, written by Triloki Nath Kol, a local RSS
activist and BJP leader of Bahraich [Kol 1997], he tried to influence
the pasi community in favour of Hindutva agenda. He also attempted to
create a narrative instigating hatred against Muslims within the pasis
by exaggerating and fantasising the attitude of the community towards
them by showing how the Muslim rule in the medieval period was very
oppressive towards pasis. The pasis were the earlier rulers of that
region and had been dethroned and dispossessed by the Muslims.
According to the narrative, Muslims consider pasis to be their
greatest enemy. It is commonly believed that when the pasis lost to
the Muslims they were forced to do jobs like filling water from tanks.
This gave them the title Bharpasi. At that time the pasis welcomed
this name since filling water is a respectable Hindu work. They did
not realise that this name would later turn into a curse for them.
Tremendous efforts were made to divide and weaken the pasis.

The Muslims married pasi girls and forced them to change their
religion. Under these circumstances the pasis started eating pork that
is hated by Muslims and marrying off their children at young ages. Kol
lamented that it was unfortunate that due to lack of historical
information, these events are not given much importance (ibid: 10-11).

The RSS and their various wings and organisations are creating
narratives based on local histories to play the politics of hatred
among the dalits and Muslims. These narratives also try to make the
pasis believe that the Muslims initiated their marginalisation
process. On the other hand, Salar Masood was projected as a cruel
person who ravaged Hindu women. Hitting out at the Hindus who visit
Ghazi Mian’s dargah and pray for the fulfilment of their desires, they
repeatedly emphasise that the dargah was once the ashram of Balark
Rishi which was razed to the ground by Salar Masood. The dargah was
built nearly 300 years later by a Muslim king called Feroze Tughlak.
Salar Masood was actually killed nearly 5 kilometres from where his
tomb is located. They termed it unfortunate that Maharaja Suhaldev,
the saviour of the nation and the Hindu religion, has been forgotten
by the Hindus while they go and pray at the imaginary tomb of a
foreign intruder to get their wishes fulfilled.16

Through these narratives the discursive strategy of the RSS is that
firstly they want to paint the myth of Suhaldev with a Hindu colour.
Secondly, linking the myth with pasis is helping to electorally
mobilise them. Thirdly, by castigating Ghazi Mian as a Muslim invader
who spoiled the culture of this region, they are trying to implant a
sense of guilt among the Hindus who visit the tomb of Ghazi Mian to
pray for the fulfilment of their wishes. This is helping them to
create a divide between Hindus and Muslims. Thus the construction of a
Hindutva-oriented commu-nal history of Salar Masood and Suhaldev can
be observed for evoking feelings of hatred against the other
community. The temple of Suhaldev, which is located in a very remote
place near a lake called Ashtavakra Jheel in Jittora, is fully under
the control of RSS and their people. The present priest of the temple
Shobh Ram Yadav also belongs to RSS. This temple is propagated by them
as ‘Rashtra Rakshak Veer Shiromani Maharaja Suhaldev ka Darbar’.
Unlike Ghazi Miyan, Suhaldev is not worshipped as a healer and a deity
and his temple is not a place where devotees fulfil their desires. He
is worshipped as a warrior who protected Hindutva. His statue shows
him sitting on a horse holding a bow and arrow. He is wearing the
dress of a maharaja with a crown.

The statue is located inside a locked iron cage. Suhaldev’s image is
also linked with the image of a grand Hindu god. Visuals of cows are
made on the walls to show him as a ‘gorakshak’ (cow protector). On one
side of the front wall, there is a painting of Krishna, the cowherd
god of Hindu mythology. On the other side, there is a painting of lord
Rama. Just below it is a painting of a cow and a calf. 17

Myth Making and Popular Narrative

It is interesting to note that the story circulated by RSS and its
various wings is contradicted by the popular narrative of the mostly
Hindus devotees who worship Ghazi Mian. Ghazi Mian is not perceived as
an intruder, but as a hunter who wanted to settle down here because of
the beautiful environs. Suhaldev was the king of a local sun-
worshipping tribe called bhar. He wasa great tyrant and an oppressor
of the Muslims and lower castes. When Ghazi Mian arrived, all the
people requested him to save them from the oppressions of Suhaldev.
Very reluctantly he agreed, and a fierce battle ensued in which both
Suhaldev and Ghazi Mian were killed.18 Thus Suhaldev is looked upon as
a villain while Ghazi Mian is a hero. Even today when a strongwind
blows it is believed to be the evil spirit of Suhaldev and an iron
chain that is full of magical powers is tied at the front gate of the
dargah to prevent the spirit from entering. No one is allowed to enter
or leave the dargah at that time (Ishar field diary ibid). The month-
long annual fair at the dargah of Ghazi Mian held in May is organised
by the Dargah Committee and Sunni Central Board, Bahraich that was
formed in 1902 [Shukla op cit]. Onthe first Sunday of the month all
the people living in the neighbourhood gather there to dip in the
water tank called Suryakund (lake dedicated to Sun god) near the
dargah. The RSS claims that earlier an idol of Sun god stood there.
Thousands of years ago before Salar Masood’s advent, big fairs used to
be held there during solar and lunar eclipses. Later, the Muslims
changed its name to ‘Hoz Shamshi’, which is the Persian translation of
the word ‘Suryakund’.19 Sunday being the day of the Sun, Hindus
observe fast and pray to the Sun god. This is the reason why Hindus go
there with flags and ‘trishuls’ (tridents) to pray. It is commonly
believed that when lepers bathe in the water of the Suryakund they get
cured.20 The RSS, however propagates that, the lake actually belonged
to Balarkmuni and it was sanctified by ‘rishis’ and ‘munis’ over the
ages, which gave it miraculous properties. This is how lepers get
cured after bathing in this lake.

Statue, Image and Myth Making

The logical, intellectual and narrative resources which RSS uses are
heavily drawn from the narratives created and circulated by Arya
Samaj, Ram Rajya Parishad and the Hindu Mahasabha Sangathan that tried
to spread ideas of Hindu nationalism derived from socio-religious
movements initiated by high caste Hindus [Jaffrelot 1996, p 11]. The
basis of the image of Suhaldev was invented and constructed by a
schoolteacher and poet of Bahraich, named Guru Sahay Dikshit Dwijdeen,
who, influenced by Arya Samaj, composed a long poem in 1940 based on
the character of Suhaldev called Sri Suhal Bavani. The poem composed
in ‘veer ras’ (emotion portraying bravery), projected him as the
saviour of Hindu pride against the foreign intruder Salar Masood.
Bitter words were used against Islam and Salar Masood, in particular.
The poet himself recited the poem in local poetry conferences in a
grandiloquent manner with a sword in his hand and a headband around
his head. This manner of recitation brought Suhaldev to life in his
chivalrous glory to the audience. A local resident of Bahraich who had
attended one such recitation, narrates that this created an arresting
image of Suhaldev in the minds of the audience.21 The oral rendition
and the printed version, which appeared in 1950, helped to build up
and diffuse a heroic image of Suhaldev in that region. It is
interesting to note that in the poem Suhaldev was not labelled as a
pasi king, but was said to be a Jain king who was a passionate anti-
Muslim and a staunch Hindu loyalist. Inspired by the poem, the local
intellectuals like lawyers, schoolteachers, etc, started writing
articles in newspapers glorifying this image of Suhaldev.22 The
Partition of India and the ensuing communalism played an important
role in the reconstruction and transmission of the myth of Suhaldev as
an anti-Muslim, Hindu hero. After inde-pendence, an incident took
place in the region, which reinforced the memory of Suhaldev in the
minds of the local people. The Arya Samaj, Ram Rajya Parishad and the
Hindu Mahasabha Sangathan had launched a movement demanding the
installation of a memorial to Suhaldev. As a part of this movement, a
fair was planned in April 1950 in Jittora, which was supposed to be
inaugurated by Joginder Singh ‘Sardar Sahab’, a local state level
Congress leader of Bahraich at whose house Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru
used to stay when they visited Bahraich. A stone plaque mentioning the
inauguration was also kept ready in an antici-pation of the event. But
on the day of the function, Khwaja Khalil Ahmad Shah, a member of the
Dargah Committee went to the district administration and reported that
a communal tension was brewing due to the frenzy created by the Hindu
Mahasabha, Arya Samaj and Ram Rajya Parishad around the Suhaldev
issue. He appealed to the administration to prevent the function
commemo-rating Suhaldev from taking place. The residents claim that
Section 144 was imposed on the basis of his appeal. However, Santram
Khanna, a Hindu resident of Jittora gathered together a few local
residents like Onkarnath Saraf, Kedarnath Asthana, Mathuraprasad
Tandon, etc, and instigated them to break the ban. They started
shouting slogans like ‘Suhaldev jaga hai, Saiyad Salar bhaga
hai’ (Suhaldev has risen, Saiyad Salar has fled), and ‘Suhaldev ne
lalkara hai, Surajkund hamara hai’ (Suhaldev has instigated, Surajkund
is ours). They gathered a big crowd which then made its way to the
Nagar office.23 The Section 144 had been broken and satyagraha had
started. The satyagrahis were put into jail by Baijnath Singh, the
city, ‘kotwal’. In this tension-ridden situation, the main social
worker of the city, Mahadev Prasad Srivastava, who was associated with
the Hindu Mahasabha, called a meeting of eminent people of Bahraich
like Sri Bholanath Arya, Shyamlal Srivastava, Laxminarain Gupta, Padma
Chandra Jain, Pyarelal Mishra, Amarnath Puri of the Ram Rajya Parishad
and the RSS ‘pracharak’ Laxmi Chandra Dhawan and formed a Sri Suhaldev
Sangharsh Samiti. It was decided that till the Section 144 was not
lifted, batch upon batch of people would be sent to jail. The main
markets were shut down for a whole week and batches of residents
shouting slogans were sent to jail. Police and administration got
together to curb the rebellion. In the meantime, a section of Congress
who got influenced by the Hindutva under the leadership of Vaidya
Bhagwandeen Mishra, joined this movement around Suhaldev. They wrote
to the government that if the Section 144 was not lifted, the Congress
would join the rebellion in a big way. Around 2,000 people went to
jail. Buckling under the pressure of the people, the government lifted
the section after some time.

The local Congressmen, taking advantage of the situation, organised a
big rally in Jittora to inaugurate the Jittora fair and the memorial
of Suhaldev. They commissioned two local painters Lalit Nag and
Rajkumar Nag to create the first icon of Suhaldev. The painting was
put on the back of an elephant and taken around the city in the form
of a big procession. This painting was installed in Jittora and the
paintings of Rishi Ashtavakra, Balmiki, Buddha, Mahaveer and Guru
Nanak flanked it. A local raja of Prayagpur donated 500 bighas of land
and the Jittora Lake to the Suhaldev Smarak Samiti. Later, the
sculptor Samaydeen of Gonda, sculpted a statue of Suhaldev based on
the painting made by the Nag painters, in which he was portrayed in a
chivalrous stance astride a horse. Earlier the statue was made of clay
and later it was changed into cement. A temple of Suhaldev was
constructed around the statue. The first priest was Bibhishan Narain
Puri whowas associated with the Hindu Mahasabha. Under his
leadershipthe event celebrating Maharaj Suhaldev Vijayotsav, began. In
the beginning it was celebrated in the form of ‘hom’, ‘havan’, ‘puja
path’ and taking out a victory procession. During Dussehra, a
tradition of worshipping weapons was started in which Hindu forces
started participating in a big way. The people behind the Suhaldev
memorial movement also invented a cele-bration around the Rajyabhishek
of Maharaj Suhaldevji on Basant Panchami when a big fair started being
held on the occasion.24 Between 1950 and 1960 the association began
influencing pasiselectorally since they were the dominant majority in
many legislative constituencies in Bahraich and its adjoining
districts. They started projecting Suhaldev as a pasi king who had
fought for defending a Hindu Ram Rajya. A candidate called Bala Prasad
won the elections from a pasi-dominated reserved constituency called
Ikauna between 1952 and 1957 (Kol 2003, op cit, p 15). In the
beginning, although the RSS was involved in the movement, the
leadership was in the hands of Arya Samaj, Hindu Mahasabha and the Ram
Rajya Parishad. Later, due to the agenda of involving dalits under
their fold and the fear of conversion of lower castes into Islam in
the Indo-Nepal border after the opening of a number of madrasas in the
region, the RSS inten-sified the move of projecting Hindu warring
icons to perpetuate the anti-Muslim hatred and started creating
memories of Suhaldev as a Hindu hero against Muslim invaders not only
in Jittora, but also in the adjoining regions. The movement had
dampened for a few years it picked up momentum in 2001 when the
maharaja Suhaldev Sewa Samiti was formed under the banner of RSS. As
mentioned earlier, this association aggressively revived the memories
and celebrations around Suhaldev by creating new festivals, publishing
pamphlets, leaflets and booklets and organising various popular
activities so that the narrative of Suhaldev may transmit to the
grassroot level. Interestingly, theRaj family, that earlier patronised
the Sri Suhaldev Smarak Samitiled by Ram Rajya Parishad and the Arya
Samaj and the Hindu Mahasabha, shifted their allegiance to the Sri
Suhaldev SewaSamiti under the RSS. In the stationery used by the Sewa
Samiti to circulate information about their various activities, the
names of pasi leaders associated with the organisation like Poonam
Verma and Padma Sen Chowdhry, were mentioned prominently. In the 2004
elections, they appealed to the voters to vote for the party which had
elevated the glory of persons who had laid down their lives in the
defence of their motherland, whether it was Suhaldev or the martyrs of
the Kargil war.Murli Manohar Joshi too, inhis address to the pasi
community, transformed the myth of Suhaldev into an electoral resource
by specifically mentioning that Suhaldev had stopped the conversion of
many Hindus to Islam. As a part of the transmission of Suhaldev in the
popular memory of people of UP, various statues of Suhaldev were
installed in different parts of the state. The statue installed in
Lucknow by the RSS, reflects their urge to propagate an aggressive
image of Suhaldev. It is markedly different from the statue in
Bahraich installed in the 1950s based on the painting by the Nag
brothers. In the Lucknow statue he is shown in as a valiant, militant
stance similar to the image of Maharana Pratap. He is wearing an iron
armour, an iron headgear, and iron breeches and is holding a spear
while a sword is tucked in his waist. On the other hand, the statue in
Bahraich depicts him more as a medieval folk hero wearing a crown and
holding a bow and arrow. Maharana Pratap is another myth propagated by
RSS and the attempt to carve Suhaldev in his image might be a
reflection of the desire to homogenise the militant Hindu heroes and
their iconography. The residents of Bahraich however believe that the
statue of Suhaldev in Bahraich is a true depiction.

The construction of aggressive hatred against Muslims can be clearly
observed during the celebration of the memory of Suhaldev by RSS
during their annual festival. One form of expression of this hatred is
through theatres. Before 2002, the festival was restricted to
performing Ramkathas, ‘kalashyatras’ and ‘havan’ and taking out
processions. In 2002, at a meeting in Saraswati Shishu Mandir, a
branch of a school run by RSS all over India to culturally condition
young children, it was decided that depicting the life of Suhaldev
through theatre would be a more effective medium of transmitting the
message of RSS to the masses. The Berunapur theatre company was
commissioned to prepare a drama based on the life of Suhaldev. The
script of the drama was prepared by Mahiraj Dhwaj Singh a Sangh
pracharak with the help of literature and writer Gopal Shukla.26 The
drama, when it was performed for the first time during the Suhaldev
fair organised at the premises of the Suhaldev temple, evoked a
thunderous applause, especially in the scene when Suhaldev chopped off
Ghazi Mian’s head. Seeing the response of the audience the organisers
decided to make the drama a regular feature and make that particular
scene even more gruesome and aggressive. This version of drama is used
by various other drama companies of the region, which they perform on
various occa-sions. Thus the drama prepared for the celebration of the
memory of Suhaldev is now emerging as a popular culture of theatrical
performance of the region and is helping in creation of popular memory
in one religious community against the other.

Conclusion

This article tried to document how local histories are being
transformed into powerful tools in the hands of political parties and
how dalits are being mobilised by communal forces by the creation of a
communal memory through narratives that re-interpret their identity
and use their myths in communal ways. The communal imaginings created
by interpreting local history of communities is one of the political
discursive strategies applied by political forces. In this process
they also create their own version of popular culture based on the
community myths and by creating narratives, launching celebrations,
inventing and making statues, writing popular booklets and leaflets
and linking this process with political agitation. The version created
by the political parties gradually enter the psyche of the community
and become a part of their identities and further lead to their
communalisation. This process also shows how a warring history and
myth is being created to break the composite history and culture which
exists at the people’s level and gradually this created history and
myth reflects in the popular culture of the region. This results in
the emergence of a warring popular culture which does not emerge from
within but is imposed from the top which consists of political forces
and social elites of the region. This shows that myths, history and
memory may be powerful weapons either to communalise people or to make
them aware of their own rights and social respect and ultimately
strengthening the politics of social justice, equality and social
respect of the marginal community. In both the process, the
communities are being treated as electoral resource, but in one case
they are being used for a divisive purpose and creating hatred against
other communities, while in the other, they are being made aware of
their rights and being empowered and gaining self-respect. The dalit
politics of UP is an example of the latter, in which the BSP
consolidated the diverse dalit communities using their myths, memories
and legends. An example of the former is that of BJPand RSS who are
using the myths and legends of the dalits and com-munalising them by
giving them warring identity against Muslims, which is one of the
agenda of Hindutva politics. The creation of a warring identity of
Suhaldev that is placed against Ghazi Mian who is a Muslim popular
hero is a case in point. This strategy serves to exemplify the
compulsions of state centredpower politics to dig out myths, legends
and heroes of marginalised communities and mould them to fit into
their political agenda.