Maharana Pratap: A Symbol of Swadharma and Swaraj

 

Maharana Pratap: A Symbol of *Swadharma* and *Swaraj*

 To this day, the outcome of the Battle of Haldighati—fought between Maharana Pratap and Akbar—remains a subject of ongoing debate. It defies comprehension why scholarly historians have yet to reach a consensus regarding who was defeated and who emerged victorious in this conflict—especially given that the actual events of the battle, the identity of the aggressor, the relative strengths of the opposing armies, and who ultimately retreated are all matters of historical record. Furthermore, is not a tactical withdrawal often an integral part of battlefield strategy? There can be no two opinions on the fact that the ethical standards governing warfare differ significantly from those applicable to ordinary circumstances.

 The true victor and vanquished in any war can be assessed by the manner in which that conflict subsequently steered the course of the future. In the annals of Indian history, Maharana Pratap stands as an exemplary warrior who dedicated his very life to the ideals of *Swadharma* (one's righteous duty) and *Swaraj* (self-rule). Given the prevailing circumstances of that era, his legacy has emerged as a profound source of inspiration for the spirit of Indian nationalism and the ongoing struggle against foreign domination.

 Making the principles of *Svadharma* (one's own righteous duty) and *Swaraj* (self-rule) the very foundation of their lives, Shivaji and Guru Gobind Singh Ji sounded the clarion call of rebellion against the Mughal Empire. Veer Savarkar notes in his writings that India's First War of Independence—the uprising of 1857—was inspired by these very principles.

Veer Savarkar termed the revolt of 1857 as the "First War of Indian Independence." In 1909, he authored a book titled *The Indian War of Independence*. Originally written in Marathi, the book was subsequently banned by the British government. Veer Savarkar argues that in the writing of history, one must focus on the underlying principles driving events rather than merely elevating subjective narratives to the status of history. He cites the British characterization of the Indian outrage against them in 1857 as a mere "Mutiny" or "Ghadar" as a prime example—a narrative that, in his view, amounts to nothing more than a British-centric discourse. Conversely, from the perspective of historical scholarship, designating the 1857 uprising as the "First War of Indian Independence" is both factually accurate and theoretically sound, for it was, in essence, a full-scale war. In support of this assertion, Veer Savarkar writes that those who attribute the Ram-Ravana war solely to the abduction of Sita, or the 1857 uprising solely to the use of cartridges greased with cow and pig fat, fail to distinguish between mere narrative discourse and genuine historical analysis. Veer Savarkar posits that the principles of *Svadharma* and *Swaraj* were the true underlying causes behind both the Ram-Ravana war and the uprising of 1857. Similarly, the book *Raja Man Singh of Amer*—authored by Rajiv Nayan Prasad, the son of Dr. Rajendra Prasad—presents a deeply researched analysis of Raja Man Singh's role in medieval India, demonstrating how he safeguarded India from the tempest of religious conversion through astute political alliances.

 Whether it was the Moderate faction or the Extremist faction, the entire struggle for India's independence—waged against foreign rule—was fundamentally driven by the pursuit of *Svadharma* and *Swaraj*. The ultimate objective shared by all was the liberation of India; while some sought independence through gradual means, others demanded it immediately.

For the sake of *Swadharma* (one's righteous duty) and *Swaraj* (self-rule), Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, and Sukhdev willingly accepted the death sentence. Mahatma Gandhi articulated his views on this subject in his book titled *Hind Swaraj*. Sri Aurobindo coined the slogans of *Swaraj* and *Swadeshi* to protest against the Partition of Bengal. Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, while residing outside India, ceaselessly struggled to liberate the nation in pursuit of *Swadharma* and *Swaraj*. This spirit is also vividly depicted in India's handwritten Constitution.

In warfare, the attainment of the objective is paramount. The ability to make decisions in accordance with prevailing circumstances and the demands of the time rests upon the wisdom and courage of the leader. Mahatma Gandhi launched his first movement with the conviction that India would attain independence. However, that movement did not succeed, and he failed to achieve his immediate objective. Yet, this failure does not in any way diminish the greatness of Mahatma Gandhi. Similarly, he was compelled to retract his decision following the Chauri-Chaura incident. Likewise, the greatness, spirit of renunciation, and sacrifice of the revolutionaries who endured torture in *Kala Pani* (the Cellular Jail) cannot be undermined by the fact that they filed mercy petitions. In the context of patriotism and love for the nation, both laying down one's life and remaining alive to achieve one's objective are equally significant; this truth can be truly grasped only by those for whom the nation stands supreme.

To comprehend decisions and events such as the *Jauhar* of Chittor, the Battle of Haldighati, the execution of Bhagat Singh, the incarceration of Veer Savarkar in *Kala Pani*, Sri Aurobindo's departure to Pondicherry, the suspension of the movement following the Chauri-Chaura incident, the Poona Pact between Dr. Ambedkar and Gandhiji, the strategy of advancing the freedom struggle from within the British administrative machinery, the enlistment of Indians in the armed forces during the Second World War, and the opposition to the Partition of India—a foundational understanding of *Swadharma* and *Swaraj* is indispensable.

Discussions regarding changes to the academic curriculum surface from time to time. During these discussions, comments and critiques regarding national heroes are often advanced based on specific ideological leanings—commentary that is frequently driven by political motives. Such a mindset does not augur well for the task of nation-building or for the future of the country. Therefore, it is essential that—just as the Constitution incorporates the 'Basic Structure' doctrine—all political parties reach a consensus on the 'Basic Structure of Indian History' along similar lines, ensuring that the subject matter remains unaltered regardless of changes in government.