Hindu Revival Essay, Research Paper
Hindu revivalism remains a growing force in India today. It is also a concern
among the millions of displaced Hindus scattered around the world. Its roots lie
in the belief that Hinduism is an endangered lifestyle. This notion is fuelled
by the political assertiveness of minority groups, efforts to convert Hindus to
other faiths, suspicions that the political authorities are sympathetic to
minority groups and the belief that foreign political and religious ideologies
are destroying the Hindu community. Every morning at sunrise, groups of men in
military-style uniforms gather together before saffron coloured flags, in all
parts of India, to participate in a common set of rituals, physical exercises
and lessons. For one hour each day, they are taught to think of themselves as a
family with a mission to transform Hindu society. (Andersen and Damle 1) They
are the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the largest and most influential
organization in India committed to Hindu revivalism. The RSS or National
Volunteer Organization, is perhaps the most interesting of any of India’s social
movements. The growth of the RSS provides a detailed illustration of India?s
changing face. The purpose of this paper is to provide the reader with an early
twentieth century view of an organization that emerged out of frustrations among
India?s Hindu revivalists. These revivalists were discontent with the work of
nationalists in politics, and determined to unify the Hindus of India against
the ?alien? threats within the nation. The origins of nationalist movements
in nineteenth century India can be traced to the expansion of Western, English
education. Those attracted to the new education came primarily from high caste
Hindu groups. Many of the proponents of social, political and religious reform
among Hindus were drawn from this English educated class. Until very late in the
nineteenth century, most politically articulate Indians were willing to
collaborate with the colonial administration. However, a shift from
collaboration to criticism began in the latter part of the nineteenth century.
Two broad movements emerged among Hindus seeking to define their national
identity: modernists and revivalists. The modernists adopted models of social
and political change based upon Western patterns; they appreciated many of the
Western philosophies and wanted India to follow suit. The revivalist view was
based on returning to a Hindu antiquity that was thought to be superior for
governing India?a ?Hindu? nation. Many felt that this desire to recreate
the age of Hindu grandeur was also a result of English education; ideas of
patriotism and nationalism crept into these peoples way of thought. It was the
English study of the Indian way of life that added to the revivalist movement.
Revivalism included those who wanted to preserve the traditional social order as
well as those who sought to reform Hindu society as a way of strengthening Hindu
solidarity. The RSS traces its roots to the revivalist feelings that were
present at that time. The Hindu revivalists sought to recover fundamental truths
about their people. They argued that the loss of national consciousness had
created conditions that facilitated British domination of the land. By appealing
to an idealized past, the revivalists reminded the Hindu public of the suffering
and degradation experienced under British rule. The call for independence was a
logical next-step, for the degraded present could only be overcome by
eliminating the foreign intruders who had supposedly disrupted the original
blissful society. Muslim rulers and the British were identified as sources of
that disruption and many revivalist spokesmen sought to place limits on their
political power and on their cultural influence. The proposed changes in Hindu
society were justified by the proposition that the changes were not new at all,
but were in fact a revival of older, purer forms of Hindu culture that had
degenerated during foreign rule. Opposition to British rule increased among both
the moderates and the more extremists, as the contradictions between colonial
rule and new aspirations became obvious. Criticism of India?s colonial status
was supported by observation of British attitudes. The British viewed Indians
and Indian culture as inferior. Educated Indians were considerably upset when
the British began to characterize them as feminine, cowardly and
unrepresentative of the native culture. The racial arrogance often expressed by
European officials, businessmen and missionaries, made a substantial
contribution to the nationalist sentiment. Constitutional reforms that offered
increased Indian participation in the legislative bodies and bureaucracy did not
match expectations. The Western educated Indians believed that they should enjoy
the same civil liberties as the English. With the development of new techniques
of agitation, the government undermined popular trust by enforcing regulations
that further diminished civil liberties. The claims that British economic
policies caused a drain of wealth from India, further enforced the view that the
British were fundamentally unconcerned with the country?s well being.
(Andersen and Damle 30) Developments in the late nineteenth century created
conditions conducive to the expansion of revivalism. Nationalism was beginning
to assert itself. The revivalist message, based on traditional Hindu concepts
regarding society, was appealing to many Indian Hindus. In pre-independent
India, the premier nationalist organization was the Indian National Congress, an
umbrella organization that accommodated a variety of interests including those
of the revivalists. However, the Congress was not entirely successful in
adequately satisfying all groups. Many Muslim leaders felt that Westernized
Hindu elite, who controlled the Congress, did not adequately respond to Muslim
interests. The same sentiments were shared by Hindu revivalist leaders regarding
the Hindu community. The founder of the RSS doubted whether the Congress, which
included Muslims, could bring about the desired unity of the Hindu community. As
the Hindu and Muslim leaders within these communities continued to feel unfairly
represented, they turned to forming other political organizations claiming to
represent their respective groups. It would be appropriate to note that there
was no cohesive community, either Hindu or Muslim, in India that was united.
These communities were divided by many barriers, and developed in each region
differently, both politically and socially. What these organizations did
represent was a certain aspect of their respective communities that was very
defensive in nature. The RSS was established in 1925 as a kind of educational
body whose objective was to train a group of Hindu men who would work together
to unite the Hindu community, so that India could once again become an
independent country. The RSS emerged during a wave of Hindu-Muslim riots that
had swept across India at the time. The RSS viewed communal rioting as a symptom
of the weakness and division within the Hindu community, and argued that
independence could be achieved only after the splintered Hindu community,
divided by caste, religion, language, and sect, united. (Andersen and Damle 32)
The formation of the RSS can be attributed to the defensive nature of the Hindu
community at the time. The deterioration of Hindu-Muslim relations and the
continual frustration with the Indian National Congress led to the rise of the
RSS. During India?s pre-independence period, the two leaders of the RSS, its
founder Keshav Baliram Hedgewar and Madhav Sadashiv Golwalker, felt that a
fundamental change in social attitudes was a necessity before any changes
occurred in the nation. The creation of a properly trained force of nationalists
would be the first step in altering such attitudes. Most revivalists argued that
Gandhi?s efforts in the early 1920s to strengthen Hindu-Muslim bonds by lining
up the Congress organization behind the Muslim protest against the dismemberment
of the Turkish Empire encouraged Muslim separatism. When he launched his first
major non-cooperation movement in India on August 1, 1920, one of the issues was
the British unwillingness to satisfy Muslims on the Turkish issue. Gandhi called
for a complete boycott of government institutions, while simultaneously
including the doctrine of ahimsa as an integral part of the movement. A
considerable number of Congress members, including many revivalists, opposed
both the objectives and tactics of the boycott. Widespread communal rioting
followed the apparent failure of Gandhi?s non-cooperation movement. (Malkani
5) Hindu revivalists were particularly alarmed by the widespread communal
rioting which took place on the Malabar coast of southwestern India during
August 1921. Events there, emphasized the revivalist concern about the dangers
facing the Hindus of the subcontinent. Muslim resentment against British rule in
the Malabar area, was coupled with anti-Hindu sentiment, and the rioting grew to
such proportions that the civil administration was unable to contain the
violence in many places. This uprising confirmed the fears of many Hindus that
the violence on the Malabar coast was a covert attempt to enhance the political
influence of Muslims at the expense of the Hindu community. It was difficult for
many to conceive how a country comprised of 85% Hindus could be unable to defend
themselves in that situation. Many Hindus feared that similar outbreaks would
occur elsewhere, and these apprehensions fuelled revivalist sentiments. The
challenge from Islam in the early 1920s was viewed by many Hindus as a threat to
their self-esteem. The proliferation of Hindu sabhas, and other ?defensive?
Hindu associations, were reactions to the growing communal violence, the
increasing political articulation of Muslims, the cultural ?Islamization? of
the Muslim community, and the failure to achieve independence. Thus, this set
the stage for the emergence of the RSS within the historical setting of modern
India. The RSS?s discipline and ideological framework were shaped by Dr.
Keshav Baliram Hedgewar, a medical doctor who had abandoned a potentially
lucrative practice to participate in the struggle against colonialism. As a
youth, Hedgewar was keenly interested in history and politics. During the early
1920s, Hedgewar became deeply engaged in Congress Party activities. At the 1920
annual Congress session in Nagpur, Gandhi had promised freedom within the year
through peaceful non-cooperation. Many including Hedgewar, decided to give the
experiment, in non-violent disobedience, a chance to prove its effectiveness.
The year 1921 ended without the promised swaraj. Gandhi called off the much
heralded non-cooperation campaign in early 1922, because a mob had killed a
number of policemen in the United Provinces. Hedgewar felt Gandhi had made a
serious tactical mistake. Hedgewar became increasingly disenchanted with Gandhi
and politics. (Malkani 10) The outbreak of communal rioting in 1923 caused
Hedgewar to question the previously attempted methods used to rid India of
colonial rule. The riots in his view, were the signs of a deeper social
problem?disunity among Hindus?that would have to be addressed if India were
to become independent. During this period of escalating Hindu-Muslim animosity,
Hedgewar began to develop the intellectual foundations of the RSS. A major
influence on his thinking was Vinayak Damodar Sarvarkar?s Hindutva, which
advances the thesis that the Hindus are a nation. While Sarvarkar?s work may
have provided Hedgewar with an intellectual justification for the concept of a
Hindu nation that embraced all the peoples of the subcontinent, it did not give
him a method for uniting the Hindu community. From his youth, Hedgewar searched
for a reason to explain India?s inability to ward off foreign domination. He
was disturbed that a small group of colonial administers could rule a vast
country like India with such ease. Hedgewar felt that much of India?s ancient
territory, referring to Tibet and Afghanistan, had been lost due to a lack of
Hindu unity. He believed that independence and national revitalization could be
achieved only when the root cause of India?s weakness was discovered. Some
time between 1924 and 1925, Hedgewar satisfied himself that he had discovered
the cause; the fundamental problem was psychological and what was required was
an inner transformation to rekindle a sense of national consciousness and social
cohesion. Once having created a regiment of persons committed to the national
reconstruction, he believed there would be little difficulty in sustaining a
movement of revitalization, which of course would include independence as one of
its objectives. In its inception, the RSS had two basic aims: (1.) to unite and
train Hindus to face the enemy, any alien party that was attempting to subjugate
Hinduism; and (2.) to radicalize the Hindus to hasten the British withdrawal
from India. It was founded on the auspicious day of the Hindu festival Dusherah.
The first recruits were largely Brahmin, although all Hindus were encouraged to
join. Gymnasiums or Akharas, associated with the Kshatriya life style, proved to
be the most successful grounds for finding recruits. (Jayaprasad 58) These
trained recruits would go on to be the future leaders of the country, and keep
with them the teachings and discipline of the RSS. They would also keep a close
network with the organization. The RSS argued that their strengths lay in their
ability to develop close bonds among their members and to sustain links when
members moved on or joined various RSS affiliate groups. In the communal riots
of September 1927 in Nagpur, RSS took steps which captured the attention of
<
squads to protect various Hindu neighbourhoods. This generated widespread
publicity and captured the attention of Hindus everywhere. The paramilitary
nature of the RSS soon convinced the Central Provincial government that the RSS
could develop into a dangerous revolutionary group. It soon became the most
successful of a class of associations, which specialized in recruiting young men
and adolescents into uniformed militia bands called Shakhas. The Shakha was the
first stage of involvement, where boys would work and train together and develop
a camaraderie. Those that excelled were moved up into the full-time rank of the
organization?an organization that was extremely effective in managing and
mobilizing many people. These Swayamsevaks belonging to the ?Sangh
Brotherhood? were dedicated to the improvement of Hindu society, culture,
religion, and to the eventual creation of a Hindu Rashtra or Hindu nation.
Shakha technique was evolved by Dr. Hedgewar to achieve these aims. It offered a
unifying experience, stressing commitment and loyalty to the ideologies of the
RSS. The uniqueness of the technique lay in the active participation on national
affairs by each and every member. The physical, intellectual and mental training
was designed to prepare all sections of society for effectively involving
themselves in nation building (i.e. a grass roots philosophy). The membership
was free to all castes of Hindus as equal participants, without prejudice. The
RSS believed in the equality of all castes. They did not accept the practice of
untouchability. All members must participate in common meals, a controversial
practice at the time, but one that was used by many reformers such as the Arya
Samaj, Swami Vivekananda, and Gandhi. All followers had to conform to the
behavioural standards of the RSS, which appeared to be a mix of Brahmin and
Kshatriya standards. Prior to his death on June 21, 1940, Dr. Hedgewar chose the
RSS general secretary at the time, Golwalker, to succeed him as leader. Under
the new leadership, the RSS continued to expand rapidly during World War II.
With the pressing for an independent Muslim state by the Muslim League, the
period between 1945 to 1948 saw sharp increases in membership within the RSS,
including lower caste Hindus in areas that are now Pakistan, Punjab and Delhi.
RSS membership had previously been largely, upper caste Hindu?s in Maharastra.
The RSS was beginning to attract, and continues to attract, low income Hindus
and small shopkeepers, who were concerned with their opportunities in a
government that favoured the high class or minorities. The RSS always kept a
certain mystery and secrecy of their membership and their future plans. It was
always under some form of scrutiny or ban from the political authorities. Under
the leadership of Hedgewar, the RSS remained a cultural and social organization
committed to the advancement of the Hindu people. Although, the RSS trained its
disciples to be aggressive and protective of their culture, Hedgewar insisted
that they not get confrontational or purposely attack other communities.
Hedgewar also insisted that the RSS remain out of politics totally. Members were
allowed to join politics on their own, but the organization was to remain
completely apolitical. Hedgewar felt that politics was a ?dirty? business
and he was more concerned with training the youth, which would have a domino
effect on later politics in India. His successor, Golwalker, respected his
wishes and kept the RSS out of politics. However, with Golwalker the RSS began
to receive an anti-Muslim sentiment directly from the leader. The RSS membership
always seemed to have contempt for the Muslims as well as the British, but it
was now more evident in the writings of their leader. In his book, We or Our
Nationhood Defined, Golwalker made claims of a Hindustan that was to be the land
of the Hindus where they could practice their all-prevailing religious
traditions without contamination from European or Muslim culture. ?Any
non-Hindus in India must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion,
must entertain no idea but those of glorificationof the Hindu race and culture,
and could only stay in the country wholly subordinated to the Hindu nation,
claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential
treatment.? (Brown 347) With the insurgence of new blood into the RSS from its
many student affiliate groups, the RSS began to grow and expand. The RSS
membership began to divide on its future objectives and goals. The
traditionalist of the Sangh wanted to concentrate on character building within
the Shakha and keep out of the country’s politics. The new members of the Sangh,
saw the RSS as a growing force on the subcontinent and wanted to use the
influence in a more aggressive and political way. In the end, the traditionalist
of the RSS won and the RSS stayed out of the pre-independence politics of India.
The RSS came under harsh criticism for this move, as many supporters felt that
the RSS was the only organized and influential group that could have prevented
partition. Lord Mountbatten, the last British Viceroy, announced the partition
of the Indian subcontinent on a communal basis on June 3, 1947, and termination
of colonial rule on August 15, 1947. The British created a boundary force to
keep law and order during partition but dissolved it in September 1947. Millions
of Hindus and Sikhs were left unprotected in West Punjab, and the same for
Muslims in East Punjab. Violence was everywhere as early as June 1947 and
reached its peak in September 1947. It only subsided when the minority
communities of West Pakistan (formerly West Punjab) fled to India. Golwalker had
set an example of fearlessness by moving through riot torn areas consoling
refugees in their flight to India. The East Punjab government provided
assistance, including the issuance of weapons to the RSS, while they were
organizing rescue squads to bring refugees to India. Armed Swayamsevaks were
assigned to guard Hindu and Sikh homes. They even retaliated against Muslims in
Pakistan when danger was imminent. Their rescue efforts helped bolster
confidence and pride among the demoralized Hindus and Sikhs of the Punjab area.
The growing popularity and activism of the RSS proved it an influential force to
be reckoned with. (Andersen and Damle 52) The RSS ?s humanitarian efforts
during the partition had won it respect from the people of the newly established
India. However, the government was wary that the RSS posed a political threat to
the stability of the country. Many Muslim leaders in India were growing fearful
of the anti-Muslim sentiment that the RSS members characterized. The RSS did
realize that it had to take a more active role in the political activities of
India. During the Kashmir war, when Pakistan sent in armed raiders, the Indian
Armed forces supplied arms to the RSS volunteers. These Swayamsevaks fought the
enemy on the side of the Indian soldiers. The RSS kept the supply lines moving
and carried arms and ammunition for the soldiers through hazardous areas.
(Andersen and Damle 53) In the closing months of 1947, senior political figures
became increasingly outspoken about the danger of the RSS becoming an
independent political force. The national Herald of Lucknow expressed this fear
in editorials published. It compared the RSS with the paramilitary form of the
German Nazi party. The RSS had been accused of being a secret society in that
what they said or showed was mostly meant to hide the reality. The daily
activities of the RSS were said to be a means of organizing Hindu society and
promoting Hindu culture. To be political is no crime, and in a democracy every
individual and association has the right to act politically. However, the RSS
has been accused of being an organization that tries to camouflage its
characters and objectives, thus giving many, every reason to be suspicious of
its on goings. Many felt that the RSS had all the characteristics of a fascist
organization. (Goyal 14) Many senior RSS figures maintained a hesitant attitude
regarding party politics in Independent India. Many felt that this was a corrupt
system and the RSS should have no involvement. Nevertheless, the more activist
youths were demanding some RSS involvement in politics. The main objective was
to gain political protection as the RSS was banned after the assassination of
Mahatma Gandhi; an event many people held the RSS responsible for. The RSS was
reinstated only after presenting a new constitution to the government which
stated that it was a non-political, cultural organization and would preach
religious tolerance. (Brown 348) But by this time contempt for the RSS had risen
to the most top level of government?Prime Minister Jawarhalal Nehru. Nehru and
his successors would all keep a watchful eye on the RSS with continuous
scrutinizing and banning of many of its activities. The RSS maintained a strong
relation and presence with student groups. These groups were a pool for new
membership for the Sangh. The RSS wanted to expand its base and get involved
with the masses of India. It was very successful in aligning itself with several
labour unions and agricultural unions. The RSS kept away from the large
capitalistic businesses. Even though the RSS won the support of these unions,
the ideology of the organization never appealed to the common peasant in India.
The Hindu Mahasabha, the Arya Samaj and the RSS were the most prominent
organizations dedicated to Hindu revivalism. There was a lot of cross membership
between these groups. However, the RSS steered away from the political Hindu
Mahasabha, as much of the public also considered this group responsible for
Gandhi?s death. The Mahasabha became insignificant in Indian politics. The RSS
gave its support to the new Jana Sangh, the predecessor of the Bhartiya Janata
Party (BJP). It was time that the RSS expand its affiliation with other groups;
it was now a reality if the organization was to improve the country it had to be
involved somewhat in politics. Of the religious organizations, the Arya Samaj in
Northern India was a close ally of the RSS. The Arya Samaj predates the RSS in
its Hindu revivalism movement. They often supported the RSS or its affiliates,
but also kept themselves separate. Other religious organizations came directly
from the RSS family tree, the most prominent of these is the Vishwal Hindu
Parishad (VHP). The VHP was seen as the more extreme religious arm of the RSS,
just as the Jana Sangh (later the BJP) had been seen as the political arm of the
RSS. Many criticize the VHP as an organization that takes on more extreme
projects on behalf of the RSS, such as the destruction of the Babri mosque in
Ayodhya, December 6, 1992, allowing the RSS to maintain its claim to being
purely a cultural organization. The VHP has also grown to become a large
organization and is at present comparable to the RSS in strength, numbers and
ideals of higher morals. There was lots of cross membership within the different
organizations. The RSS lent its prominent members to these groups to help serve
or organize projects and campaigns. The RSS?s support of the VHP allowed its
members to participate in more activist projects concerning Hindu revivalism.
Its support of the Jana Sangh and the BJP also allowed its members to get
involved on the Indian political scene in a very large way. Although these
organizations?the RSS, VHP, BJP, Arya Samaj, Hindu Mahasabha and
others?differ in their ideologies or methods, they all seem to be connected by
a strong network and a commitment to Hindu revivalism. In recent years, these
groups have received a strong nod of popular support and political importance.
India?s current government will most likely be a coalition formed around the
BJP. The new millenium will be an interesting and trying time for the 1 billion
plus of India. Being the major exponent in spreading Hindu nationalism, the RSS
had come under much attack for their actions, policies and supposed hidden
agendas. They have always maintained themselves as a cultural organization,
despite other allegations. One cannot help but sympathize with them for the
concept they uphold based on valid fears when one takes a look at Indian history
and politics. The RSS have been credited for much humanitarian efforts during
partition and after, but they have also been a factor in the rising communal
feelings in India. Albeit the RSS is considered by many as a secret
organization, its claims of rather being a silent organization still remains
with its ultimate goal of seeing India realizing Hind Swaraj. The only thing the
RSS must remember is that they are not the only nationals of India. In a
democratic state such as India all voices must be heard. Mother India has many
other children, whether they are Hindu, Sikh, Christian or Muslim.
Andersen, Walter K., Damle, Shridhar D. The Brotherhood in Saffron: The
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Hindu Revivalism. Colorado: Westview Press,
1987. Brass, Paul R. The Politics of India Since Independence. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1994. Brown, Judith M. Modern India: The Origins of
an Asian Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Goyal, D. R.
Seminar: Secret Societies?RSS. New Delhi: Romesh Thapur, 1972. Jayaprasad, K.
RSS and Hindu Nationalism. New Delhi: Deep and Deep Publications, 1991. Malkani,
K. R. The RSS Story. New Delhi: Impex India, 1980. South Asia: After Ayodhya:
BJP and the Indian Political System. Nedlands: University of Western Australia
Press for the South Asian Studies Association, 1994. Spitz, Douglas. The RSS and
Hindu Militancy in the 1980’s. Internet Article: http://www.monm.edu/academic/Classics/Speel_Festschrift/spitz.htm