Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review P-ISSN 2708-6453

June 2019, Vol. 3, No. 1 [01-10] O-ISSN 2708-6461

RESEARCH PAPER
Hindutva: Impacts on Indian Muslim Community

Iqra Jathol 1 Muhammad Munib Khalid 2 Dr. Imran Ashraf 3

1. Centre for South Asia Studies University of the Punjab Lahore Pakistan
2. Lecturer, Minhaj University, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan
3. Assistant Professor, Department International Relations, NDU, Islamabad, Pakistan
DOI http://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2019(3-I)2.1
PAPER INFO ABSTRACT
Received: The study aims to explore the deep rooted Hindutva ideology
January 12, 2019 which cannot be removed from Indian society Hindutva has
Accepted: always been part of Indian civilization; however, this aspect
June 15, 2018
developed from the mid-19th century, especially in the 20th
Online:
century, and in many ways clearly expresses violence and
June 30, 2019
Keywords: hatred. The Indo-Pakistani rivalry is a phenomenon that is well
understood academically and politically both locally and abroad.
Foreign Policy,
Hindutva,
What is less understood is the implications of the Hindutva
India. brand on the relationship between the two nuclear-armed rivals
Nationalism, and Muslims in India, already overcome by complications?
Secular Hindu leaders and national movements violently repeated by
Corresponding Savalkar and Hindu Mahasaba in the 1930s. The findings
Author: recommend, Hindutva nationalism continues to grow without
iqrajathol@gma moderation or control. This not only affects the interior, but
il.com threatens India's foreign policy and secular image
Introduction

Pakistan “The term hindutvais central to their claims that religion is the
defining characteristic of the Indian nation. V.D. Savarkar, leader of the Hindu
Mahasabha, the most important Hindu nationalist party before independence,
advanced the term hindutva, which equates religious and national identities.
According to this Hindu rashtra, or ‘Hindu nation’ theory, Indian culture has its
roots in the Hindu past. ‘India is God’s chosen land; it’s the abode of Hindus.
Hence, the ethical and spiritual values of all Indians who have ancestral roots in
India derive from the Hindu culture. In essence all Indians are Hindus. Irrespective
of their mode of worship, Christians and Muslims are culturally Hindus. Hindu
revivalists seek to incorporate Indians of various faiths into Hinduism” (Savarkar,
1969).

In modern times, it is difficult to ignore the role of religion in modern

society, and most of the violence that occur and seem to have a certain religious
 Hindutva: Impacts on Indian Muslim Community

depth, implicitly or explicitly. This means that the majority of the states of religious
violence and the Indian society are not free from religious extremism. So
fundamentalism and religious extremism is not a new phenomenon in India and
that political goal and the state is responsible for separating the company into
sectarian lines, Hinduism has many faces connected with fundamentalism.
(Hassan, 2008) The current situation in India shows that Hindus are
fundamentalists and the development of fundamentalist ideologies. Thus, the
forces of Hindutva and the main Hindu parties, including Shuseena, consistently
undermine the spirit of secularism in India. In this regard, the BharatiyaJanata
Party (BJP) and specific Narandra Modi regime proved that Hindu
fundamentalists have openly encouraged the Hindu right to violence and declare
Hindu rule. They gave the right hand of Hindu extremist parties "Indianization"
based on anti-Muslim rhetoric. In this way, Christians, Dalits and other lower
castes are also victims of crime caste.(Hindutva, BharatiyaJanata Party) (BJP)

Historical background of Hindutva Ideology

In the state of India, like any other nation-state, nationalism is at the core a
nation requires nationalism, without it the nation cannot exist. There are many
forms of nationalism that can be classified as religious, ethnic, cultural and social,
and all these represent the respective inclination of the people in a state. The
historic basis of this nationalist ideology can be traced back to centuries. However,
in contemporary India the ethnic, cultural and religious form of nationalism are
incorporated into the political ideology. Hindutva nationalism, which is used as an
umbrella term. This political ideology is associated with the conservatives, namely
the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The promotion of this as a social and political
ideology is the self-proclaimed responsibility of the Rashtriya SwayamsevakSangh
(RSS). The process of ‘Saffronisation’ as is referred to, is the retelling of Indian
nationalist stories, by completely sidelining the contribution of other religions or
races living within India. By practicing cultural nationalism to this extent the most
damage has been done to the secular policies adopted by the predecessors. This
conservative party still shows resentment towards achievements like the Mandal
Commission Report that provides opportunities to the lower classes and scheduled
tribes that are 400 in India.

Indian nationalism is based on primordialism theory that an ideology of

nationalism that is based on ancestral roots and religious bases. Indian nationalism
identifies “India as an ever-ever land – emerging from an ancient civilization,
united by a shared history, sustained by pluralist democracy” (Tharoor, 2012).
However, it is important to note that Hindu nationalism has greatly hampered the
pursuit of social pluralism and religious pluralism, because its activities have not
been thwarted by the state structures. (Subramanian, 1999).

Historically, religious violence in India is not a new law because Hinduism

is not an intellectual or philosophical concept rather than a rigid set of beliefs. The
main Hindu law parties have generally used religion as an instrument of power
over other religions, including the Muslims and other minorities. In this regard,
2
Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review (PLHR) June, 2019 Volume 3, Issue 1

there are indications that Hindu seems a seemingly impossible situation

fundamentalists, in which the possibility of a unified principle of direction seems
to have been made inaccessible. If they are not willing to integrate, they would be
in India(Rao, &Roover, 2013).

India has a carefully knitted constitution that caters to the needs of the
population by providing them rights based on a multi-level federalism modeled on
ethnic, linguistic and religious affiliations especially after the amendments. This
presents a very rosy picture of external political orientation of India towards the
international community. The internal political dynamics under the current fascist
leadership reveals the gloomy picture of conservative Hindutva India as it tries to
impose an aggressive cultural nationalism on the minorities. Hindu nationalism
has swept the Indian politics off its feet. The insistence on calling every Indian, a
Hindu man or woman, attacks on mosques and churches, the killings of Muslims
on sacrificing cows, oxen and buffaloes by Hindutva forces unveil the true face of
intolerant India. (Robinson,1999)

Hindutva Ideology and its impact on Muslim Society

The Indian society is fragmented between Hindutva practitioners and the

ones advocating a secular atmosphere. The conservative majority rules India today
and unfortunately they are the ones who breed hate politics. The Muslims that are
13.4 percent of the population of India, BJP is the torch bearer of the Hindutva
ideology. It is worth noting that the relations of Hindus and Muslims have not
been peaceful even in the post-independence era, with incidents like the Babri
Mosque and the Gujrat riots being the most prominent ones. As BJP’s candidate,
Prime Minister NarendraModi came to power, it was expected that communal
riots would become a norm between Hindu and Muslims, and such has been the
case (Varshney, 2014). With incidents like force feeding a Muslim in Ramadan and
the staged conversion of 57 Muslims in Agra which was labeled as the
“homecoming” are many of such examples. The aims of BJP are the prevention of
globalization by becoming a dominant force in India and making India a global
economic power by the means of a Swadeshi approach as pointed out by Rajnath
Singh in the BJPs’ National Executive meeting in 2009.

Following the change in behavior in India with the rise of the

BharatiyaJanata Party (BJP) and its slogans from Hindutva, the discourse against
Muslims in India has deteriorated significantly. Prime Minister Modi's government
came to power in 2014, and in the next four years, law enforcement and some of
the most worrying crimes against Muslims and other minorities that have tackled
community issues have been enforced. As a result, violence and discrimination
have increased, as has the rhetoric of right-wing Hindu organizations, which are
somehow supported by leading BJP politicians. This article examines and analyzes
the current state of the Muslim minority based on current sources, including
human rights reports from international organizations, which claim that Hindutva
forces and BJP ideological support have promoted and integrated extremist
3
 Hindutva: Impacts on Indian Muslim Community

mindsets into society. This means that even apparently Congress political actors
have resorted to Hindu rule in an environment in which history is rewritten and
minorities in India are considered foreign. (Reddy, &Zavos, 2009)

Nehru’s Secular Vision

The precipitous rise of Hindu nationalism and the communalization of

Indian politics can be explained in large measure by the changing attitude of state
leaders toward the secular ideals of the Nehru period. The Indian government, led
by its first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, promoted a secular vision of
modernity. The government’s support for secular norms and identities was
premised on a belief that an in elusive understanding of the nation was necessary
for integrating India’s diverse ethnic and religious groups into a common political
framework. A secular vision of nationalism was thus institutionalized in India’s
first constitution. This commitment to a nonsectarian social order, however, was
not universally shared. There were those who believed that national identity was
more properly defined in religious terms. This reflected the desire among Hindu
nationalists to create a Hindu Rashtra(a Hindu dominated political order or Hindu
state) and to place control of state power exclusively in the hands of the Hindu
majority. (Sullivan, 2011).Nehru and his supporters were concerned about the
conflict and division that would result from marginalizing minority populations.
Particularly in the aftermath of Partition, Pakistan from India in 1947, the
politicization of religion was discouraged, particularly any form that might fan the
flames of sectarian violence.(Esposito, 1984).“In the first fifteen years, led to
attempts to develop village economies, and increased production of food and
industry. Indeed, by 1966, India was the seventh most industrially advanced
nation in the world and by 1989”(Clothey, 2007).

The early Congress Party leadership subsequently campaigned against

efforts to institutionalize preferential status for the majority population or
otherwise to link civil status to religious identity. Unlike Nehru, Indira Gandhi and
her son, Rajiv Nehru’s daughter and grandsonappealed to the religious sentiments
of the majority population and portrayed the Congress Party as the one true and
able defender of the Hindu nation.(Gyanendra, 1996)

The religious politics of the Indira and Rajiv Gandhi era, in short, was part
of a new strategy to mobilize support along communal, instead of class, lines.
Although this majoritarian strategy worked for the Congress Party in the short
term most spectacularly in the party’s 1984 electoral landslide it had dire
consequences in later years. By overturning the Nehruvian consensus, the
Congress leaders helped to dissemble the secular norms that had governed Indian
public life for most of the post-Independence era. This contributed greatly to the
communalization of local governments and police forces and to an increase in
communal violence. It also cost Indira her life and the Congress Party its
dominance. By invoking the themes of Hindu communalism, the Congress Party
leaders gave the organizations associated with this ideology a credibility that they
had historically lacked. Congress thus helped to normalize what was previously
4
Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review (PLHR) June, 2019 Volume 3, Issue 1

seen as a sectarian and discredited ideology and paved the way for the rise of the
BJP(Hasan, 2000 & (Deol, 2003).

Roots of India’s Religious Politics

The roots of India’s religious politics go back to the religious reform

movements of the late nineteenth century. As in the Middle East, there was a
conscious effort among colonized populations to reevaluate their religious
traditions as part of a broader effort to understand and respond to British colonial
rule. This reevaluation entailed a variety of responses. For some, the central issues
were the cultural stagnation of the region and the need to adapt religious tradition.
For these liberal and “modernist” reformers, religion was dominated by
superstition and legitimized a dysfunctional social order characterized by caste
and gender discrimination. What was required, then, was to retain the positive
elements of religion while shedding the accretions that had come to distort it.
(Bipan, 1988)however, were less concerned about reconciling religion with
Enlightenment norms than they were with preserving the centrality of religion in
social life. From this perspective, religion was central to cultural identity and was
worth preserving in whatever form. Ironically, both groups perceived religious
reform (and revival) as a necessary means of revitalizing the political community
and confronting the West.

Religious Nationalism

The internal political dynamics under the current fascist leadership reveals
the gloomy picture of conservative Hindutva India as it tries to impose an
aggressive cultural nationalism on the minorities. Hindu nationalism has swept the
Indian politics off its feet. The insistence on calling every Indian, a Hindu man or
woman, attacks on mosques and churches, the killings of Muslims on sacrificing
cows, oxen and buffaloes by Hindutva forces unveil the true face of intolerant
India. The Indian society is fragmented between Hindutva practitioners and the
ones advocating a secular atmosphere. The conservative majority rules India today
and unfortunately they are the ones who breed hate politics

The efforts to organize and reform the various communities began in the
late nineteenth century, but it was only in the 1920s that extreme forms of religious
communalism became entrenched in Indian politics. Differences of caste, class,
region, and language divided followers of both Islam and Hinduism and made it
difficult to regard these groups as genuine communities with shared interests.
Moreover, while many Muslims and Hindus opposed British rule in India, others
supported it. The colonial rulers played on these differences and frequently allied
with landowning elites, tax collectors (the zamindars), princes, and minority leaders
to undermine the Indian National Congress. The British government also
encouraged the communalization of Indian society as a means of maintaining its
rule. Through such “divide and rule” policies, the British empowered communalist
organizations at the expense of liberal reformers (Jaffrelot,1999).
5
 Hindutva: Impacts on Indian Muslim Community

The defining features of the early RSS were its military organization, its
anti-Muslim sentiments, and the asceticism of its followers. It also sought to
inculcate a martial Hindu spirit among its youth cadres. Although the RSS was
more of a social movement than a political party, it shared with the leaders of the
Mahasabha a communalist vision of national identity. This was evident in
Golwalkar’s 1939 book, we, or Our Nationhood Defined. Although both the RSS and
the Mahasabha ostensibly appealed to tradition, their ideas were consistent with
the right-wing politics of the 1930s.The conservative elite (both Muslim and
Hindu) had historically been reluctant to engage in mass-based politics, since such
movements were typically associated with leftwing radicalism. In the 1930s,
however, the nationalist movements in Germany, Italy, and Spain provided a
model of right-wing populism that both Hindu and Muslim communalists
emulated. This led Nehru to conclude that the Hindu nationalists represented “an
Indian version of fascism (Savarkar, 1969).

Nehru’s Secularism and Muslim Minorities

Primary obstacle to Nehru’s secular vision, however, was the continuing

support for communal preference associated with organizations such as the RSS
and the Mahasabha. For these groups, constructing an organic Hindu nationalism
and establishing a Hindu state were seen as prerequisites for the self-actualization
of the community.

Although the priority given to economic development reflected Nehru’s

desire to create a more egalitarian society, it was also seen as a key component to
the resolution of India’s many social issues. Rapid economic growth would help
eradicate poverty, while the development of a welfare state would address the
considerable needs of the population. A key premise of these policies was the
belief that caste discrimination, gender inequality, illiteracy, and communal
division were associated with economic deprivation and poverty. By raising living
standards, it was assumed, many of these problems particularly the communal
problem would become less pressing. In short, creating a more egalitarian society
would also mean building a less divided one. Thus, the early efforts to restructure
landlord tenant relations, provide workers’ rights, and reform the landownership
structure were all meant to have social as well as economic effects. National
integration and nation building was, as a result, very much intertwined with issues
of social justice and economic reform. A third feature of the Nehruvian consensus
was its secular orientation. For Nehru, the new order had to be nondiscriminatory
in its treatment of minority populations. The key to such tolerance, from his view,
was state neutrality in matters of religion and belief. The government was not
intended to be irreligious or otherwise hostile to religion but rather equidistant to
all religious traditions. Civil status would not be linked, either positively or
negatively, to membership in one religious community or another. In this sense,
secularism meant nondiscrimination. As Nehru described it, “We call our State a
secular one. The word ‘secular’ perhaps is not a very happy one and yet for want
of a better, we have used it. What exactly does it mean? It does not obviously mean

6
Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review (PLHR) June, 2019 Volume 3, Issue 1

a society where religion itself is discouraged. It means freedom of religion and

conscience, including freedom for those who may have no religion. It means free
play for all religions, subject only to their not interfering with each other or with
the basic conceptions of our state.

Implicit in Nehru’s secularism, however, was a suspicion of religion and an

underlying belief that many of the social ills the caste system, denigration of
women, and poverty were associated with the religious outlook so prevalent in
India. Thus, despite the overt support for an idea of secularism as neutrality,
lurking within Nehruvian secularism was the belief that religion as a social force
ought to be diminished. According to this view, the economic and social religious
Politics and Secular States development of society that is, its modernization
depended on relegating religion to the private sphere and actively constraining
those organizations that promoted communalist ideas. (Smith,1991).

The response by the Hindu community was one of shock and horror. In
areas such as Maharashtra, it sparked anti-Brahman violence because of the close
association of the Hindu Nationalists with the Brahman upper caste. The
assassination also strengthened the hand of the secularists. Nehru long wary of the
RSS and its sectarian beliefs immediately banned the organization and had many
of its leader’s arrested. Hindu militancy represented a threat to the new republic;
the government prohibited any organization that openly advocated communal
hatred and violence. The Mahasabha was temporarily forced out of party politics,
and the RSS’s standing was greatly diminished. The tensions between the secular
leadership and the various communal forces, however, continued. One area of
contention involved repealing the ban on the RSS. Golwalkar, the RSS leader, had
written to both Nehru and Patel, urging an end to the ban, arguing that there was
no direct evidence linking the organization to Gandhi’s murder. Moreover, in one
letter he implored Patel to recognize their common interests and urged an alliance
between Congress and the RSS in opposition to the left.38 Although Patel was
sympathetic to Golwalkar’s position, Nehru remained adamantly opposed. Nehru
was deeply concerned about the militant character of the RSS, seeing it as a threat
to the government (Golwalkar, 1939).

Nonetheless, secret negotiations between Patel and the RSS leadership

continued, and a Congress working committee voted in 1949 to lift the ban and
allow RSS members to join the Congress Party. The vote, undertaken while Nehru
was out of the country, sparked a dispute between supporters of Patel, who
endorsed the vote and those of Nehru, who opposed it. The vote was ultimately
reversed.(Wickham, 2002).

Conclusion

In fact, and this is an important point, the Muslims both in India and their
supporters from outside, while being aware of the specific circumstances and
particularities of each minority group or community, have suffered by the
7
 Hindutva: Impacts on Indian Muslim Community

extremist narratives and the violence emanating from the extremist Hindu right-
wing. This means that while women, Dalits, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and other
oppressed communities in India have their own legitimate grievances resulting
from the discrimination faced by Hindu extremists under the BJP, they also have a
collective cause. Recognizing this will enable better advocacy to emerge for human
rights. In particular, the conclusions reached here about the figure of the Indian
Muslimswho are bearing the bitter attitude of Hindus such as V D Savarkar in the
1920s and 1930s.

The policies being followed by the current Modi regime favor only the
Hindu majority and not the minorities of India that are as ancient to these lands as
the soil. The sharp turn in Indian domestic politics has left the notion of inclusive
pluralist nationalism in shambles.

8
Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review (PLHR) June, 2019 Volume 3, Issue 1

References

Clothey, F. W. (2007). Religion in India: A historical introduction. London, Routledge.

Deol, H. (2003). Religion and nationalism in India: the case of the Punjab. Routledge.

Embree, A. T., & de Bary, W. T. (Eds.). (2011). The Hindu Tradition: Readings in
Oriental Thought. Vintage.

Esposito, J. L. (1984). Islam and Politics. Harvard International Review, 6, 6-9.

Golwalkar, M. S. (1939). Our Nationhood Defined. Nagpur, India: Bharat Prakashan

Hasan, M. (2000). Nationalism and communal politics in India, 1885-1930. Manohar

Publishers.

Hassan, M. S. (2008). The Breakdown in North-East India: Identity Wars or Crises

of Legitimacy? Journal of South Asian Development, 3(1), 53-86.

Jaffrelot, C. (1999). The Hindu nationalist movement and Indian politics: 1925 to the
1990s: strategies of identity-building, implantation and mobilisation (with special
reference to Central India). Penguin Books India.

Katju, M. (2003). Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Indian Politics. Hyderabad: Orient
Longman Ltd,.

Pandey, G. (2006). The construction of communalism in colonial North India. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Rao, B., & De Roover, J. (2013). The Dark Hour of Secularism: Hindu Fundamentalism
and Colonial Liberalism in India. Routledge, London, UK.

Reddy, D., & Zavos, J. (2009). Temple publics: Religious institutions and the
construction of contemporary Hindu communities. International Journal of
Hindu Studies, 13(3), 241-260.

Robinson, F. (1999). Religious change and the self in Muslim South Asia since
1800. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 22(s1), 13-27.

Savarkar, V. D. (1969). Hindutva: Who Is Hindu? (5th ed.). Bombay: Veer Savarkar
Prakashan.

Smith, A. D. (1991). National identity (Vol. 11). Reno: University of Nevada press.

Sullivan, B. M. (2011). The Mahābhārata: Perspectives on Its Ends and

Endings. International Journal of Hindu Studies, 15(1), 1-7

9
 Hindutva: Impacts on Indian Muslim Community

Tharoor, I. (2012). The Sino-Indian war: 50 years later, will India and China clash
again. Time.< http://world. time. com/2012/10/21/thesino indianwar50
yearslaterwillindiaandchinaclashagain.

Wickham, C. R. (2002). Mobilizing Islam: Religion, activism, and political change in

Egypt. Columbia University Press.

10