Skip to main content

Tridip Suhrud's Mahatma

Tridip Suhrud
It was a lovely evening in Ahmedabad, and I decided to go to Gandhi Ashram with a friend to have a chat with a senior Gandhi scholar who sits quietly in a modest, less than 10x10 room – Tridip Suhrud. Suhrud is currently involved in digitizing anything and everything related to Mahatma Gandhi. “We have already digitized nearly five lakh pages and put them online, including Gandhiji’s complete works. Once we have finished digitizing around 25 lakh pages, which would include works by all those who have worked and interacted with Gandhi, you wouldn’t need to go anywhere to do research on Gandhi. All you would need to do is to go online”, he tells me modestly as I begin talking to him.
A reputed social activist, Achyut Yagnik, known as an expert on Gujarat and Ahmedabad (Penguin has published his books on the cultural history of both), introduced me to Suhrud in mid-1990s. At that time, Suhrud was a faculty at the National Institute of Design in Ahmedabad. Thereafter, I would meet Suhrud at the Dhirubhai Ambani Institute of Information and Communication Technology (DAIICT), in Gandhinagar, Gujarat’s capital, where he taught political science and cultural history, his areas, to those ICT students who wanted go to go beyond ICT.
What a contrast it was! I thought. The mundane Gandhi hut where he sits now stands in sharp contrast to the upscale DAIICT campus. Always amenable to interact as a “master”, as he called himself informally and with a smile, I decided to ask Suhrud a controversial subject: A section of the Dalit intellectuals accuse the Mahtma of being casteist. What does he say? “Granted”, he said, repeating, “Granted… Gandhi had his own limitations, he couldn’t come out of a certain framework. But answer me one simple question: Who made untouchability a national issue, when it wasn’t on agenda, and fought against it despite huge opposition from the upper caste Hindus?”
Suhrud said, “And, who directly interacted with Babasaheb Ambedkar? None but Gandhi. There are umpteen letters between the two. Others like Rabindranath Tagore or Sardar Patel merely followed Gandhi’s views on untouchability, not beyond. None but Gandhi fought manual scavenging, called it national shame. During the trips he made to Gujarat villages, for instance, during the Dandi march, there were cases when the huts where he stayed put were ‘purified’ by setting them on fire. Often, he would be made to stay outside the village. He was considered ‘impure’ because of his views on untouchability and his unusual ways of supporting the untouchables.”
Pointing out that there are a large number of examples of this kind, the professor – who wore a trendy blue khadi kurta and a black bandi, but looking through his mundane classes – added, “In villages, high caste people would listen to him on British Empire, but when it came to untouchability, they would just back out. Show me if there is another example of this kind. Tagore wrote poetry against untouchability, following Gandhi, but never actively interacted with Ambedkar. Sardar Patel, who, following Gandhi, disapproved of untouchability in all his speeches, but didn’t take it up as campaign.”
Suhrud referred to the controversial Pune pact of 1932, where Ambedkar and Gandhi agreed to have reservation for “depressed classes” – now referred as scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. “Ambedkar wanted separate electorate for the depressed classes, which Gandhi opposed. Separate electorate would have meant Dalits could vote only to Dalit candidates, none else. The British supported such an arrangement. Few see the reason why Gandhi opposed it. It would have deprived large sections of Dalits to vote in areas where upper caste persons are candidates, especially where they are in extreme minority. Besides, other sections of society couldn’t vote for the depressed class candidates. It would have meant an end of interaction in society. Gandhi rightly opposed it”, Suhrud said.
Ask him about the objection Dalit intellectuals raise on the use of term Harijan, and Suhrud clarifies: “There was no word like Dalit during the national movement. The term Dalit came into force in 1950s, it was coined by Ambedkar. The so-called untouchables were referred to by upper classes derogatorily like ‘dhed’ in Gujarat. So, Gandhiji identified them as Harijan, or God’s children. What’s wrong in that? The fight against untouchability was the fight for Harijans as a community. They were called depressed classes by the British, and were identified as Dalits by Ambedkar in 1950s.”
Suhrud concluded by insisting that there is a need to end the move to pit Gandhi against Ambedkar . “The legacy of both is a force to be reckoned with in case Indian society has to reform”, he said. I instantly remembered how my friend Martin Macwan, a Dalit rights activist, had to face the ire of sections of Dalits during shobha yatra a year ago, when he projected Gandhi and Ambedkar together in an effort to highlight untouchability, prevailing in Gujarat cities and villages. Some Dalits threatened him he wouldn’t be allowed to enter into Ahmedabad; but the yatra didn’t stop.
Suhrud’s reference to Sardar Patel made me curious, as the Iron Man is in focus over the debatable plan to build the world’s highest statue in his memory in the midst of Narmada river for Rs 2,500 crore. It’s a mystery what Sardar thinks of untouchability. I decided to investigate. Urvish Kothari, a Gujarati publicist, who has written a book, “Sardar: Sacho Manas, Sachi Vat” and has studied Sardar as few have, told me, “To Sardar, Gandhi’s word was the gospel truth. He just followed Gandhi.” A Dalit intellectual, whom I know well, Chandu Maheria, forwarded me an article he had written on the subject several years ago in the Gujarati periodical “Dalit Shakti”.
Maheria refers to how, in 1924, thanks to the Sardar’s effort, a Dalit, Kachrabhai Bhagat, got a ticket to fight polls to Ahmedabad municipality despite stiff opposition, and ensured his victory; how he called himself “municipality’s bhangi” during that period in order to fight against insanitary conditions, which resulted in plague; and how he decided to sat with the “untouchables” in November 1922 during a Congress meet in Kathiawad where there was separate sitting arrangement for the Dalits.
But, as Suhrud told me, the Sardar didn’t have an “independent view on untouchability, like Gandhi. He was an organizer, and followed Gandhi.” Well-known sociologist Prof Ghansyam Shah, in his article, “Traditional Society and Political Mobilization: The Experience of Bardoli Satyagraha (1920-28)”, published in “Contributions to India Sociology” (1974) refers to some of Sardar’s speeches to suggest that the Sardar had no concrete views on caste. Prof Shah points to how the Sardar told upper caste people to “strengthen” caste organizations in order to fight the British Empire.
As for the “untouchables, dublas, and artisans”, while addressing them in the rural areas around Bardoli, the Sardar told them that it was their “dharma” to be loyal to their masters who belonged to the upper castes. “The government wants to divide you and the shahukar, but for you, your shahukar is everything. You should laugh at and consider him a fool if somebody says that you should change your shahukar. It is just like saying that to a pativrata (chaste and dutiful wife) that she should change her husband. How can you leave the shahukar who had helped you in your difficulties?”, the Sardar had wondered!

Comments

ALSO READ

Surprised? Communist candidate in Ahmedabad bypoll in a Hindutva bastion

On October 11, 2019 morning, as I was scanning through daily news online (I don’t read papers now), I found that both BJP and Congress candidates from Ahmedabad’s Amraiwadi assembly constituency, which fell vacant following the victory of its BJP MLA in the Lok Sabha polls, have been asked to explain as to why they had cash in hand for election campaign, and why they did not deposit their money in a bank account. Fighting the bypoll, BJP’s Jagdish Patel and Congress’ Dharmendra Patel had declared they possessed Rs 1.81 lakh and Rs 1.70 lakh as cash in hand, respectively, for election expenditure.
The Election Commission notice reportedly said it is mandated for candidates to first deposit their expenditure funds in a bank account and then spend from their bank account money for various purposes. Interesting, but who cares for Election Commission, which has no teeth now, I thought. As it was Amraiwadi, what interested me more was (surprise of surprises), CPI had put up a candidate in t…

Repression on anti-CAA, NRC protesters: Are 'notable figures' silent? Not any more

In an amusing opinion piece in “Washington Post” (WP), former "Tehelka" journalist Rana Ayyub  – whose book on Gujarat riots, “Gujarat Files: Anatomy of a Cover Up”, based on her undercover operations with government officials as a documentary filmmaker, made her famous – has blamed three Bollywood Khans, but most notably Saif Ali Khan, for playing an “off-screen role, enabling the worst impulses of the government.”

A top Gujarat High Court lawyer who lived and worked for the underprivileged

When I came to Ahmedabad to join as assistant editor of the Times of India in 1993, I didn’t know Girish Patel was a senior advocate of the Gujarat High Court. Apart from assisting the then editor, Tushar Bhatt, my job was to specifically look after the editorial page, which also meant I should be selecting from among the letters to the editor that we would get, edit them appropriately, and put them in the Letters to the Editor column.
Apart from those who would genuinely write letters, reacting to, particularly disagreeing with, this or that story or comment that appeared in the paper, there were what I would then call “professional letter writers”, too. They would regularly write letters to the editor always profusely praising the paper, just to see their name appearing in the paper. I found this annoying, and the first thing that I did to give them regular space.
Among these regular letter writers was Girish Patel, too. Initially, I would looked at his letters skeptically, but I fou…