‘The question of two stanzas or six was answered in 1937’: Sanjay Hegde on Vande Mataram debate

Mangaluru: Senior Supreme Court advocate and constitutional expert Sanjay Hegde said the debate over whether two or all six stanzas of Vande Mataram should be sung had already been settled by political leaders in 1937 and should not be reopened as a question for the courts. He said the issue now needs to be understood by citizens in the context of India’s composite and inclusive idea of nationalism.

Delivering the BV Kakkilaya Inspired Oration 2026 at Raveendra Kalabhavana, University College, Hampanakatte, Mangaluru, on Friday, Hegde spoke on Vande Mataram-Vaishnava Janato: Two Songs, Two Nationalisms. The programme was organised by Hosatu Monthly, MS Krishnan Trust and Samadarshi Vedike, in association with the Department of Political Science, Mangalore University.

Beginning with BV Kakkilaya's role in the freedom struggle, Hegde said the British Empire had been afraid of Kakkilaya when he was a college student. He said that even today, empires and powerful establishments remain afraid of students and people who read.

Referring to the political atmosphere on the coast of Karnataka, he said, “Politics of this coast has become a laboratory and we are the experiments.” He added that communalism does not operate alone and described it as a dance that requires partners.

A major part of Hegde's lecture focused on the history of Vande Mataram and the debate over its use as a national song.

He said the first two stanzas of Vande Mataram were written in 1875 and that the meaning and context changed seven years later, in 1882, when Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay incorporated the song into his novel and transformed the image of the motherland into that of a goddess.

According to Hegde, Vande Mataram subsequently moved beyond being a literary composition and became a political expression, being used in slogans, rallies and as a form of political mobilisation.

He stressed that the first two stanzas of the song were “in no sense objectionable”, but said the controversy arose when Muslims were asked to sing portions that portrayed the motherland as a goddess.

“Muslims were made to sing Vande to a goddess that was never theirs,” he said, explaining the basis of the objection raised by sections of the Muslim community.

Hegde said that while some Hindus wanted the entire song to be sung, the Congress eventually settled the issue by recognising the objections raised by Muslims. He argued that the decision had effectively been made constitutionally even before the Constitution itself came into force.

He also drew a comparison with the National Anthem and other traditions to explain why selecting a particular portion of a larger work should not be seen as unusual.

“The National Anthem is also part of Tagore's full poem, nobody objects to that,” he said.

Similarly, he pointed to the tradition of performing the Ram Leela in episodes rather than presenting the entire story at one time. “Every tradition sings the part it needs,” he said.

Hegde also referred to the legal position surrounding national symbols. He said that the National Song did not have the same constitutional or statutory protection as the National Flag, National Anthem and Constitution, pointing to Article 51A and the legal provisions concerning insults to national symbols, Until August 2026 when the law was enacted by the Union Government, “breaking the seal of Republic that was put in 1937”.

He said India's traditions and constitutional philosophy had room for tolerance.

“Our tradition teaches tolerance, our philosophy preaches tolerance, our Constitution practices tolerance. Let's not dilute it,” he said, adding that these words from the Supreme Court should be displayed in all government offices.

‘When does disagreement become disturbance?’

Hegde also raised the question of where disagreement ends and disturbance begins.

“When does disagreement become disturbance? Law framed,” he said, while discussing the manner in which disputes over national symbols and patriotic expression have been addressed through political and legal processes.

Referring to a decision dating back to 1937, he said a “republic sealed” at that time had been reopened now, and described the subsequent developments as giving punishment to a wound first through a circular and later through a statute.

He argued that the question of whether two or six stanzas should be sung had already been addressed by political leaders in 1937.

“The question of two stanzas or six was answered by statesmen in 1937 and needs to be answered by citizens now. The question is never for the courts,” he said.

Hegde also referred to Subhas Chandra Bose and the song Shubh Sukh Chain, saying Bose had sung it with around 3,000 of his soldiers. He described it as Tagore's tune retold in Hindustani.

He said a song intended to unite people must be capable of being sung together by people from different communities.

“A song that everybody cannot sing together cannot become a national anthem,” he said.

Vaishnava Janato as a different idea of patriotism

Hegde then turned to the 15th-century poet-saint Narsinh Mehta and his famous devotional song Vaishnava Janato.

He said the song's central idea was that a true human being is one who understands another person's suffering as his own.

“Vaishnava Janato contains no map, no river, no king, it doesn't ask for someone's head,” Hegde said.

Instead, he said, the song speaks about feeling another person's pain, helping people in distress, speaking ill of nobody and not touching wealth that does not belong to oneself.

He described this as “a definition of a true human being.”

According to Hegde, Mahatma Gandhi later adopted the song and embedded its message in his own life. It became an anthem of the freedom movement, which included Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and other Muslim leaders, without creating the same objection, he said.

“The song doesn't demand anything,” Hegde said.

He argued that the values expressed in Vaishnava Janato were closely aligned with the principles later reflected in the Preamble to the Constitution.

“Narsinh drafted everything that is in the Preamble, earlier than it came into our Constitution,” he said.

‘One divinises the soil, one civilises the soil’

Drawing a distinction between the two songs, Hegde said Vande Mataram and Vaishnava Janato represent two different approaches to patriotism.

“One divinises the soil, one civilises the soil. That's two patriotism for two songs,” he said.

He added that India already has a national anthem protected by law and a national song honoured through recitation. He proposed that Vaishnava Janato should be made the national prayer and suggested that children in schools should read and learn it.

He described it as a devotional song that has been sung by people of different faiths in the country for centuries.

Hegde also brought the discussion back to BV Kakkilaya, saying Kakkilaya was an atheist but was nevertheless associated with Vaishnava Janato.

“The definition was never about deity, it was always about the neighbour,” he said.

‘Nations become great by making citizens feel they belong’

Hegde strongly argued against using patriotic songs as a test of loyalty.

“Confident nations do not audit their citizens' throats,” he said.

He added: “Nations do not become great by making citizens sing, they become great by making them feel they belonged here.”

He said Indian nationalism had historically been “composite, never exclusionary.”

Referring again to the debate over the longer version of Vande Mataram, he said, “The nationalism of six stanzas is not good, it's just louder.”

Hegde said Gandhi knew and honoured Vande Mataram throughout his life. However, during morning prayers and the long march, Gandhi chose verses by poets such as Narsinh Mehta that focused on understanding another person's suffering.

He concluded with an appeal to citizens to rethink how patriotism is expressed.

“Do not ask your neighbour to bow down to your mother, ask yourself if you have failed to hear the neighbour's pain,” he said.

Hegde ended by stressing that the value of patriotic expression should be measured not merely by how loudly it is sung, but by whether its message brings people together.

“Two stanzas of that music, honestly sung, are worth more than six stanzas enforced,” he said.

The oration was held in memory of BV Kakkilaya, who was a freedom fighter, leader of the Karnataka unification movement, Communist Party of India leader, member of the first Rajya Sabha and Karnataka Legislative Assembly, writer and thinker. The organisers described his lifelong work towards building a secular, casteless and progressive society based on equality.