Last updateMon, 13 Nov 2017 4am

Shades of Hindutva– Examining challenges from within and without

Shades Of Hindutva Examining  1

Hindutva, a stock of knowledge and way of life unique to Indian civilisation, is being viewed differently and is facing challenges from within and without. On January 21, M. Venkaiah Naidu, India's Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, tweeted: "Feeling immensely motivated by seeing the great Hindu monk of India, Swami Vivekananda, who has taken…[the] message of Hindutva across the globe. Naidu made the comment after visiting the Vivekananda Rock Memorial in Kanyakumari. In this sense, Hindutva is seen as a universal way of life, and was presented in this meaning by Swami Vivekananda at the Chicago Parliament of the World's Religions in September, 1893. In Chicago, Vivekananda had stated: "We believe not only in universal toleration, but we accept all religions as true.

On January 25, Ramachandra Guha, a noted Indian historian who describes himself as a "lapsed Marxist", tweeted: "I admire aspects of Hinduism and am a Hindu too… I am opposed to Hindutva and Hindu bigotry. Guha's tweet got a rejoinder the same day from Sudhanshu S. Singh who works in the humanitarian sector: "There are no clear-cut definitions of Hinduism and Hindutva. Often people abuse Hinduism in the name of Hindutva."4 In short, Hindutva – as a way of life, as a corpus of cultural practices, as a civilisation and as a religion and spirituality – has acquired a set of contentious meanings in Indian society.

The English word "Hinduism" does not reflect it completely due to its association with "ism" which denotes "ideology."The word "Hindutva" too is not a complete translation of "Hinduism" insofar as it conveys a sense of ideology. For example, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) website views Hindutva as an ideological movement, stating:


The Truth About Article 370

the truth

Politicians have been talking endlessly about Article 370, but many Indians still do not understand what it practically means.

It was drafted by Gopalaswami Ayyangar, Minister without portfolio in the first Union Cabinet of Nehru who felt that JK was not yet ripe for integration. Sardar Patel was so livid with the provisions of Article 370 that he had resigned on this issue.


The state’s residents live under a separate set of laws, including those related to citizenship, ownership of property, and fundamental rights, as compared to other Indians

Unlike other State legislative Assemblies, J&K legislature has a six-year term.

Jammu & Kashmir has two flags; a separate State flag along with the National Flag.


A List of the 50 biggest enemies of Hindus (Dead or Alive)

A List of the 50 biggest enemies

Hindus should at least know who are their enemies. Jews have shown us that to remember, helps to make sure that atrocities do not happen again. Let us not forget that the biggest genocide ever – is that of the Hindus – which has been calculated at 100 million victims, from the Hindu Kush to the Mumbai attacks of 2006.

 This list, which is compiled without any hatred or malice, is not complete. I am counting on you to raise it to a hundred. If you think I missed someone, facebook it to me, with the name and two or three paragraphs on why you think he or she is an enemy of the Hindus.

 It would be also interesting to compile separately a list of say, the ten or twenty biggest enemies of Hindus in the US (or UK, or Canada) that could be circulated worldwide and damper the activities of these people….

 I have also made a hit parade of the ten countries that I feel are inimical to Hindus.


  1. Thomas Babington, 1st Baron Macaulay. Played a major role in introducing English and western concepts to education in India. This was good and one cannot deny that English gives India an edge, say compared to China, in dealing with the West and conducting business. Yet, Macaulay had very little regard for Hindu culture and education: « all the historical information which can be collected from all the books which have been written in the Sanskrit language, is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgement used at preparatory schools in England ». Macaulay thus succeeded in fashioning a class of “brown Sahibs”, who thought and acted British. Today, much of India’s intelligentsia and Media stands proof that Macaulay succeeded: they look down on their own culture and analyse India through the western Prism
  2. Indian National Congress. Few people know that the Indian National Congress was founded on 28 December 1885 by a Britisher, A.O.Hume. Its goals were to « allow all those who work for the national (read British) good to meet each other personally, to discuss and decide of the political operations to start during the year”. And certainly, till the end of the 19th century, the Congress, who regarded British rule in India as a “divine dispensation”, was happy with criticising moderately the Government, while reaffirming its loyalty to the Crown and its faith in “liberalism” and the British innate sense of justice”!!! Real nationalist leaders like Sri Aurobindo or Tilak, were side-lined by the ‘Moderate’ Congress’. Today, we find that the British succeeded in implanting an eternal love of the ‘White’ in the Congress, witness the sycophancy around Sonia Gandhi.


The strange irony of Indian history

The strange irony of Indian history

Indian history presents us with a delightful irony. On the one hand, most schools and colleges teach it in such offputting manner, with stale textbooks full of howlers, that most students come to hate the topic and happily erase it all from their memories the day after the exam. And on the other hand, Indian history seems to be alive and well, if we judge by the numerous historical debates that have filled the public space, from the Aryan theory to the Ayodhya issue, from the record of Aurangzeb or Tipu Sultan to pinning down the responsibility for the Partition, from “terrorism” in the Freedom Movement to Subhash Chandra Bose’s ultimate fate. That such “debates” are conducted more often through mud-slinging, if not demonization, than in a mature and civilized manner is another matter.

We also have a colourful range of scholars: At one end of the spectrum, some, dreaming of Puranic scales of time, are tempted to take Indian history millions of years into the past (or at least many thousands more than archaeology would permit), to visualize vimanas and other advanced technological devices from earliest times, and to imagine ancient India as a perfect golden age. And at the other end, scholars claiming to practise “scientific” history produce, instead, a brand heavily inflected by ill-suited imported ideologies and models, leave alone factual and methodological flaws. In between, are numerous solid, unprejudiced and meticulous historians who are passionate about the discipline; unfortunately, the wider public rarely gets to hear about them as the media can’t get desired sound bites from them .

Is this scene unique to India? By no means. Because history is at the root of the identity individuals, communities and nations choose to give themselves, it has immense bearing on current situations, and no nation escapes historical controversies. Did the Hebrews migrate from Egypt to Palestine as described in the biblical Exodus?


Subhash Chandra Bose got us Independence

Subhash Chandra Bose got us Independence

Since some papers of the Intelligence Bureau on Subhash Chandra Bose and his family have come into the public domain, there has been a concerted campaign by a section of the media to vilify the national hero. An article in a prominent English news daily went to the extent of declaring that Subhash was of the strong opinion that post-independence, India should be under a dictatorial rule for 20 years.

In a way, the article sought to justify the incarceration and subsequent killing of Subhash. The pro-British, pro-Nehru and anti-Subhash constituency still exists. From the tenor of this anti-Subhash lobby it can be extrapolated that how vicious must have been the British and Congress intrigues against Subhash during World War II and subsequent to his disappearance, considering the fact that it was only Subhash who was fighting for overthrow of the British , all the top Congress leaders were in jail during that period.

What political philosophy Subhash desired or would have pursued is a matter of conjecture. The moot question that the IB documents pose is as to why the family of Subhash was kept under surveillance for two decades after independence, and most deploringly, why was the surveillance report being shared with the British intelligence agency, the MI5. What common interest did the MI5 and Nehru have? If Nehru did know about the real truth about Subhash, i.e. about his alleged incarceration or alleged murder, how did he live with the murderous guilt?

The sharing of intelligence with a foreign intelligence agency, rather former colonial master on a revered freedom fighter, who was also the Congress President at one time, lends some credence to the insinuations about certain leaders in the Congress of pre-independence era having links with MI5, primarily to marginalize the extremists. The hatred for Subhash in the Gandhi-Nehru camp is a historical fact. This hostility compelled Subhash to resign as Congress President in 1939, despite being democratically elected. Hence the question as to who were fascists and who were liberal democrats in the pre-independence Congress will always remain.


Why Westerners are Getting Attracted to Hinduism?

Why Westerners are Getting

It takes all sorts to make the world!  Whether you are born in America, Iran or India….you either gratefully realize the existence of Supreme Power that guides the universe….or…you are too  indifferently busy in materialistic life to bother over it….or…you are a non-believer to the extent of hating that Supreme Power people term as God!

Let’s discuss about the first category…the believers. The believers in the Supreme Power call Him as Lord Almighty, Allah or Vishnu as per the religion they are born in.Christianity, Islam and Hinduism are the top three religions in the world. The believers incline towards gaining spiritual knowledge through the religious doctrines and scriptures available in their religion. For Muslims, it is Holy Quran. For Christians, it is Holy Bible. For Hindus, well, there is an Ocean of religious Literature like Vedas, Upanishads, Mahapuranas etc.

Quran was written by Mohammad around 609 CE. Even Bible Scholars believe Bible to be aseventh century human artifact. From time to time, these doctrines have been tampered with for convenient changes. Mohammad,who had specified polygamy allowed up to four marriages for Muslim men, justified his fifth marriage to his daughter-in-law with some verses of Quran. As to Bible, the researchers have discovered manyinconsistencies,anomalies and repetitionsof stories in the Bible.

Hinduism is the oldest faith in the world. The religious scriptures like Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas are timeless, consistent and constant. The time of their origin is too ancient to be calculated by human beings. Hinduism and its divine Literature teach us a way of life.  These Literatures guide the seekers with the correct knowledge about oneself, the universe and the Creator.


Language and Discourse: Why the issue is not merely about Sanskrit or English

Language and Discourse

With the rapid spread of English in India, most Indians are worried about the future of Indian languages, especially Sanskrit. It is also observed that learning is less efficient when conducted through a foreign language. Furthermore, efforts are undertaken to popularize Sanskrit, not only in the hope that a language of Indian origin may come to serve as the lingua franca of India but that it may encourage better thinking patterns on account of its logical structure.

In all such cases, we find that the emphasis is entirely on language as the key to build a better India. No attention is paid to the discourse which is the medium through which a language expresses its power. A discourse encapsulates the socio-political meaning of what is communicated through language and is therefore more important than the language itself. The same discourse can be expressed through different languages and while usually a language is associated with its own peculiar discourse, the same language can be employed to communicate different discourses. Let me explain this point with an example.

Consider a man who sends his 12-year old son to work, instead of giving him an education, and lives on his income. Evidently, this is wrong but how do you raise the issue? You could tell the man that his son has a right to education. By not sending him to school and making him work, the man is violating the rights of his son. This is a discourse of human rights, of European origin, but it is not that it can be articulated only in English. You can just as easily use the term mānava–adhikāra instead of ‘human rights’ and make the same point.