This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 69.199.165.162 (talk) at 14:38, 26 June 2006 (→Criticism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 14:38, 26 June 2006 by 69.199.165.162 (talk) (→Criticism)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Hindu Rāshtra (Hindi : हिन्दू राष्ट्र, approx. Hindu Nation) is a socio-cultural concept and a political agenda aimed at making India a Hindu nation, culturally and politically. The concept is central to political Hindu nationalism, and is heralded by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a nationalist political party, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (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 Hindu in this case is a synechdoche 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 Sikhism,Buddhism and Jainism), 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 concept 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 Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists, as well as the more distinguished Muslim and Christian communities. It was argued that since the word "Hindu" literally is derived from the word "Sindhu," (the Indus river), it applies to any inhabitant of the land of and beyond the river Indus, i.e. India.
The proponents of Hindu Rashtra argued that Hinduism is the ancient system of religious philosophy and social traditions developed in Bharat by a combination of Indo-Aryan and Dravidian belief systems and philosophies. It has been continually added to by migrant races, and has spawned famous reform movements like Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism, all of whom were classified as separate religions only with the advent of the British census system and the colonial policy of "divide and rule."
Partition of India
See Also: Partition of India
The rise of Islamic fundamentalism and the partition of India to create an Islamic nation Pakistan 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 great visionary hindu leaders like Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, "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 Adolf Hitler's nationalism, not his genocide, they condoned Islamic genocide of Hindus and loath Mahatma Gandhi, the leader of the Indian freedom struggle a man they blame for lack of vision by conceding a Pakistan to extremist Muslims, on the premise that Hindus and Muslims can't live together and yet allowing muslims who voted for a pakistan to stay in India. Savarkar in fact is widely considered to be behind Gandhi's (who was a stubborn dictator in his own non-voilent way ) death in 1948, and his group, the Hindu Mahasabha is without a good reason blamed with masterminding the murder of thousands of Muslims in the partition riots. When the known fact is for a 1000 yrs all over the world it is the muslims who could never integrate into an civilized society.
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. The advocates of Hindu Rashtra argue that while the Muslims who left India also suffered from 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), while the Hindus simply lost a chunk of their ancestral motherland in the batting of an eyelid. These 10 million Hindus and Sikhs had lived only months ago in complete peace with their Muslim neighbors.
Modern times
To modern advocates and Hindu nationalists, the "Hindu Rashtra" is here to defend: Assortement of Hindus make up more than 60% of Bharat's population, and thus naturally dominate and define the country's cultural, economic and political life. But the secular Congress Party and Leftist politicians are accused of mollycoddling the sizeable Muslim minority for votes, and ignoring the coercion of poor Hindus to convert to Islam and Christianity, the influx of illegal Muslim migrants from Bangladesh, separatist movements and the waves of Islamic terrorism in Kashmir that has struck many major cities as well.
The Agenda of the Hindu Rashtra
- Banning of bovine and supine slaughter, possibly extending to ban beef and pork all together (Cows and other bovine animals are sacred in the Hindu religion).
- Establishing a uniform civil code for all citizens (Muslims and Christians enjoy a separate civil justice code based upon their religious values), abrogating Article 357 of the Constitution of India (granting Muslim-majority state of Kashmir a special status which disallows any non-Kashmiri citizen from settling in Kashmir).
- Building a Ram Janmbhoomi Temple ("the birthplace of Rama temple") at the site of the destroyed Babri Mosque in Ayodhya.
- Resurrecting of ancient Hindu temples around India (especially at the holy cities of Mathura and Kashi) which where destroyed by the Muslim invaders and super-imposed by mosques.
- Ban on religious conversions.
- An aggressive war on Islamic fundamentalism and Islamic terrorism. This call may extend to a full war with Pakistan based on the Kashmir territorial dispute and the Islamic terrorism being supported by Pakistan in Kashmir and other major parts of the country.
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 . This is akin to the Moroccans demanding that Spain be recoverted into an Islamic country or Iran (an Islamic republic) ethnically cleanse the Baha'i and Jewish minorities, based on past events in History. 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, they opine, reflects on several facets of Indian politics, where caste-based parties enjoy more political clout than those espousing Hindu nationalist sentiments . They opine 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 opine that many of the Muslims were once lower caste Hindus (Dalits) 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 A.R.Rahman, who converted to Islam from Hinduism. Many of the lower caste Hindus opine that the proponents of Hindu Rashtra are proponents of 'Brahminism' or caste-based oppression. 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 1000 years of the Hindu ruling class by Islamic and Western invaders but themselves are not willing to pay for 3000 years of caste-based crimes they commited against the non-ruling and lower caste Hindus. This, the lower castes say, is as an attempt by Hindu Rashtra proponents to retain their supremacy and to regain the right to subjugate lower and non-ruling castes. Hence, many lower caste Hindus would prefer a 'Dalit Rashtra' instead of a Hindu Rashtra. India's secularists say Hindu Rashtra is an example of nationalism based on exclusion of minorities. They say it is similar to the Balkans and the failed state of Yugoslavia and not Jewish state of Israel, as Jews never discriminate against themselves and do not have upper castes who wish to retain their supremacy over lower castes, based only on birth. 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 unlike the situation in Israel. 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
Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra prefer to define a 'Hindu' as "a person who regards this land of Bharatvarsha (a synechdoche for the Indian Subcontinent), from the Indus River to the Malabar Coastline as his Motherland as well as his Holy land that is the cradle land of his religion." From this definition, they opine the Vedics, Jains, Sikhs, Buddhists, Lingayats, Aryas , Santhals, Adivasis etc. are all legitimate Hindus, because all these people have only one Holy Land the Bharatvarsha, only one motherland, India. Their pantheons (or lack thereof) may differ. But their nationality is one that is nothing but, the "Hindu Nationality". They argue that since Muslims and Christians follow religions that radiated from foreign lands, they do not conform to the Indian ethos or to Indian culture in any real way.
Based on historical events,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 "Dhimmitude" of non-muslims such as Hindus, Jews, Zoroastrians and Christians implemented in Islamic countries. Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra claim that Muslims & Christians cannot have double standards, and cannot be awarded special treatment in detriment to the Hindu majority.Plus, they claim that granting a Hindu Rashtra is fair compensation of centuries of violent atrocities against Hindus by Muslims and Christians . Also, Christian Missionary activities in India have been known to get violent and aggressive against Hindus and Sikhs as part of a deliberate agenda of cultural ethnic cleansing , and Hindus merely wish the right to practice their religion in peace. They claim that the muslim and christian minority need to bear the burnt of their own policies.
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 Sultanate of Delhi, the Bahmani Clans, the Mughal Empire and the Hyderabad Nizamate. However, they also point out that no people on the earth are so homogenous as to present perfect uniformity in language, culture, race & religion. An ethnic group is marked out a nation by themselves not so much by the absence of any heterogeneous differences amongst themselves as by the fact of their differing from other peoples more markedly than they differ amongst themselves.
Great Britain can be cited as an example. There are at any rate three different languages there, They have fought amongst themselves rather intensely in the past, there are to be found the traces of different seeds & bloods and races. If one says that inspite of it all they are a nation because they possess a common country, a common languages, a common culture and common Holyland then the Hindus too possess a common country so well marked out as the Bharatvarsha, a common language being Sanskrit. By 'Anuloma' and 'Pratiloma' marriages their seed and blood continued to get commingled even since the days of the Emperor Manu. Their social festivals and cultural forms are not less common than those we find in England. They possess a common Holyland. The Vedic Rishis are their common pride. Their heroes Shriram and Shrikrishna, Shivaji and Pratap, Guru Govind and Banda are a source of common inspiration. Their prophets Buddha & Mahaveer, are held in common esteem.
Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra opine that all Hindus have common ancient and modern history. They have friends and enemies in common. They have faced common dangers and won victories in common. One in national glory and one in national disasters, one in national hope and one in national despairs and Hindus are welded together during aeons of a common life and a common habitat.
The advocates point out that If countries like the United States with the diverse ethnic groups of African-Americans, German and Anglo-Saxon-descended Caucasians, Jews, East-Asians,South Asians, Hispanics etc. with a common past not exceeding four or five centuries put together can be called a nation - then the Hindus must be entitled to be recognised as a nation in India.
They point out that Hindus as a people differ more from any other people in the world than they differ amongst themselves. The oneness of the Hindus was proved in a negative way at the time of partition of India on a political and theocratic basis. One who received a muslim dagger was invariably a Hindu. The Muslims while attacking "Kafirs" made no distinction between a touchable and nontouchable,a Brahmin and a nonbrahmin,a Kshtriya or a Vaishya.When Hindus came together in death,they are certainly a nation while alive.
They further believe that the differences that divide the Hindus amongst themselves are rapidly disappearing owing to their awakening of national consciousness and the Sanghatan & Social reforms.
Furthermore, they contend that, since the global collapse of communism as a world power, most societies in the world have shifted to mainstream religion, and have turned to the Persecution of Hindus (a global minority) to bolster their ethnic solidarity, much like the evolution of anti-semitism in Muslim and European societies. This is precisely the problem which Hindutva and the Hindu Rashtra means to resolve. Many muslims still believe they enjoy the feudal status they did during the Mughal Empire and have committed hate-crimes and perpetrated atrocities against Hindus. They advocate that hindus, generally known for their tolerance and pluralism, have retaliated against muslims in self-defense. Furthermore, they believe that the establishment of the Uniform Civil Code is a secular act, and that the present "pseudosecularist" left wing regime in India is mollycoddling the Islamic and Christian minority vote bank against Hindus by providing them with preferential treatment. Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra point out that absolute "secularism" is not a necessary prerequisite to democracy, as said by Western Scholar Daniel Pipes . Advocates of the Hindu Rashtra point to the success of Zionism as a national liberation movement for the Jewish people, and Israel as a democratic Jewish State as an example of how to implement a democratic Hindu Rashtra.
External Links
- Article in favor of Hinduness
- Article detailing the Christian Missionary situation
- Christian Aggression
- Hindu Nationalists Ponder Unexpected Defeat in India Elections Article in The New York Times
- Information from U.S. Library of Congress on caste-based politics of India
- Attacks on Christians Unsettle Rural India Article in The New York Times
- Idols removed from temples, thrown into the Bhima Article in 'The Hindu' on Dalits destroying Hindu idols and declaring their intent to convert to Buddhism.
- Idol sparks tension in Badrinath Story in Deccan Herald newspaper on dispute between Hindu community and Jain community over a temple
- - Charmed woman marries Cobra Story on Yahoo News on a Hindu Woman marrying a Snake!
- Jain saints' nude march evokes strong resentment in Tamil Nadu Story on Yahoo News about Hindu women anger against nude Jains
See also
- Hindu nationalism, Indian nationalism
- Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Vishva Hindu Parishad, Bharatiya Janata Party
- Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Praveen Togadia, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Lal Krishna Advani, Narendra Modi