This led to an existential threat to Hinduism. While savants like Swami Vivekananda espoused the rich philosophy of Hinduism and brought it to the attention of some parts of the world and tried to create sense of pride amongst Hindus, his valiant efforts had little impact.
Helpless, many concerned Hindus decided to build a counter force to protect Hindu tradition, culture and way of life in order to stop further erosion. Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS) was born a few years before India’s independence, catching the imagination of a section of Hindus to an extent.
While years have passed and several developments have taken place, even RSS was banned for some time in India, yet it remained a force to be reckoned with. Attempts to discredit RSS has continued, yet popular view gained that it has played a positive role in stemming the existential threat to Hinduism.
Till now RSS claimed it was essentially a cultural organization, functioning with the objective of conserving and highlighting the traditional value system of Hinduism. At the same time, several RSS members started showing interest in political activities, thinking that attainment of political power is an essential requirement to protect Hinduism’s glorious past.
A decisive change took place when pledged members of RSS, AB Vajpayee, and later Narendra Modi, became Prime Ministers. Modi has stayed on to the job after convincingly winning in the national parliamentary election for second term, enjoying reasonable level of popularity.
However, it is crystal clear that BJP is the political arm of RSS, or RSS is the social arm of BJP, with foot soldiers of RSS actively campaigning for BJP in during elections. Both these entities are so closely intertwined that one cannot distinguish between RSS and BJP with regard to goals and objectives.
Earlier, an impression was sought to be created that RSS functions independently of BJP. But Modi has removed this “curtain” by laying the foundation stone of Ram Temple in Ayodhya at an official function.
Earlier, an impression was sought to be created that RSS functions independently of BJP. But Modi has removed this “curtain” by laying the foundation stone of Ram Temple in Ayodhya at an official function.
An impression was sought to be created that RSS functions independently of BJP. But Modi has removed this curtain by laying the foundation stone of Ram Temple
The ceremony took place in the presence of RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat. The intention was to establish the fact and conveying the view to the nation that BJP and RSS are the same with regard to objectives and long-term goals. The veil that BJP and RSS are different has now been erased by no less a person than the Prime Minster of India.
Unlike earlier Prime Ministers who were extremely reluctant to be seen in public eye as wedded to Hinduism, Modi has demonstrated his determination to be seen and understood as a Hindu with strong faith in the religion and its rituals.
In several other countries in the world it is common for the governments to be officially associated with a particular religion, as seen in several Islamic nations. There are also countries where Christianity is the official religion. This has not been so in India. India calls itself as a secular country.
While theoretically India continues to remain secular, with all religions enjoying similar status, and those belonging to minority status even getting special privileges, it is for the first time that an Indian Prime Minister asserted the predominant status of Hinduism in India.
While the “secularists” in India object to this approach and stand of Modi, one wonders if there anything ‘unsecular’ with regard to the approach of Modi, as the basic concept of secularism remains intact.
A Prime Minister declaring himself as Hindu and adopting Hindu religious practices and his party being associated with another organization (RSS) wedded to the spread of Hindu philosophy does not mean that secular philosophy of India has been given up.
There appears nothing inappropriate in declaring that BJP and RSS share the same values and they complement each other.
---
*Nandini Voice for the Deprived, Chennai
Unlike earlier Prime Ministers who were extremely reluctant to be seen in public eye as wedded to Hinduism, Modi has demonstrated his determination to be seen and understood as a Hindu with strong faith in the religion and its rituals.
In several other countries in the world it is common for the governments to be officially associated with a particular religion, as seen in several Islamic nations. There are also countries where Christianity is the official religion. This has not been so in India. India calls itself as a secular country.
While theoretically India continues to remain secular, with all religions enjoying similar status, and those belonging to minority status even getting special privileges, it is for the first time that an Indian Prime Minister asserted the predominant status of Hinduism in India.
While the “secularists” in India object to this approach and stand of Modi, one wonders if there anything ‘unsecular’ with regard to the approach of Modi, as the basic concept of secularism remains intact.
A Prime Minister declaring himself as Hindu and adopting Hindu religious practices and his party being associated with another organization (RSS) wedded to the spread of Hindu philosophy does not mean that secular philosophy of India has been given up.
There appears nothing inappropriate in declaring that BJP and RSS share the same values and they complement each other.
---
*Nandini Voice for the Deprived, Chennai
Refreshingly neutral analysis without making typical accusations of BJP and Hindus seen by other commentators. Others have been alarmists and making a mountain out of a mole hill. India is secular specifically because it has a Hindu ethos. They go hand in hand and the RSS Sangh parivar knows this. They however will call our organisations, religions and individuals who either take advantage of this or are trying to erode this.
ReplyDeleteThe problem Hindus have is that bulk of people educated in earlier generation in India were by schools fashioned in Christian worldview, which saw Paganism as bad and idea that pagans need to be salvaged. Hinduism, Buddhism are seen as much closer to Paganism than any Abrahmic faith. So while faults in Hinduism, Buddhism etc. were magnified, flaws of Abrahmic faiths were overlooked.
ReplyDeleteGood example is social mobility & caste system. Caste system blamed for discrimination and prevention of upward mobility in India. But they conveniently ignore the fact that in West also there was no upward social mobility, until the beginning of Industrial age. India is still a developing country. So Hindu society can be compared with Western society only after India reaches comparable economic status matching per capita income.
Other good example is slavery, rape etc. In Abrahmic traditions slavery is allowed and rape of slave girls were accepted. Read old testament, Koran etc., while it is not accepted in Hinduism. Nobody was sold in slave market in Hindu tradition. There were bonded people, who lost their freedom due to debt.
While Hindus were criticized for their flaws they were not given credit for higher ideals such as preaching to be in harmony with other creatures and nature.
What is needed is through re-evaluation of Hinduism, Buddhism in balanced manner and realize that Hinduism and India has much to offer to world.