Reform, Resistance, and Ideological Challenges
Vinayak Damodar (Veer) Savarkar remains a fascinating and often polarizing figure in Indian history. As we discussed earlier (Part 1), his involvement in the debate surrounding the sea travel ban (Attock Bandi) reveals both his reformist zeal and the challenges he faced in balancing tradition with modernity. While his stance on this issue underscores his forward-thinking vision, it also highlights the limitations of his approach within the socio-religious landscape of early 20th-century India.
The Socio-Religious Context
The sea travel ban (Kala Pani taboo) primarily targeted higher-caste Hindus, who were bound by orthodox religious customs concerning food preparation, social interaction, and fears of contamination through foreign influence. Traveling overseas was viewed by many as a violation of caste purity, making it a deeply controversial issue.
In contrast, lower-caste Hindus, particularly those employed in the British colonial machinery, were less affected by this taboo. For them, crossing the seas was not a matter of religious dogma but a means of livelihood and economic survival. This divide meant that the sea travel ban did not equally resonate across all sections of Hindu society, weakening the possibility of a united front against it.
Regional Disparities in the Debate
The debate over the sea travel ban was far from uniform across India. In the Bombay Presidency—a region closely linked to Savarkar’s political activities—the issue became part of broader reformist movements challenging religious orthodoxy and caste rigidity.
However, this debate never grew into a nationwide movement. Local and regional concerns often overshadowed broader ideological goals. Unlike other reformist campaigns, the sea travel issue failed to capture the collective imagination of the entire country.
The Decline of the Movement
By the 1920s, the sea travel ban had largely faded as a pressing social issue. With increasing acceptance of foreign travel—spurred by education, trade, and the demands of a changing world—the opposition to crossing the seas began to diminish.
For Savarkar, this posed a challenge. His call for reform on this front lost momentum as the issue itself became irrelevant in much of India’s public discourse. The waning of the sea travel debate weakened his platform and diverted attention away from his efforts to modernize Hindu society.
Savarkar’s Isolation
Savarkar’s uncompromising criticism of Hindu orthodoxy put him at odds with both conservative and reformist groups. His bold attacks on “religious lawmakers” and their interpretations of Hindu scriptures alienated traditionalists, while his Western-inspired modernist reforms were often met with skepticism by reformist leaders.
As a result, Savarkar became increasingly isolated. His refusal to strike a middle ground or build alliances left him without the broad social support needed to mobilize a powerful reformist movement.
Historical Continuity and Utopianism
A key feature of Savarkar’s arguments was his tendency to romanticize India’s ancient maritime traditions. He believed that reviving the spirit of India’s historical seafaring prowess was essential to reclaiming national strength and sovereignty. However, this narrative often relied on selective history and limited, non-Indian sources.
Savarkar’s approach reveals both his nationalist vision and a utopian streak—his tendency to adopt historical narratives uncritically to justify political goals. While this was effective as rhetoric, it lacked the historical rigor necessary to build a credible, evidence-based case.
Final Thoughts: Contributions and Limitations
Savarkar’s role in challenging the sea travel ban reflects his complex relationship with Hindu orthodoxy and modern reformist ideals. Though he raised important questions about India’s engagement with the wider world, his ideological rigidity and inability to critically engage with both history and tradition limited the impact of his efforts.
Ultimately, Savarkar’s position within the nationalist and reformist landscape of his time was one of both visionary leadership and missed opportunities. His battle against the sea travel taboo offers a window into the broader struggle between tradition and modernity—a struggle that defined much of India’s pre-independence intellectual discourse.
💭 What do you think?
Do you think Savarkar’s criticism of religious orthodoxy was ahead of its time, or was it too radical for early 20th-century India? How do you interpret the conflict between tradition and modernity in Savarkar’s stance on the sea travel ban? Do you agree with Savarkar that the revival of ancient maritime traditions was essential for India’s national strength? Do you think the sea travel taboo would have disappeared naturally due to social change, even without reformers like Savarkar? How relevant is the debate between caste-based restrictions and modern mobility even today? Does modernity always need to break tradition? Are uncompromising reformers effective—or do they risk isolation? What matters more in social reform—strategy or sincerity; in other words: Gandhi or Savarkar?
👉 Share your thoughts in the comments below!
Sources:
GODBOLE, Vasudev Shankar. 2004. Rationalism of Veer Savarkar. Itihas Patrika Prashan: Thane/Mumbai.
KEER, Dhananjay. 1988. Veer Savarkar. Third Edition. (Second Edition: 1966). Popular Prakashan: Bombay (Mumbai).
KELKAR, B. K. 1989. „Harbinger of Hindu Social Revolution“, in SWATANTRYAVEER SAVARKAR RASHTRIYA SMARAK. 1989. Smarak Inauguration. 28 May 1989. Festschrift. Swatantryaveer Savarkar Rashtriya Smarak: Bombay (Mumbai), 49-51.
PHADTARE, T. C. 1975. Social and Political Thought of Shri V.D. Savarkar. A Thesis submitted to the Marathwada University for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Unpublished: Aurangabad.
SAMPATH, Vikram. 2019. Savarkar (Part 1). Echoes from a forgotten past. 1883-1924.Penguin Random House India: Gurgaon.
WOLF, Siegfried O. 2010. Savarkar’s Strategic Agnosticism. A compilation of his political and economic worldview, in Heidelberg Papers in South Asian Comparative Politics (HPSACP), No. 51, Heidelberg University, Germany.
WOLF, Siegfried O. 2009. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar und sein Hindutva-Konzept. Die Konstruktion einer kollektiven Identität in Indien [“Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and his concept of Hindutva: The construction of a collective identity in India.”]. Online Dissertation: Heidelberg University: Heidelberg.
Leave a Reply