Hindutva

[acharya]

http://www.epw.org.in/epw//uploads/articles/12764.pdf
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Hinduism and Hindutva</b>
These twin tragedies in the hills got me musing.
I began to see the connections between the relatively harmless (not counting the
harm it does to the faculty of critical thought) middle class rite of vahan puja,
the tragic fate of pilgrims to Naina Devi and Chamunda Mata temples, and the politically disastrous outcome of government encouraged Hindu pilgrimage in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. I began to see, more clearly than ever before, how the same world view and beliefs of ordinary Hindus that makes them have pujas for their cars and undertake arduous and often life-threatening pilgrimages, also
makes them sympathise with – and indeed actively demand – the open, state-sponsored Hinduisation of India that has been going on in recent years.
This led me to see the folly of the secularist argument that popular Hinduism has
“nothing” to do with Hindu nationalism.

When my secularist friends make such statements, what they mean is that Hinduism has no organic – that is, cognitive, aesthetic and moral – connections with Hindu nationalism, and that “bad” Hindu nationalism as “hijacked,” “distorted” or “Semitised” the “good”, “tolerant” and “harmless” Hinduism of the masses. I have never found this argument persuasive at all, because I believe that the Hinduism that the Hindu nationalists invoke actually is the Hinduism that the majority of Hindus love, cherish and practise. Even this whole business of making Rama the symbol of India does not really amount to a “hijacking”: the god-king Rama and Ramayana have been central to the political imagination of Hindus for at least a millennium, if not longer. So, I have always been a sceptic when it comes to “good Hinduism, bad Hindutva

kind of arguments. But after my travels in India this summer, I began to see more clearly than ever before that we cannot fight the faith-based politics of Hindu nationalists and the similarly inspired initiatives of the Indian state, unless we question the very foundations of the beliefs and rituals of popular Hinduism itself. We cannot go on “respecting” people’s faith, but then turn around and start questioning them when they actually act upon that faith under the banner of Hindutva.
What is happening in Kashmir over the land-transfer issue is a perfect illustration of what I mean when I say that secularists cannot continue to “respect” faith while, at the same time, fight against faith-based politics. Let us suppose that out of “respect” we do not question the popular Hindu myth – which is endlessly repeated not just by priests but by the tourist and information departments of the supposedly “secular” state as well – that the naturally formed ice stalagmite in the Amarnath cave is “really” Shiva’s phallic symbol (lingam), and that god Shiva actually revealed the secrets of the universe at this spot to his wife, goddess Parvati. If we grant all that, then on what grounds do we turn around and start criticising the mass mobilisations of Hindus that are taking place not just in Jammu but all over the country demanding that more land be given to Amarnath temple so that more and more Hindu pilgrims can witness the “miracle” of the ice-lingam? Sure, we can criticise political parties and the temple management for their attempted land-grab for a temple in such an ecologically and politically sensitive area. But if we grant that people’s faith – even it if confuses a natural phenomenon with a divine phallus – is to be “respected”, then why should we not respect their right to demand more land to build better facilities so that they can freely practise their religion? I have always believed that as long as we do not challenge the world view, the background assumptions, the explicit and tacit beliefs that animate popular Hindu rituals and practices, we will be fighting against the menace of Hindutva with one hand tied behind our backs. For then, we will only allow ourselves to challenge the material and political interests of Hindu nationalist parties. But we will be in no position to challenge and change the mentalities, or

the habits-of-the-heart, of the millions of ordinary people that incline them to support Hindutva politics, enthusiastically (by joining the many rath-yatras, pujas, yaganas, yoga-camps and other religious-political spectacles organised by the Hindu Right), or passively (through the ballot box only). Unless we question the basis of faith critically, rationally and scientifically, we will not succeed in stemming the popular support for faith-based politics. There can be no viable secular politics in India without a secularisation of consciousness and conscience of the Indian people.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->