Hinduism and Hindutva
(By Amulya Ganguli)
Feb 8, 1999
The Hindusatan Times

The Congress working committee’s recent reference to Hinduism as the “most
effective guarantor of secularism” has been interpreted by the BJP as “a repudiation
of the motivated attempts by the Congress party itself to characterise the BJP’s
ideology of cultural nationalism as communal and anti-secular”.

A BJP spokesman saw the working committee’s pronouncement as an echo of the
“BJP’s conviction that Hindutva is the bedrock of Indian nationalism and national
identity”. The synonymity of Hinduism and Hindutva has helped the BJP to claim
that there is no difference between the two. Most people will also agree that they
mean the same. Indeed, no one would have bothered to differentiate between
Hinduism and Hindutva before the rise of the ultra-right political forces in India.
However, after the BJP’s appropriation of the word, Hindutva has acquired a political
rather than a religious meaning. It no longer stands for Hinduism but for a quite
distinctive world-view which is better expressed in the other phrase which the BJP
uses in this context— cultural nationalism underlying the concept of one people,
one culture, one nation.

Since even the BJP would not deny that Hindutva stands for one people, one
culture, one nation, it is easy to see that it has nothing to do with religion but is
purely a political slogan. Nor is it an ordinary political slogan. The “one people...”
etc. phrase has a special history and a special meaning. It echoes the Nazi chant
of “ein volk, ein Reich, ein Fuehrer”, which sent shivers down the spine of the
minorities in Hitler’s Germany. There is another similar phrase which can be
mentioned in this context. It is “eie volk, eie taal, eie land” (our own people, our
own language, our own land) from South Africa of the apartheid period, which also
represented fascism in another form, and which brings to mind the “Hindi, Hindu,
Hindustan” mantra of the ultra-right in this country. The meaning of these phrases
is self-evident. They denote an oppressive philosophy favouring the obliteration of all
cultures excepting one — that of Hindutva imposed by the majority community.
Hindutva, therefore, really means Hindu Rashtra — that long-cherished goal of the
Sangh parivar. It has nothing to do, therefore, with Hinduism as a religion but only
with a state system in which Hindu rituals and customs will apply not only to
Hindus but to the followers of other religions as well. So the Muslim, Christian,
Sikh, Buddhist, Parsi and other children in schools will have to sing the Saraswati
vandana, which is an invocation to a Hindu goddess. Patriotism will be judged in
accordance with obedience to Hindu norms. It will be a unicultural society, where
non-Hindu cultures and communities will have secondary status.

This particular meaning of Hindutva is not a new one. It derives from Savarkar’s
thesis that “a Hindu... is he who looks upon the land that extends... from the Indus
to the seas, as the land of his forefathers — his pitribhu (fatherland)... and who
above all addresses this land... as his punyabhu (holy land)... these are the
essentials of Hindutva— a common rashtra, a common jati and a common
sanskriti... the first two essentials of Hindutva —rashtra and jati — are clearly
denoted and connoted by the word pitribhu, while the third essential of sanskriti is
pre-eminently implied by the world punyabhu.”

Savarkar himself explains, with reference to the Sikhs, the difference between
Hinduism and Hindutva. Referring to the “unfortunate misunderstanding that owes
its origin to the confusing similarity between the two terms, Hindutva and
Hinduism”, he says that the Sikhs, to whom also India is pitribhu and punyabhu,
“are Hindus in the sense of our definition of Hindutva and not in any religious sense
whatever. Religiously they are Sikhs, as Jains are Jains, Lingayats are Lingayats,
Vaishnavas are Vaishnavas; but all of us racially and nationally and culturally are a
polity and a people, one and indivisible most fitly and from times immemorial called
Hindus.” Unlike Hinduism, therefore, Hindutva is not a religion. It is not concerned
with the salvation of the soul but with the racial, national and cultural aspects of a
state system, distinguishing individuals not on the basis of their moral stature but
their roots and love for the fatherland. So those who may have other holy lands
—Mecca or Rome — are automatically excluded from being the true children of the
fatherland even if they are born there.

It is evident that this is a primitive, tribal attitude, harking back to the medieval
ages. Such concepts have no place in a modern society where citizens are not
given passports on the basis of their race or rituals. Besides, all citizens are equal
in a modern country, irrespective of whether their holy day is Sunday or Tuesday or
Friday. Clearly, therefore, Hindutva cannot be an effective guarantor of secularism,
for a secular state makes no distinction between individuals on the grounds of race
or religion or any other factor. Hinduism, on the other hand, has nothing to do with
a state system. Its concern is with an individual’s soul, his inner being, his
attainment of moksha by treading the razor’s edge. It has no connection with the
polity or with India as a pitribhu and punyabhu because a Hindu need not be an
Indian at all. Indeed, he should be indifferent to the pleasures and pain of the
material world if he imbibes the message of the Bhagwad Gita which, according to
Radhakrishnan, “represents not any sect of Hinduism but Hinduism as a whole.”

What makes Hinduism an “effective guarantor of secularism”, however, is not its
renunciatory aspect, which only raises it above the state system, but its liberal
ethos, encompassing in its fold beliefs ranging from animism to atheism. The
absence of a single prophet or a single holy book has made it the most eclectic of
religions. But what gives it special distinction and undoubtedly enabled it to survive
nearly unchanged for centuries is its “fundamental individualism”, as noted by A. L.
Basham, for it left a person free to worship in his own humble way, without the
intercession of priests or the need to assemble at a house of prayer. “Whoever
offers to Me with devotion a leaf, a flower, a fruit or water, that offering of love, of the
pure of heart I accept”, said Krishna to Arjun.

According to Basham, the “ancient Indian seer, unlike the Chinese sage or the
Hebrew prophet, thought not in terms of the salvation of the whole people... but of
the salvation of individual men and women. This fundamental individualism is
perhaps the reason why India... has taken so enthusiastically to parliamentary
democracy, where ultimate political power is in the hands of an enormous number
of individuals, each casting his vote alone and in secret.” It is this atmosphere of
freedom and non-conformism which makes Hinduism so unique and so amenable
to a multicultural society. Hindutva, on the other hand, is a prescription for a
theocracy.

Among the enlightened Hindu leaders of India, there is a growing realization that the Hindutva Brigade is betraying true Hinduism. Manishankar Iyer is quite categorical in his statement that, "the champions of Hindutva have generally traduced the values they pretend to uphold and disgraced the religion they claim to represent" (Indian Express, "Different as Chalk and Cheese: Hinduism and Hindutva", Jan. 26, Delhi, 1999). In the context of the murder of Graham Stains in Orissa by the Bajrang Dal, Miss Uma Bharati said that " No Hindu can do it. Those who are doing it should be thrown out of religion", (The Asian Age, reported by Josy Joseph, New Delhi, Jan. 25). Well Umaji, if we believe the statements of the then spokesperson and BJP Minister M. Khurana and of the DGP of Orissa, the Bajrang dal has done it and still it is used as a hooliganistic arm by the Sangh Parivar (Hereafter, SP). Kuldip Nayar graphically depicts the situation saying that " The RSS parivar has released the genie of Hindu fundamentalism from the bottle. It is no use in telling it to behave or to get back into the bottle" (Indian Express," The Silent Majority's Dilemma: The Right to Speak", 2-2-l999, p.6). Hitlerism spread like wild fire among the Germans as redeemers of German identity and pride until it destroyed itself and the German nation. Let us bear in mind that some of the leaders of the SP are great admirers of Hitler.

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE PRESENT SITUATION

R. K. Laxman (Times of India, 20 - 1- '99) in his inimitable style cartooned the ransacking of the BCCI office by one of the outfits of the SP, with the following caption: "It is not enough to protect only the minorities. The time has come to demand protection to the majority also." This cartoon graphically describes the state of Mother India under the BJP dispensation for just 10 months. It has succeeded not only in antagonizing the minorities but also in distorting true Hindutva with "Pseudo Hindutva", to use M. Khurana's expression, and in disfiguring Mother India.

The SP sees danger not only in cricket matches with a neighbouring country, albeit unfriendly, but also in Economics which gives priority to the education of the illiterate millions of our country and which insists on having a bias for the poor in economic planning. Dr. Amartya Sen received the highest International Award and the most prestigious National Award for his contribution to Artha-sastra (economics) which is perhaps the only science where the legendary enemies, Lakshmiji, the goddess of wealth, and Sarasvatiji, the goddess of wisdom, enter into a friendly dialogue. But the SP considers this professed atheist a crypto-missionary. Reacting against this view of the VHP President in the Jaipur meeting, M.N. Buch wrote in the Hindustan Times:

"His argument was that Dr. Sen pronounced in favour of universal literacy which is an agent of conversion of Hindus to Christianity. By implication this means that if a person is illiterate and ignorant he belongs to that primitive faith called Hinduism, but if he becomes literate and capable of absorbing knowledge, he would naturally gravitate towards Christianity. What stronger condemnation of Hindu faith can be found than this alleged statement of Mr. Singhal? (But) Hinduism is one religion which places great emphasis on knowledge... and not only permits but encourages the search for truth by questioning, by discourse, and by seeking one's own path to salvation" ( "Is VHP Really Hindu?", Jan. 19, 1999).

In North Gujarat, near Shyamlaji, the SP attacks a group of intellectuals, mostly Hindu, gathered together to advocate communal harmony. The SP's narrow outlook and intolerance are best exemplified in its vandalizing of Hussein's artistic masterpieces, and in attacking theaters, cricket grounds and Pepsi Vans. The climax of this lawlessness and anti-national activities of the SP was in burning alive of the Australian missionary who cared for the lepers in an obscure corner of Orissa. The President of India, called this inhuman deed " a monumental aberration of time-tested tolerance and harmony" and lamented in anguish saying:" The killings belong to the world's inventory of black deeds".

In the Indian Express ( 5-1 - '99, p.1) Unni, depicted the present Indian scenario with a graphic cartoon: a jeep with the nameplates VHP and HJM, is driven away by goondas from a church on fire, while observed indifferently by a police officer. The following caption of the cartoon is what the officer tells to a worried-looking Christian priest standing close by: " Earlier, offenders changed number plates to dodge us. Now they change the outfit's name ". What the cartoonist meant was that the so called Hindutva outfits like VHP, HJM and Bajrang Dal are real criminals and their Hindutva is "Pseudo-Hindutva." India Today quotes the following statement of a senior RSS official about the Bajrang Dal: "All the riff raff, the rejects of society, and the discards of the Sangh Parivar. These are the people who find refuge in the Bajrang Dal" ("Loonies at Large", Feb. 8, 1999, p.27). With regard to violent and lawless outfits like the Bajrang Dal and Hindu Jagran Munch of the SP, the BJP Government has the dubious policy of running with the hare and chasing with the hounds.

THE ANGUISH OF ENLIGHTENED HINDU WRITERS

Swamy Agnivesh expresses his agony in the context of imposing Sarasvativandana, in one of the most illiterate states of India: " I am worried that the political misappropriation of the mythology, ritual and symbolism of Hinduism will do enormous harm to this great and tolerant faith: that it will alter the profound treasures of this way of life beyond repair and recognition" ("Invoking Sarasvati among the Unlettered", Times of India, 27 - 11 - 1998, p. 10 ).

Dr. Karen Singh, one of the founding Fathers of the VHP, has begun lamenting at the lawlessness and terrorism perpetrated by the SP. He wrote: "It is tragic that the great universal ideals and values of Hinduism should be reduced to the digging up of cricket pitches and the vandalization of sports offices. Such actions in the name of Hinduism do grave disservice and injustice to one of the world's great religions." (Times of India, 23-1- '99, p.10).

Mr. Kuldip Nayar wrote in the Indian Express:

"In fact during the 10-month rule of the BJP-led coalition, the country's plural fabric has been coming apart. Communal forces have been let loose....The philosophy of accommodation and tolerance that has inspired the nation is in tatters.... The RSS parivar has been casting Hinduism into such a tight mould that it is getting defaced and defamed. Hinduism is pluralistic, compassionate, and accommodative, it can neither be monolithic nor restricted to one discipline, it is a way of life. This is its strong point which the RSS is determined to defeat" (Tuesday, 2-2-'99, "The Right to Speak", p.6).

Another well-known columnist Prem Shankar Jha wrote in Outlook: "The murder of Graham Staines and his children is unforgivable.... The damage our country has suffered is substantial, and some of it may prove irreparable, for whatever traits the Hindus and Hinduism may have been known for, extreme bigotory was not among them" ( For God's Sake Beware", Feb. 8, 1999, p.32).

H.K. Dua wrote in the Hindustan Times:

"The fundamentalist view of Hinduism ...has always and rightly been rejected by India in the past. Hinduism's strength lies in its inherent plural nature, resilience in its beliefs, acceptance of freedom to worship different gods and respect and tolerance of other gods" ("Not by Hatred", 15-1-1999, p.13).

A GLIMPSE OF TRUE HINDUTVA

To begin with, it must be noted that punya-pra-kopa (prophetic anger against adharma) is part of Hindu ethos as the following Yajurvedic prayer, shows: manyurasi manyum mayi dhehi (= You who are righteous anger personified, give me the same) . One of the basic teachings of the Gita is found in the repeated command of the Lord mam anusmara yudhyacha (Cf.2:18,37;8:7) which means to fight against adhrama with the Lord's help. Though the foreign traders and invaders abused the hospitality, broad mindedness and universal openness of Hinduism, it is not a religion which advocates tolerance of any nonsense.

The ancient Sanskrit sayings Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam (= the world is our family) Atraiva vishvam bhavati ekanidam ( = the world as one nest for all mankind) and the Tamil saying Yatum ourai, yavarum keli (= in one place welfare for all) express the underlying world-family ideal of the Hindu ethos. This Hindu desire for universal welfare is found in the daily prayer loka samastha sukhino bhavantu ( = May all be happy) and in the three-fold Om shanti blessings. The Gita injunctions of working for total welfare (lokasangraha , cf. 3: 20, 25) and for the happiness of all beings (sarva-bhuta-hite-ratah, cf. 5:25 and 12:4) express this universal outlook and magnanimity of the Hindu ethos. The Gita asks the devotees to be compassionate and friendly to all beings (adveshta sarvabhutanam mitraha karun eva ca, 12: 13). The following two well-known verses which are attributed to Vyasji and which summarize much of Hindu attitudes to fellow humans can give us a glimpse of true Hindutva:

Slokardhen pravakshyami yaduktam shastra kotibhih, Atmanah pratikoolani na paesham samacharet (=I shall express through half of a verse what has been expressed through crores of sacred books: Do not do to others what you do not want others do to you).

Ashtadasa puraneshu Vyasasya vachanam dvayam Paropakarah punyaya papaya parapidanam (=The gist of all that is contained in the 18 puranas is contained in the following two sayings of Vyasji: there is virtue in the service of others and there is sin in doing harm to fellow humans).

As an outflow of this universal outlook and magnanimity of Hindu ethos there developed in India the concept of sarvadharmasamabhav propagated by the Father of the nation. The true interpretation is that as we love our religions so too I must respect and love the religions of others, and the wrong interpretation is that all the religions are the same. The following line from Gandhiji is enough to convey this idea: " But I can see clearly the time is coming when people belonging to different faiths will have the same regard for other faiths that they have for their own " (Selected Works, vol. 6,p.268). This is an echo of what can be found in Ashoka's 12th stone edict: " Whoever honours his own religion and disparages another man's,...does his own religion the greatest harm " (Theodore de Bary, Sources of Ind. Trad., p. 151).

The root of this Hindu attitude is found in the Vedic statement that " To the Supreme One sages give many titles " (Ekam sat, viprah bahudha vadanti, Rig. 1:164: 46). The Lord of the Gita teaches this ideal when He says:

Yepi anya devata bhkta yajante shradhayanvitah, tepi mameva, Kaunteya, yajanti avidhipurvakam (9:23, cf.7:21) (=even those who lovingly devote themselves to other gods and sacrifice to them in deep faith, they really worship me though the rite may be different from the usual ).

The following well-known verse in Bhagavat is another expression of the above Rigvedic dictum: Akashat patitam toyam yatha gachati sagaram , Sarva deva namaskarah Keshavam pratigacchati (= Just as the waters falling from the heavens (in thread-like draughts and scattered drops) flow into the same ocean so too the worship of the Divine in numerous forms reaches Me Keshava).

TO CONCLUDE

True, the burning of the Bibles, setting fire to the churches, raping and murdering persons sacred to a particular religion, exhuming the ritually buried corpses in sacred cemeteries, etc. are clear violations of human rights. But these are acts which go directly against the heart of TRUE HINDUTVA. Unless the true Hindus, who are by far the majority, take action against the SP with Punya-prakopa, sooner than later they will be forced to make the confession similar to the following one by Pastor Niemoller:

"First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out because I was not a communist. Then they came for the trade unionist and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I did not speak out because I was not a Catholic. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me."

(Israel Today, March/April, '97, p.8).