02-07-2005, 08:31 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Hindutva and beyond </b>
Roopa Kaushal -Pioneer
In the article, "Conceptual civilisation" (January 24), Sukanya Ghosh has rightly quoted Vishnu Puran in support of her argument that India's geographical boundary, from the time immemorial, consisted of the territory between Himalayas and the Indian Ocean. This description of the the country's cultural unity is also found in both Agni and Vayu Puran. These references contradict the stereotype thinking that India did not constitute a nation before the British Raj.
Ms Ghosh, however, appears confused when she states: "<b>Hindutva is the socially-activated Hindu consciousness which is a civilisational and cultural concept." </b><b>She says that the prime components of Hindutva are a deep faith in the Sanatan Dharma which postulates spirituality and service to humanity, a feeling of belonging with Bharat-bhoomi and oneness with the followers of Hinduism. But, at the same time, she finds in Bharatiyata an embodiment of civilisational, geographical and political overtones</b>. Earlier, Mr Ram Gopal in the article, "Interpreting Hindutva" (January 14), had aptly stated that the words 'Hindustan' for 'Bharat' and 'Hindu' for its inhabitants had entered into Indian vocabulary about a thousand years back when Arabic or Persian became the country's official languages. The word 'Hindu', however, got a religious connotation much later when all religious sects of Indian origin were grouped together as Hindu religions and subjected to jazia. Even now, English dictionaries give the meaning of 'Hindu' both as a member of the Indian race and an adherent of Hinduism. Hence, etymologically, Bharatiyata and Hindutva are synonyms.
However, it is erroneous to link Hindutva with Hinduism. After all, Hindu religion is not a single religion. It is a commonwealth of about 20 India-born religions. All of them have many commonalties, but each one has its own distinct features, too. Thus, religious bigotry remains an alien phenomenon here.
In the Goa musings of January 2003, former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee observed that Hindutva was a geo-cultural concept whose aim was to strengthen nationalism, not to propagate any particular religious order. But a year later, Mr Vajpayee said that though Hindutva and Bharatiyata meant the same thing, he preferred the latter. Obviously, the BJP wanted to lure Muslims before the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. But, the attempt failed. The reality is that however beautiful and accomplished a girl may be, she cannot be the wife of a devout Muslim, unless she embraces Islam and undergoes nikah. Similarly, no monetary grant or other concessions can satisfy their appetite for complete political sovereignty over the land of their occupation. Jammu & Kashmir is a living example.
A learned Muslim leader and a close associate of Mahatma Gandhi told his community on the eve of the Khilafat agitation of 1920-21: "Their duty is only to act strictly in accordance with the commands of the God, which are incorporated in the Quran. They should empty their minds of all man-made ideas and national sentiments and surrender themselves to the instructions and the guidance of the Supreme Educator" (Tara Chand; History of Freedom Movement in India, volume III). Thus, any attempt to eulogise Bharatiyata in place of Hindutva is futile.<b> The need is to understand Hindutva in its true meaning and educate Muslims that, by nationality, they too are Hindus. What Hindutva requires them is to adopt secularism, like other religionists in India, and shun their old concepts of Dar-ul-Islam and Dar-ul-Harb</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Roopa Kaushal -Pioneer
In the article, "Conceptual civilisation" (January 24), Sukanya Ghosh has rightly quoted Vishnu Puran in support of her argument that India's geographical boundary, from the time immemorial, consisted of the territory between Himalayas and the Indian Ocean. This description of the the country's cultural unity is also found in both Agni and Vayu Puran. These references contradict the stereotype thinking that India did not constitute a nation before the British Raj.
Ms Ghosh, however, appears confused when she states: "<b>Hindutva is the socially-activated Hindu consciousness which is a civilisational and cultural concept." </b><b>She says that the prime components of Hindutva are a deep faith in the Sanatan Dharma which postulates spirituality and service to humanity, a feeling of belonging with Bharat-bhoomi and oneness with the followers of Hinduism. But, at the same time, she finds in Bharatiyata an embodiment of civilisational, geographical and political overtones</b>. Earlier, Mr Ram Gopal in the article, "Interpreting Hindutva" (January 14), had aptly stated that the words 'Hindustan' for 'Bharat' and 'Hindu' for its inhabitants had entered into Indian vocabulary about a thousand years back when Arabic or Persian became the country's official languages. The word 'Hindu', however, got a religious connotation much later when all religious sects of Indian origin were grouped together as Hindu religions and subjected to jazia. Even now, English dictionaries give the meaning of 'Hindu' both as a member of the Indian race and an adherent of Hinduism. Hence, etymologically, Bharatiyata and Hindutva are synonyms.
However, it is erroneous to link Hindutva with Hinduism. After all, Hindu religion is not a single religion. It is a commonwealth of about 20 India-born religions. All of them have many commonalties, but each one has its own distinct features, too. Thus, religious bigotry remains an alien phenomenon here.
In the Goa musings of January 2003, former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee observed that Hindutva was a geo-cultural concept whose aim was to strengthen nationalism, not to propagate any particular religious order. But a year later, Mr Vajpayee said that though Hindutva and Bharatiyata meant the same thing, he preferred the latter. Obviously, the BJP wanted to lure Muslims before the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. But, the attempt failed. The reality is that however beautiful and accomplished a girl may be, she cannot be the wife of a devout Muslim, unless she embraces Islam and undergoes nikah. Similarly, no monetary grant or other concessions can satisfy their appetite for complete political sovereignty over the land of their occupation. Jammu & Kashmir is a living example.
A learned Muslim leader and a close associate of Mahatma Gandhi told his community on the eve of the Khilafat agitation of 1920-21: "Their duty is only to act strictly in accordance with the commands of the God, which are incorporated in the Quran. They should empty their minds of all man-made ideas and national sentiments and surrender themselves to the instructions and the guidance of the Supreme Educator" (Tara Chand; History of Freedom Movement in India, volume III). Thus, any attempt to eulogise Bharatiyata in place of Hindutva is futile.<b> The need is to understand Hindutva in its true meaning and educate Muslims that, by nationality, they too are Hindus. What Hindutva requires them is to adopt secularism, like other religionists in India, and shun their old concepts of Dar-ul-Islam and Dar-ul-Harb</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->