Communalism taking deep roots rather than weakening: Sunil P. Ilayidom

Devadathan A

“Reviving secularism requires more than protest against communalism from political, organisational, or ideological fronts. It must also be connected with the fundamental nature of national discourses, while rediscovering the plurality that exists within us,” writer and critic Sunil P. Ilayidom has said.

He was delivering a talk titled ‘Indian secularism: ways to reclaim it’ (Indian Mathanirapekshatha: Veendedupinte Vazhikal) at the fourth edition of the Kerala Legislature International Book Festival (KLIBF) organised by the Kerala Assembly here on Tuesday.

Mr. Ilayidom noted that large-scale resistance against communalism had always existed – in the form of protest by political parties and organisations, resistance from coalition of secular parties in elections, and opposition to Brahmanical value systems. “Yet, despite these critiques what we actually witness is communalism taking deep root in society rather than weakening,” he observed.

He explained the origins of Indian communalism, pointing out was how imperialist historians of the 19th century often depicted India as primitive and superstitious. Citing The History of British India (1817) by historian James Mill, he highlighted how it marked the first attempt to categorise India’s past in religious terms: the period up to the 12th century as ‘Hindu India’ and the middle-ages as ‘Muslim India.’

He noted that another critique had also emerged suggesting that these religions were in conflict with each other, laying the foundational idea of Hindu-Muslim conflict.

Following this, a group that identified as orientalist emerged, including scholars Max Mueller and Thomas Colebrooke. This resulted in a notion of ‘golden India,’ embodying spirituality, divinity and enlightenment. In the late 19th century, the national movement gained movement.

Mr. Ilayidom pointed out that the issue the nationalists encountered was that India did not have a historical consciousness, and they began to counter imperialist historians’ contentions. These nationalists appropriated the previous perspectives to create a nationalistic past. In doing so, they adopted a core idea from these perspectives: that ancient India was essentially Hindu and that this Hindu India was its golden age, as portrayed by the orientalists.

He also pointed out how even historians such as R.C. Majumdar portrayed a divided India, to a point where mutual cooperation or life in harmony were presented as having never existed between Hindus and Muslims. “Aspects of India’s past that could not be Brahmanised were often excluded from the national tradition,” he said.

Mr. Ilayidom stressed that India was characterised by its plurality, with its culture and traditions shaped by influences beyond. Divine archetypes, religious beliefs, food habits, and clothing styles, which flowed through daily life practices from different eras and regions, mixed together to form India’s pluralistic culture.