[nukkad] Hindutva in discussion

[Gireesh Dixit - PCS <>]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What wisdom can you find that is greater than kindness? 
-Jean Jacques Rousseau, philosopher and author (1712-1778)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hindutva in discussion
Author: M. G. Vaidya 
Publication: Mumbai Tarun Bharat (Translation of Marathi article) 
Date: January 5, 2003 
Now-a-days, plenty of discussion is going on on Hindutva. Every Hindutvawadi
will welcome it because according to Hindu Logic 'Out of discussion is born
light'. They believe it. But the debate must be genuine and not only debate
for debate's sake. Keshavmitra has defined debate as "Debate is one which is
done in the search of knowing the principles" and twisted (with vested
interest) debate as "Debate done without explaining one's own side and only
to point out the faults of the other". Now the thought of Hindutva has come
to the centrestage of our national life. No discussion on any subject is
complete without discussing Hindutva. We welcome this situation. Because,
this is the result of 77 years of incessant work (Tapas) of Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh. 
There is no hardline or softline Hindutva. Hindutva is homogenous. It is of
a special character, that of champion of peace, tolerant, generous and
assimilating. Just as water is always cold, but if heated, it burns our hand
too. That is this condition of giving pains has come because of external
reasons imposed on it. 
First part of word Hindutva is Hindu. It is a name of a community of people.
Western logic says that proper nouns have no connotation. My name is
'Vaidya' but it does not mean that I should have the knowledge of pulse
reading. Or a man with the name "Digambar" (one whose clothes are only
directions i.e. is naked) may have ample clothes on him. But the word Hindu
has a qualitative meaning which it has got through a process of history of a
number of centuries. Just as 'Karna' is applied to a generous person, or
'Kuber" to a wealthy one or 'Jamdagni' to a person who gets angry quickly.
That meaning is as described above. This nature of Hindus has got it those
wonderful virtues which is Hindutva. These virtues are not committed to any
rituals and hence Hindus did not become a sect. It has become a culture.
That is their religion (meaning - characteristics) i.e. the principle of
universal harmony. A harmony between an individual and society, harmony
between Humans and the nature without Humans. Dr Radhakrishnan has,
therefore, said that Hinduism is not a religion; it is a commonwealth of
many religions. It embraces a large number of rituals like : those who
believe idolatry and those who do not - those who consider God is without
features or any shape - and those see God in the stones. Shaiva, Vaishnav,
Shakta, Aryasamaji, Lingayat, Mahanubhav so many and all are Hindus. 
Hindu is a concept which has been growing more and more comprehensive and by
nature also comprehensive. Those who believe the Vedas as ultimate truth and
who do not - both are Hidus. Hence the Supreme Court has stated in its
verdict that 'Hindu' is not a religion that is it has no universal ritual.
It has no holy book, has no prophet. But all this is a negative description.
Then what is Hindu ? SC says that it is a way of life. We call this way of
life as culture - Sanskriti. Culture means an order of values. It is code of
deciding a thing is good and bad, praiseworthy and censurable. Those who
established these at the cost of even their lives, the continuous link of
such perfections is culture. SC told it now, RSS had told in 1925 only.
Hence, as there are Vedic Hindus, there are Sikh, Jain, Bauddhas also. Even
constitution and the law has accepted it and in the Article No.25, it is
explained that whatever is stated in the above article is applicable to
Sikh, ?Jain and bauddha people also. Why to them only and why not to Muslims
or Christians? 
We have a act viz., "Hindu Code Bill" which was proposed in the Parliament
by Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar. At that time, one Sikh MP objected to it saying
"You are destroying the identity of Sikh". Dr Balasaheb replied, "To make
Hindu Code Bill applicable to Sikhs, Jains and Bauddhas is a historical
development process. There is too much delay now to oppose it. The
difference of opinion of Buddha had with Vedic Brahmins was about the
religious creed, but Buddha had kept the frame of law the same. He did not
make a separate law for his followers. The same is the case with Mahavir and
the ten Gurus of Sikh. The verdict of Privy Council of 1830 (1930?) also
states that Hindu Law is applicable to Sikhs also." (TOI, 7.02.51). 
In our opinion is that this Civil Code should be applicable to Muslim and
Christians also. Not to apply this law to some communities when it is
applicable to all others, is really the communalism. But our distortion in
the political field has gone to such an extent that all those say that make
a common civil code applicable to all communities, are called communal and
those who oppose the common code just to maintain the communal divide, are
felicitated as Secular. 
The saying of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee that Hindutva and
secularism are not separate, is true indeed. His statement may be in English
and that is why he had used the word secularism. The translation of the word
'secularism' as 'religionlessness' is downright wrong. In the official Hindi
translation of our constitution, the word 'panthnirpeksha' (sectless) has
been used. It is consistent with our concept of secularism which is separate
from that of Westerners. Hence what PM says that there is no difference
between sectlessness and Hindutva is correct in view of the political field.

We did not learn it from English people. If it was so, Pakistan and
Bangladesh were governed by British then why their constitution did not
become sectless? Why it was sectless in India only. If they are honest
enough, they will have to admit that sectless state came into being here
because Hindus are in majority here. Hence, there is nothing wrong in the
PM's statement. The thought of Hindutva cannot be narrow and intolerant. 
The test of Sectlessness 
But are not there limits to tolerance? By tolerance, what is to be
tolerated? To tolerate the intolerance of others? Aggression, atrocities and
insults to be tolerated? The most brilliant example of tolerance in recent
times is that of Mahatma Gandhi. But he also did not tolerate the British
rule. He gave non-violent fight but it was in vain. He then gave the
ultimate directive "Do and die" in 1942. The violence which took place
during 1942 movement, it was not condemned at least by the Congress. How can
it be tolerated if then tolerances is to be shown by Hindus and the others
should shatter to little bits? The strict vow of Sectlessness is to be
observed only by Hindus and the others should take advantage of the
sectlessness for one's own sect's sake - how can this be tolerated. Why law
governing marriages and divorces is not common to all? The same declaration
which was signed by other princes, was only signed by the Maharaja of
Kashmir. Why then article 370 is applicable to Kashmir only? Why separate
constitution for it? Why Indian citizens cannot be citizens of Kashmir? Why
5 % Hindus could not live with security in 95% Muslim area of Kashmir? So
many questions like these are troubling the nationalist common man. Those
who boast of secularism should answer these. 
Now Hindus will not accept the artificial secularism. Hence today's
discussion has become like cultural nationalism asking common laws for all
Vs so-called secularism supporting separate laws/rules for minorities for
their political selfish interests. It is the firm resolve of Hindu's minds
that it is not in the interest to allow the intolerant and aggressive
communalism. That resolve has been expressed in the voting machines of
Gujarat. One way, secularism is being tested on the touchstone. Secularists
should try to get it passed in this test. But unfortunately, it does not
look that such efforts are being made. On the contrary, that the nature of
this false dedication to secularism is being exposed more and more. Really
they should take courage and with the help of Article of 44, they should
endeavour for enacting a Common Civil Code and abrogate the article 370.
This is their test. 
These people have no right to talk about Hindutva. One communist has written
a book stating that Sangh's Hindutva is different from Vivekanand's. He does
not know Sangh nor Vivekanand. The wicket remember religion or God only when
they are in difficulties like 'Karna', who was reminding Arjuna of Kshatriya
Dharma and his moral duty when his wheel was getting deep I the mud.
Shreekrishna replied to him: 
"It is a good thing you remembered religion now? The lowly people blame the
fate when they are in difficulties not to their bad deeds. Where had your
religion, Radheya (Karna) gone when Shakuni was deceiving Dharma in the
gamble, even after their spending 13 years in forest, while refusing to
return their kingdom, while trying to burn to death the Pandavas alive in
Varnavart (One remembers Godhra here), laughing at Draupadi when she was
being pulled by heir and telling her 'pandavas have gone to hell. Now marry
another husband', killing young Abhimanu along with so many other warriors?
You did not remember any religion at that time. Now what is use of shouting
your throat hoarse and dry? Arujuna," roared Shrikrishna "shoot him with
your arrow". 
Hence, I have to say that, those secularists who have been shocked by
Gujarat results, now at least should review their behaviour and improve it.
then only they should dare to discussion with Hindutvawadi people. At this
moment, they are not even qualified to even utter the word Secularism. 
Multi-dimensional Hindutva 
Hidutva is a extremely expansive concept. Whose relation is with the culture
i.e. life values. Secularism is concerned only with State. Hidutva is
concerned with the entire nation. State is a part of nation's life.
Important one, but it only a part. Its concern is with the political order.
Nation is concerned with entire people. Or people is only nation and
people's life has many dimensions besides, state, politics, government and
administration. All these dimensions are covered by Hindutva. 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To join/leave, use the form at: http://www.mumbai-central.com/nukkad/#options
This list is archived at: http://www.mumbai-central.com/nukkad/archive.html