Lokmanya Tilak and Gopal Ganessh Agarkar : Clash between Political, Social reforms

Lokmanya Tilak and Gopal Ganessh Agarkar : Clash between Political, Social reforms

The issue of introducing reforms in the society has been tackled by prominent world thinkers in different ways. While it is true that the social, religious political and cultural aspects cannot be bifurcated from one another in any given society, yet at times, social reformists have found themselves in this very controversy due to the popular prevalent nature of the society. Lokmanya Tilak, the ‘father of Indian resentment against the British’ whose death anniversary falls on August 1, was deeply involved in the controversy on the issue of giving priority either to social reforms or political reforms.

The so-called religious, social customs had proved to be a major obstacle to the progress of the society at that time while the country was enslaved by the ‘cultured’ British people. Therefore, the problem of giving preference either to social or political reforms had become prominent among the Indian

thinkers.

Orthodox : Lokmanya Balwant Gangadhar Tilak, though more famous as the extremist in the political field, proved to be an ‘orthodox’ in a totally different sense and though supporting fully the eradication of all the prevalent social evils, stood firmly to oppose the moves of the social reformers to bring legislations to prevent the social evils. The said attitude of Lokmanya Tilak has created quite a confusion and misunderstanding among the people in the post-independent era.

Lokmanya Tilak (23 July 1856 – 1 August 1920) has contributed a lot to the field of politics, religion, education, philosophy, journalism and social reforms. He took the lead in establishing the New English School in Pune, started ‘Kesari’ and ‘Maratha’ newspapers to criticize the British Government as well as to awaken the Indian masses. A strong defender of Hinduism and its culture, Tilak used the newspapers to criticise his opponents, the so-called reformers or ‘Bolke Sudharak’. His editorials in the

two newspapers were the classic examples of his wit and views on different fields in the society. His relentless battle against the social reformists in opposing the social reforms at the cost of political reforms were well expressed in these editorials.

Evils : The controversy among the Indian thinkers lasted for many years. The group, led by Gopal Ganesh Agarkar, Ranade and Bhandarkar, argued in favour of social reforms while almost going to the extreme end of welcoming the British raj as a boon to the Indian society, plagued with social evils. Tilak, on the other hand, a staunch political extremist that he was, firmly held that the British must be expelled from the country which will be followed by social reforms. The controversy between the two groups, even led both of them to accuse each other of being ‘anti-social’ and ‘traitors’ while time has proved the genuine concern of both for the well- being of the society.

Tilak, in contrast to the social reformists, was of the view that particular type of social situation does not necessarily follow specific political condition. To prove his claim, Tilak gave example of the societies where there were good social customs like the marriages, widow re-marriages, absence of caste-system, ‘samudra-gaman’ (Crossing of the sea which was banned in Hinduism and yet the society was enslaved by foreigners. It should not be misconstrued that the Lokmanya was against any social reforms proposed by the reformists like Agarkar and others. However, he maintained that the Indian society has to fight on two battlefields, one on the social field, the other on the political. While it was easier to arouse the masses to fight against the British to conquer the political power, he said, the latter battlefield against one’s own society was bitter, may destroy the unity of the Indians, besides requiring decades to conquer the fortress.

Tilak, while linking political stability with social progress , even went to the extent of saying that if the Peshwa rule had to continue for a longer period the social conditions in Maharashtra and nearby areas would have been improved to a greater extent.

Politics : Due to his preference to political reforms over social, Tilak who as the editor of two prominent newspapers in Maharashtra was imprisoned by the British Government for his extreme political views, however held that newspaper, though a powerful weapon for political reforms, should not be involved in social debates. For, according to him, it might lead to fanaticism among the different groups which was also harmful to social reforms.

Agarkar held the positive view. While accepting among both social and political reforms as essential, Tilak maintained that a majority of the leaders should be involved in politics while only a few should be in the social field, practicing and preaching reforms.

The main aim of any reform according to Tilak, was to arose the spirit of patriotism. Himduism has a consistent tradition, one culture store of knowledge in its literature which was often far superior to others, he said and held that Hinduism could be a major factor uniting all the countrymen against the British. In the efforts of the social reformists, he saw the seeds of creating division among the Indian masses and opposed it tooth and nail.

The moves of the reformists to introduce the Age of Consent Bill (The Bill to raise the marriage age for Hindu girls from 10 to 22 years) and other Bills were strongly opposed by Tilak on the grounds that Acts should not be enforced on the masses by the foreign Government and stressed the need for reforming the society gradually without offending it. Tilak even challenged the reformists to provide an example before the society in which many of the reformists, barring Agarkar and a few others, failed. Tilak, on the other hand, got his daughter married much later than the practice followed at that time.

Religion : The major criticism of Tilak against the social reformers was the letters’ views on Hindu religion. He refused to give them the status of Martin Luther, the Protestant reformist, since, for Tilak, the reformists were purely utilitarian, rationalist having least respect for religion. He says, “Our

present downfall is due not to Hindu religion but to the fact that we have absolutely forsaken religion’’ Tilak’s philosophy is firmly grounded in religion and in his ‘Gita-Rahasya’, written in Mandalay prison in Burma, he had preached Karmamarga- the path of action- to the Indian people to free

themselves from the bondage of the foreign alien rule.

The controversy on the issue of priority either to social reforms or political reforms created bitterness between Tilak and Agarkar who had earlier rubbed shoulders while working in the education field. The battle of the two great reformists was portrayed in a recent Marathi play, “Tilak Ani Agarkar’ written by Vishram Bedekar and staged in Panjim recently. The controversy did not end with the demise of the two leaders. In the later period, Mahatma Gandhi who filled in the vacuum created in the political field by the death of the Lokmanya, also found himself in the same dilemma and opted for social reforms when he said that if he was given an option to choose between political freedom and eradication of untouchability, he would rather opt for the latter.

Controversy : In the present age, it is difficult to assess the position held either by Tilak, the political extremists or Agarkar, the extremist social reformer. Some groups hold that social progress is possible without capturing political power while the other group sees political power as a key to solve all the social problems as well as to bring progress. The gaining of independence has placed a full-stop to the controversy of priority of social and political reforms.