It's high time that the divisive narrative of any political party is trashed. What's the big deal about religion being dragged into politics? Not really! Politics and social caste-system structure have always been a part of the political system historically. Every country has a religious history which cannot be denied. India has been under slavery for thousands of years of Muslim rule in India and subsequently by the British Empire. It's only for the last 75 years that India has gained its independence. What is 'Oligarchy'? Normally a State that is run on a particular religion is known as Oligarchy. Wearing of Rudraksha, saffron clothing, sandal tilak, Ganges dips; are being used for political purposes. 'Rahul Gandhi is a Janayudhari politician' declared a Congress spokesperson. Rahul's visits to Kailash temple, Padmanabhaswami temple, bare bodied, are all narratives to attract Hindu votes. Even Indira Gandhi wore the famous Rudraksha mala. Sonia Gandhi, a Roman Catholic, also claims to be a Hindu. Priyanka Gandhi Vadra visiting Haridwar and taking dips in Ganges wants to assure that, ' Hum bhi Hindu hain". Look guys, people of India are not foolish. It can be said that the Islamic countries, supposedly governed by the Quranic laws are oligarchies. Is Pakistan an oligarchy? On one hand Pakistan boasts about democracy and on the other follows the Islamic laws. Most of the Muslim countries are called "Islamic Republic of ..." so obviously they are an Oligarchy. Asaduddin Owaisi's AIMIM is also based on religion and focuses on Muslims, although Asaduddin claims that his party is for the socially and economically underprivileged sections of the society. BSP, S.P. have caste support. Of late there has been a lot of talk about religion mingling in politics. Hinduism and Hindutva are being defined by politicians. Hindutva ideology has a political connotation, while Hinduism has a religious connotation. The line between the two is thin. Rahul Gandhi, ex-Congress President made a vitriolic attack on Bharatiya Janata Party and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh for using the Hindutava agenda to stifle over the minority religions in India, i.e. Islam Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism, Parsis etc. If we take the History of Ancient India, the Vedic systems were followed in political discourse. If we talk of Ram Rajya, Dwapar Yuga and Treta Yuga, obviously they were all Hindu States! After disintegration of ancient India and the formation of Delhi Sultanate, with the advent of Mughals in India, Islam took predominance. Masjids and Madrassas were built all over India. Muslims rulers tried to accommodate the regional population into their body politics. 'Muslims are Mohammadia Hindus, as their ancestors were Hindus," is said by R.S.S. and B.J.P. There are various political interpretations. Why is it that the issue of religion and personal faith takes predominance, by all politicians just before elections? Prime Minister Narendra Modi has won much of the Hindu sentiments by the victory of Ram Janmabhoomi in the Supreme Court of India and by the foundation laying of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. Construction of Ram Temple in Ayodhya was a long term agenda of the BJP and RSS. It is not to be denied that Hindus are a majoritarian group in India, so you have lakhs of temples in India. Projecting the Hindu hard-line by BJP is quite obvious. After the Ayodhya and Kashi corridors, BJP has sent a strong message, which is being claimed by Rahul Gandhi, Akhilesh Yadav and others as #Metoo. Mathura corridor will be declared soon. Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura were in BJP's manifesto. Is Hindutva a religion, ideology or a vote catcher? Recently Rahul Gandhi made a vociferous attack on the Hindutva ideology-based on political narrativ from Jaipur. Election battle grounds have entered the political discourse. On the other hand Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the Kashi-corridor on 13th December 2021. Prime Minister is also a Lok Sabha Member of Parliament from Varanasi. Hindutva is the predominant form of Hindu nationalism, so to say! As a political ideology, the term Hindutva was articulated by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 1923. Now it's being championed by Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Even Balasaheb Thackeray, Shiv Sena founder said, 'Garv sey kaho hum Hindu hain". Congress has an alliance with Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, a Hindutava party? The Hindutava movement has been described as a variant of "right-wing extremism" or "ethnic absolutism". Modern politicians have attempted to play down the racial and anti-Muslim aspects of Hindutva, stressing the inclusiveness of the Indian identity. Hinduism, Hindutava as defined in the classic statement of its ideology, is the "culture of the Hindu race" where Hinduism is but an element and "Hindu dharma is a religion practiced by Hindus. Proponents of Hindutva have sought to promote the identification of national identity with the religious and broader cultural heritage of Hindus. Vir Savarkar states, "Muslims were the real enemies, not the British", because their Islamic ideology posed "a threat to the real nation, namely Hindu". The definition and the use of Hindutva and its relationship with Hinduism has been a part of several court cases in India. In 1966, the Chief Justice Gajendragadkar wrote for the Supreme Court of India in Yagnapurushdasji (AIR 1966 SC 1127), that "Hinduism is impossible to define". The court adopted Radhakrishnan's submission that Hinduism is complex and "the theist and atheist, the sceptic and agnostic, may all be Hindus if they accept the Hindu system of culture and life". The Court judged that Hinduism historically has had an "inclusive nature" and it may "broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more". The word Hindutva was already in use by the late 1890s by Chandranath Basu, who coined its usage in and later by Bal Gangadhar Tilak. Savarkar's Hindutva ideology reached Keshav Baliram Hedgewar in Nagpur in 1925. In parallel to the RSS, Savarkar after his release from the colonial prison joined and became the president of Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha in 1937. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, who served as its president in 1944 and joined the Jawaharlal Nehru Cabinet after independence, was a Hindu traditionalist politician who wanted to uphold Hindu values but not necessarily to the exclusion of other communities. He asked for the membership of Hindu Mahasabha to be thrown open to all communities. When this was not accepted, he resigned from the party and founded a new political party in collaboration with the RSS. He understood Hinduism as a nationality rather than a community but, realising that this is not the common understanding of the term Hindu, he chose "Bharatiya" instead of "Hindu" to name the new party, which came to be called the Bharatiya Jana Sangh and now Bharatiya Janata Party. In retrospect it can be said that this debate on Hindutva by political party is only deviational from the key social and economic issues concerning the common man. All sections have the protection of the Constitution of India. Nation first should be important for every political party. Let's hope of unity in diversity and a harmonious coexistence of all religions and interfaiths in India. Constitution of India says, 'India to be a sovereign, socialist, secular and democratic republic. The objectives stated by the Preamble are to secure justice, liberty, equality to all citizens and promote fraternity to maintain unity and integrity of the nation". We are one nation and one Indians.
Neelam Mahajan Singh
Sr. Journalist, Author, Essayist, TV Personality, Solicitor for Human Rights Protection
singhnofficial@gmail.com
Comments
Post a Comment