| Revision as of 08:18, 10 September 2014 editAkhilKumarPal (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,198 edits Undid revision 68368401 by Babub (talk)← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:56, 26 September 2022 edit undoKautilya3 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers86,642 edits Restored revision 651264736 by Kautilya3 (talk): The correct targetTags: Twinkle Redirect target changed Undo | ||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{POV check}}{{merge|Hindu Nationalism}} | |||
| {{Hinduism small}} | |||
| '''Hindu Rāshtra''' (Hindi : हिन्दू राष्ट्र, approx. ''Hindu Nation'') is a socio-cultural concept and a political agenda aimed at making India a ] nation, culturally and politically. The concept is central to political ], and is heralded by the ] (BJP), a nationalist political party, the ] (VHP) and the ] (RSS). | |||
| Advocates of Hindu Rashtra contend that Hinduism's strong legacy of tolerance for diverse philosophies and reform movements, and the root idea of universal human brotherhood is the reason for the country's vibrant fabric of diversity, and thus every person, community and institution is perenially Hindu. In that sense, it is contended that the term ] in this case is a ] for all indegenous Indian religions and philosophies. In that vein, some advocates of the "Hindu Rashtra" prefer to think of the concept as inclusive of religions that evolved in India (such as ], ] and ]), and thus are believed to be compatible with Indian social ethos. | |||
| The adherents of the Hindu Rashtra philosophy claim that the English term ''nation'' is only a crude translation of the Sanskrit term ''rāshtra''. Their term ''rashtra'' does not mean a European-type nation with one ethnicity, one common history, one language and one religion. | |||
| ==History== | |||
| ===Early concept=== | |||
| The ideology of Hindu Rashtra is based upon beliefs about the origins of human civilization, religion and culture in India. It was conceived way back in the early 20th century, that the vast majority of the population of the country is Hindu, an identity merging diverse religious communities and cultures including ]s, ]s and ]s, as well as the more distinguished ] and ] communities. It was argued that since the word "Hindu" literally is derived from the word "Sindhu," (the ]),{{fact}} it applies to any inhabitant of the land of and beyond the river Indus, i.e. India. | |||
| The proponents of Hindu Rashtra argued that ] is the ancient system of religious philosophy and social traditions developed in Bharat by a combination of many philosophies. It has been continually added to by migrant races, and has spawned famous reform movements like ], ] and ], all of whom were classified as separate religions only with the advent of the British census system and the colonial policy of "]." | |||
| ===Partition of India=== | |||
| ''See Also'': ] | |||
| The rise of ] and the ] to create an Islamic nation ] gave ''"Hindu Rashtra"'' a more political meaning: it became the heading of an agenda to preserve the Hindu majority in India, politically and culturally. | |||
| To some leaders like ], "Hindu Rashtra" meant a nation free of the Muslim and Christian peoples; it includes the pre-islamic India, now the heavily populated by Muslims and separated as Pakistan and Bangladesh. They were known to praise ], they condemned Islamic genocide of Hindus and loathed ], the leader of the ] a man they blame for lack of vision by conceding Pakistan to Muslims. Savarkar was accused of being behind Gandhi's death in 1948,{{fact}} and his group, the ] has been accused by some masterminding the murder of thousands of Muslims in the partition riots. | |||
| During the partition, over 10 million Hindus and Sikhs were forced to leave their ancestral homes in what became Pakistan and Bangladesh almost overnight; more than 1 million were killed in the violence.{{fact}} The advocates of Hindu Rashtra argue that while the Muslims who left India also suffered from similar violent attacks, they at least obtained a new state all to themselves (non-Muslims make up less than 4% of all Pakistanis; Hindus are less than 2% of that figure). | |||
| ==The Agenda of the Hindu Rashtra== | |||
| *Banning of bovine and supine ], possibly extending to ban ] and ] altogether. (] and other bovine animals are sacred in the ] religion). | |||
| *Establishing a ] for all citizens (Muslims and Christians enjoy a separate civil justice code based upon their religious values), abrogating Article 357 of the ] (granting Muslim-majority state of ] a special status which disallows any non-Kashmiri citizen from settling in Kashmir). | |||
| *Building a ''Ram Janmbhoomi Temple'' ("the birthplace of ] temple") at the site of the destroyed ] in ]. | |||
| *Resurrecting of ancient Hindu temples around India (especially at the holy cities of ] and ]) which where destroyed by the Muslim invaders and super-imposed by mosques. | |||
| *Ban on religious conversions. | |||
| *An aggressive war on Islamic fundamentalism. This call may extend to a full war with Pakistan based on the Kashmir territorial dispute and the revolution allegedly supported by Pakistan in Kashmir. | |||
| ==Criticism== | |||
| Based on events in History that are centuries old, the advocates of Hindu Rashtra want that India's 150 million-odd Muslims and Christians convert to Hinduism or be expelled from India or risk losing their lives, property, identity, as happened in Gujarat state in 2002, under the Nationalistic Hindu Governments at the state and federal level . | |||
| Critics of the Hindu Rashtra argue that it will not be an easy thing to implement. The Hindus are a heterogenous group and do not necessarily have clear cut guidelines on religious practices. The religious practices and family traditions of Hindus are so diverse that let alone having a Uniform Civil Code for all the religions, it would not be possible even for Hindus to evolve common practices amidst themselves. Critics of the Hindu Rashtra claim that Hindus and other religions like Jainism, Sikhism and Buddhism are not sufficiently similar so as to warrant the label "Hindu" . This reflects on several facets of Indian politics, where caste-based parties enjoy more political clout than those espousing Hindu nationalist sentiments . | |||
| They assert that attempts to portray Hindus as a homogenous group is an attempt by the erstwhile Hindu ruling class to garner political mileage for the gains of a narrow political group and not the broader Hindu religion. They agree that India is a Hindu majority nation and the attempts by Right-wing Hindus or Hindutva forces is to create a 'Hindu-only Nation' rather than a 'Hindu Nation', which it already is. This, the critics say, is being done by inciting hate against minorites like Muslims and Christians, some of whose forefathers happened to rule the Indian sub-continent. | |||
| They point to some traditions stating that many of the Muslims were once lower caste Hindus (]) who embraced Islam, some even after Indian independance. There are examples of entire villages of oppressed lower caste hindus converting to escape the caste-based oppression of their former religion, like in Meenakshipuram village of Tamil Nadu in early 1980s . Another example is the famous Indian musician ], who converted to Islam from Hinduism. | |||
| Many of the lower caste Hindus believe that the proponents of Hindu Rashtra are actually proponents of ''Brahminism'' or caste-based oppression. This, critics believe, is the real hidden agenda. Hindu Rashtra proponents want to ''abolish'' caste-based reservations for lower caste Hindus in jobs and higher education. This, the lower castes say, is ironic, as Hindu Rashtra proponents want compensation of alleged repression for 1,000 years of the Hindu ruling class by Islamic and Western invaders but themselves are not willing to pay for 4,000 years of caste-based crimes they commited against the non-ruling and lower caste Hindus. This, the lower castes say, is an attempt by Hindu Rashtra proponents to retain their supremacy and to regain the right to subjugate lower and non-ruling castes. The lower-castes have bore the brunt of Muslim rule as shrewd Muslim rulers divided the Hindus by picking middle-caste Hindus for posts, thereby squeezing upper-caste and lower-caste Hindus. | |||
| India's secularists say Hindu Rashtra is an example of xenophobic nationalism based on exclusion of minorities. They say it is similar to the Balkans and the failed states of Yugoslavia and South Africa. Also the Muslim and Christian minorities in India do not question the integrity of political boundaries of Republic of India and have infact lost many of their community as soldiers of India's Army. Hence, they say, the alternative to Hindu Rashtra, Dalit Rashtra or an Islamic Nation is a secular, multi-faith, democratic India. | |||
| ==Response to the Criticism of the Hindu Rashtra== | |||
| See ] | |||
| Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra prefer to define a 'Hindu' as "a person who regards this land of Bharatvarsha, from the ] River to the ] Coastline as his Motherland as well as his Holy land." From this definition, they opine the ], ], ], ], ], ] , ], ] etc. are all legitimate Hindus, because all these people have only one Holy Land the Bharatvarsha, only one motherland, ]. Their ] (or lack thereof) may differ. They argue that since Muslims and Christians follow religions that radiated from foreign lands, they do not conform to the Indian ethos. | |||
| Some of the more literalist advocates of Hindu Rashtra want India's 150 million odd Muslims and Christians to 'repatriate' to Hinduism (since they claim that they are descended from Hindus and they believe that most were forcibly converted), or have a reduced status in Indian society along the standards of Islamic ideas of "]" of non-Muslims in medieval Islamic empires. | |||
| Plus, they claim that granting a Hindu Rashtra is fair compensation of centuries of violent atrocities against Hindus by Muslims and Christians . | |||
| Also, they accuse Christian Missionary organisations in India of a deliberate agenda of cultural ] ,. | |||
| They also believe that 'forced' conversions have been carried out by Christians on Sikhs ,, , whom they generally view as part of the Hindutva agenda. In addition, they cite atrocities committed by the Christian separatists{{fact}} in the ] as example of Christian persecution of Hindus. | |||
| Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra do not dispute the heterogenous nature of Hindu society. This heterogeniety is one of the primary reasons why it has withstood the Islamic genocide of Hindus by the ], the ] Clans, the ] and the ] Nizamate and believe that all Hindus have common ancient and modern history. | |||
| They further believe that the differences that divide the Hindus amongst themselves are rapidly disappearing owing to their awakening of national consciousness and social reforms. | |||
| With regards to the claim that Muslims and Christians are low caste Hindus who chose to convert to Islam, advocates of Hindutva believe that historical evidence exists to support the claim that this was not, in fact, the case. Proponents of the Hindu Rashtra believe that the Muslims of India today, are, point of fact, Hindus who simply are unaware of their Hindu heritage.{{fact}} Arguments have been made by some sympathetic to Hindutva ) that the conversions of Hindus to Islam were largely forced at point of arms. Whenever Hindus took back territory conquered by Islamic armies, they did not force the converts to reconvert, as Hindus do not practice prosetylisation or conversion. | |||
| With regards to the claim of a hidden agenda of "Brahminism" (upper caste supremacy) in Hindutva, it is well to point out that many members of the religious right parties in India (such as the RSS) are, in fact, members of the middle and lower castes. Point of fact, a well publicized goal of the RSS is the eventual "phasing out" of the caste system, which members of the RSS view as an unnecessary anachronism, and have recruited members of lower catses also . Marxist historians like ] have demonstrated that the caste system was aggrandized by the British to foster sectarian tensions in India as part of their policy of "Divide and Conquer". Eminent historian ] has pointed out in his illustrious text ] that the caste system of ] was traditionally not meant to be a sectarian influence but merely a division of labor in society. Proponents of the Hindu Rashtra believe that this system is no longer pertinent to Indian society and must be removed. | |||
| In fact, proponents of the Hindu Rashtra have accused the other parties in India of aggravating caste based sectarian tensions in India as part of their minority vote-bank politics. | |||
| They opine that it is the ''stateless'' nature of Hindus{{fact}} that causes these persecutions and this is a problem that the ideology of the Hindu Rashtra means to resolve. This is a line of reasoning that is similar to that given by many Jewish Scholars in favor of ] as a means to reduce ] . | |||
| Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra point to the success of ] as a national liberation movement for the ] people, and ] as a democratic Jewish State as an example of how to implement a democratic Hindu Rashtra. | |||
| Furthermore, they believe that the establishment of the ] is a secular act. Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra point out that absolute "secularism" is not a necessary prerequisite to democracy, as said by Daniel Pipes . | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| *], ] | |||
| *], ], ] | |||
| *], ], ], ], ] | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 15:56, 26 September 2022
Redirect to: