SAMARPAN DIVAS

Humanism, viewed integrally

Sudheendra Kulkarni pays tribute to Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya, ideological guru of the BJP, on his death anniversary (February 11). 2005 is the 40th anniversary of Deendayalji's historic lecture series on 'Integral Humanism'

Post-independence India has not produced many political leaders who were also philosophers in their own right. Sadly, even those who were first-grade philosopher-politicians have not received the attention they deserve. Nowhere perhaps is this truer than in the case of Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya, the principal organizer and guide of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, which, in 1980, re-emerged as the Bharatiya Janata Party. The BJP continues to revere him as its ideological guru. Indeed, its constitution enshrines 'Integral Humanism', his chief philosophical work, as the "basic philosophy of the Party".

One does not have to be a BJP supporter to realize the greatness and enduring value of this work, which is a collection of four lectures that Deendayalji delivered in Bombay on 22-25 April, 1965. What strikes any unprejudiced reader of this treatise is its mind-expanding power. In a short space of 32 pages, its author illumines the vast expanse of the Bharatiya Darshan, presenting a seamless elucidation of almost all the fundamental issues that political philosophers of all times have grappled with. Its additional attraction is its simplicity. In the great tradition of Indian seers, Deendayalji's style is so unpolemical and unadorned that it is difficult to believe that it was employed by the leader of a party that perforce had to work in a confrontationist ideological environment.

The obscurity that surrounds 'Integral Humanism' is rather perplexing. After all, BJP is one of the two principal poles in Indian politics today. Under the leadership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, it also provided one of the best governments at the Centre. Still, its basic philosophy has attracted little scrutiny from academic and political circles. In mainstream media debates, 'Integral Humanism' is so unfamiliar a phrase as to make one wonder whether it is a victim of deliberate black-out.

Deendayalji was a remarkable political leader, so unlike leaders of his era or the times that followed his death on February 11, 1968 in a mysterious case of murder while traveling in a train. He was more a teacher than a mass mobiliser. His leadership lay in the power of his intellect and, more so, in the strength of his ethical influence on the people around him. Ideology and idealism were inseparably woven into his personality which, like Gandhiji's, radiated sincerity.

Deendayalji's basic impulse in developing his discourse was humanistic, and not political in the narrow sense of party politics. In words that resonate with the anguish felt by every right-thinking person in the world, he writes: "Man, the highest creation of God, is losing his own identity. We must re-establish him in his rightful position, bring him the realization of his greatness, reawaken his abilities and encourage him to exert for attaining divine heights of his latent personality."

Every philosophy carries with it the birthmarks of the times in which it originates. Since the great debate in the early decades after India's independence revolved around the theme of 'capitalism vs. communism', Deendayalji developed 'Integral Humanism' partly as a counter to both. He presents persuasive arguments to show the pitfalls of both systems. "Both capitalism and communism have failed to account for the Integral Man, his true and complete personality and his aspirations. One considers him a mere selfish being hankering after money, having only one law, the law of fierce competition, in essence the law of jungle; whereas the other has viewed him as a feeble lifeless cog in the whole scheme of things, regulated by rigid rules, and incapable of any good unless directed. The centralization of power, economic and political, is implied in both. Both, therefore, result in dehumanization of man." How true, considering the global developments of the last four decades.

But Deendayalji was anything but doctrinaire in his approach. Though a strong critic of aping the western way of life, he accepts that "western principles are a product of a revolution in human thought and it is not proper to ignore them." His critique of the western political and economic thought does not call for its total rejection; it only highlights its inadequacy. Referring to "nationalism, democracy, socialism, world peace and world unity", which were the hotly debated 'Big Ideas' in India and elsewhere in the '60s, he says, "All these are good ideals. They reflect the higher aspirations of mankind." But the manner in which the West has voiced them shows that "each stands opposed to the rest in practice."

It was Deendayalji's deeply held belief that 'Bharatiya Culture' (it is notable that the word 'Hindu' or 'Hindutva' does not appear in his treatise even once) was capable of harmonizing and realizing these great ideals for the common good of mankind. What was the basis of his belief? It is the "integral" approach of our culture - the "keynote of Bharatiya Sanskriti" -- which views every aspect of human life not in isolation, but holistically in the light of the universal and enduring principles of man, as applied to the specific conditions of each society. In contrast to the theory of class conflict (as in communism), Indian culture posits inter-dependence between various sections of society working together for the common weal of all. Similarly, rejecting notions of any inherent contradiction between the individual and society (as in capitalism), it underscores the essential concord between the two. "A flower is what it is because of its petals, and the worth of the petals lies in remaining with the flower and adding to its beauty."

The great merit of 'Integral Humanism' lies in its successful attempt to deal with a problem that has defied so many political philosophers of our age: how to conceptualise a practical approach to achieve peace and harmony within the individual man and society. Deendayalji persuasively describes how the Bharatiya way of life seeks the simultaneous progress of the body, mind, intellect and soul. He also explains how a balanced observance of the four-fold responsibilities -- Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha (the four Purusharthas or desirable human efforts) guarantees all-round development of both the individual and society.

This may sound like a restatement of the well-known principles of Indian philosophy. Some of 'Integral Humanism' is indeed an inspiring elucidation of that. However, what is new in this treatise is Deendayalji's intellectually audacious leap in applying these principles for the goal of India's national resurgence. Firstly, he resurrects, from the works of ancient Indian rishis, two important definitional traits of nationhood (called 'chiti', the nation's soul, and 'virat', the power that energises the nation) which deserves to be studied in depth by today's thinkers. If understood properly, these would strengthen our national unity and provide motive force to India's emergence as an integrally Developed Nation.

Secondly, with the courage befitting a social revolutionary, Deendayalji calls for abandonment of all those customs ("untouchability, caste discrimination, dowry, neglect of women") that are symptoms of "ill-heath and degeneration" of our society. ("We have taken due note of our ancient culture. But we are no archeologists. We have no intention to become the custodians of a vast archeological museum.") Thirdly, he lays down general objectives of India's economic reconstruction which, in spite of the vast changes that have occurred in the global economic terrain in the past four decades, are still valid.

Lastly, his emphatic espousal of Dharma Rajya (which, according to him, does not connote theocracy state but only a law-governed state and duty-oriented citizenry) echoes Gandhiji's concept of Ram Rajya. "Dharma (which is different from religion) sustains the nation. If Dharma is destroyed, the nation perishes". Does Dharma Rajya negate democracy? Not at all. Look how Deendayalji creatively expands the meaning of Lincoln's famous words: "In the definition of democracy as 'government of the people, by the people and for the people', of stands for independence, by stands for people's rule, and for indicates Dharma. Dharma Rajya encompasses all these concepts."

Today on the death anniversary of this great Indian, who was also a firm votary of value-based politics, we would do well to study, and rededicate ourselves to, the undying ideas and ideals of Integral Humanism.