OPINION | Why RSS’ articulation of ‘Being Hindu’ and ‘Hindutva’ is a much-needed intervention

“Being Hindu” is associated far more with spirituality than with politics or geography.

(RSSFACTS is a column that demystifies the functioning, organisational structure and ideology of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.)

During a time when public discourse is increasingly saturated with shorthand narratives about Bharat’s culture and civilisational values, RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat’s articulation of “Being Hindu” and “Hindutva” is a much-needed intervention to reset the debate in the right direction.
In several recent speeches, the RSS Sarsanghchalak has reiterated the organisation’s consistent position that anyone who considers Bharat to be his or her motherland is a Hindu, and that this has nothing to do with one’s way of worship. Bhagwat spoke about this at length during his interaction in Bengaluru on 8–9 November and again while addressing a gathering in Guwahati.

Who is a Hindu?

To understand the RSS’ stand on this issue, one needs to go back well before 1925, when the organisation was founded. There is a general misconception that “Hindutva”, “Hinduness”, or “Hindu nationalism” is a recent phenomenon, but a deeper look into the past provides the right perspective.
There have been many definitions of the term “Hindu”, but the most commonly accepted one is that it denoted a civilisation carrying certain cultural values embedded in the concept of “Dharma”. There is no true equivalent in English for “Dharma”; the closest is perhaps “righteousness”. Much misunderstanding about “Hindu Dharma” arises from the misinterpretation of “Dharma” as “religion”.

“Dharma”, a Sanskrit term, implies a way of life or “that which sustains”, whereas “religion” denotes a way of worship. In practice, Dharma comprises eternal, universal laws and the ever-changing socio-economic order interpreted in their light. Perceived oneness amid diversity (Avibhaktam Vibhakteshu) has been the eternal message of Sanatana Dharma or Hindu Dharma.

In the early 20th century, under British colonial influence, “religion” was often used interchangeably with “Dharma”. Many thinkers—including Swami Vivekananda—used the term “Hinduism” in English writings, though the suffix “-ism” denotes dogma, such as in “capitalism” or “socialism”. Thus, it implies a rigid ideological framework, which Hindu Dharma is not.

As a result, many Indian philosophers and ideologues of the 19th and 20th centuries used these terms interchangeably due to the constraints of writing within a colonial linguistic framework.

This is evident in the works of Sri Aurobindo, who initially referred to the “Hindu religion” in his famous Uttarpara speech, but later elaborated on Hindu “Dharma”. Other stalwarts such as Dr S. Radhakrishnan and Radha Kumud Mookerji followed the same pattern.

Therefore, as we interpret their writings today, the word “religion”, when used by these philosophers, may be read as “Dharma”, which was their true intent. The terms “Sanatan Dharma”, “Hinduism”, “Hindu religion”, and “Hindu Dharma” were often used interchangeably, but the essence of the civilisation is best conveyed by “Hindu Dharma” or “Sanatan Dharma”.

Readers may therefore interpret the word “religion” in older quotations as “Dharma”.

In his celebrated speech at Uttarpara Jaikrishna Library on 30 May 1909, Sri Aurobindo said:“What is the Hindu religion? What is this religion which we call Sanatan, eternal? It is the Hindu religion only because the Hindu nation has kept it, because in this Peninsula it grew up in the seclusion of the sea and the Himalayas. But it is not circumscribed by the confines of a single country; it does not belong peculiarly and for ever to a bounded part of the world…
That which we call the Hindu religion is really the eternal religion, because it is the universal religion which embraces all others…
It is the one religion which impresses on mankind the closeness of God to us…
It is the one religion which does not separate life in any smallest detail from religion, which knows what immortality is and has utterly removed from us the reality of death.”

Conclusion

“Being Hindu” does not mean being religious. One can be an atheist and still be a staunch Hindu. “Being Hindu” is associated far more with spirituality than with politics or geography. That has been our legacy since the Rig Veda, and that is what the RSS appears to be carrying forward.

Earlier RSSFACTS columns can be read here.

(Arun Anand has authored two books on the RSS. His X handle is @ArunAnandLive.)

Views are personal, and do not represent the stand of this publication.