Welcome to SPN

Register and Join the most happening forum of Sikh community & intellectuals from around the world.

Sign Up Now!

Hinduism Hindutva Is Different from Hinduism: Sri Veer Savarkar

Discussion in 'Interfaith Dialogues' started by Archived_member7, Jan 15, 2009.

  1. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    Hindutva is different from Hinduism

    To this category of names which have been to mankind a subtle source of life and inspiration belongs the word Hindutva, the essential nature and significance of which we have to investigate into. The ideas and ideals, the systems and societies, the thoughts and sentiments which have centered round this name are so varied and rich, so powerful and so subtle, so elusive and yet so vived that the term Hindutva defies all attempts at analysis.

    Forty centuries, if not more, had been at work to mould it as it is. Prophets and poets, lawyers and law-givers, heroes and historians, have thought, lived, fought and died just to have it spelled thus. For indeed, is it not the resultant of countless actions- now conflicting, now commingling, now cooperating- of our whole race? Hindutva is not a word but a history.

    Not only the spiritual or religious history of our people as at times it is mistaken to be by being confounded with the other cognate term Hinduism, but a history in full. Hinduism is only a derivative, a fraction, a part of Hindutva. Unless it is made clear what is meant by the latter the first remains unintelligible and vague. Failure to distinguish between these two terms has given rise to much misunderstanding and mutual suspicion between some of those sister communities that have inherited this inestimable and common treasure of our Hindu civilization.

    What is the fundamental difference in the meaning of these two words would be clear as our arguement proceeds. Here it is enough to point out that Hindutva is not identical with what is vaguely indicated by the term Hinduism. By an 'ism' it is generally meant a theory or a code more or less based on spiritual or religious dogma or creed. Had not linguistic usage stood in our way then 'Hinduness' would have certainly been a better word than Hinduism as a near parallel to Hindutva.

    Hindutva embraces all the departments of thought and activity of the whole Being of our Hindu race. Therefore, to understand the significance of this term Hindutva, we must first understand the essential meaning of the word Hindu itself and realize how it came to exercise such imperial sway over the hearts of millions of mankind and won a loving allegiance from the bravest and best of them. But before we can do that, it is imperative to point out that we are by no means attemption a definition or even a description of the more limited, less satisfactory and essentially sectarian term Hinduism. How far we can succeed or are justified in doing that would appear as we proceed
     
  2. Loading...


  3. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    rajkhalsa ji

    This is an excellent topic but should not be in this thread. I am going to move it to General Discussions.

    To get the most out of the discussion, we should also focus on what is meant by "Hindu." Hindu can be meant as any one of these ideas: a geographical, political, spiritual, religious, cultural, and/or historical term. Hindu is used in various ways depending on the context. As a religion it can refer to a wide variety of paths. It has broad applications in discussion and some times they are very different.

    These differences in meaning make the comparison of Hindu with Hindutva a highway to confusion, and at times hostility, if we are not clear in how we mean to use the word "Hindu."

    One thing "Hindu" is not: it is not a "race" but the author above states that it is a race. Right away we start with an inaccuracy that reveals the biases of the author. A statement that can lead to needless conflict. That should be pointed out. There are other errors in the article. "Hinduism" existed long before the idea of "Hindutva" was coined. So Hinduism cannot be part of Hindutva. The are related but one does not encompass the other.

    Sat Nam
     
  4. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    Hindu + Tatva = Hindutva i.e. The essence of Hindu. Hindu is a geographical term and has no direct relation to Religion.

    Sri Veer Savarkar has defined Hindutva as

    “Aa Sindhu Sindhu paryanta, yasya Bharat bhumika;
    Pitrubhuh punyabhushchaiva sa vai Hinduriti smritah.”

    There is a vast land between river Sindhu (Indus River) and Indian Ocean (Hind Mahasagar) called Bharat and those who accept that this is their fatherland or / and holy land, land of pilgrimage are all Hindu.

    Thus Hindu has nothing to do with one set of beliefs or practices

    Hinduism is not older than 150 years. It has been coined by the British writers. This Hinduism is defined as a religion consisting of many Gods and Goddesses and having brahmin priests to provide guidence.

    Unfortunately the people who call themselves Hindus align with the British defined Hinduism rather than what has been their cultural identity and the actual defination. What the Vedas say is just the opposite.
     
  5. pk70

    pk70
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,582
    Likes Received:
    627
    Rajkhalsa ji

    How come this word is coined by the British? It has been floating around centuries earlier describing the people and their religious beliefs
    Please explain me the following Guru Bachanas about Hindu written a away before 150 years

    ਪੰਨਾ 237, ਸਤਰ 12
    ਜਾਤਿ ਵਰਨ ਤੁਰਕ ਅਰੁ ਹਿੰਦੂ
    जाति वरन तुरक अरु हिंदू ॥
    varan urak ar hinū.
    Social classes, races, Muslims and Hindus;
    ਮਃ 5
    ਪੰਨਾ 340, ਸਤਰ 6
    ਤੁਰਕ ਤਰੀਕਤਿ ਜਾਨੀਐ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਬੇਦ ਪੁਰਾਨ
    तुरक तरीकति जानीऐ हिंदू बेद पुरान ॥
    Ŧurak arīka jānī▫ai hinū be purān.
    The Muslim knows the Muslim way of life; the Hindu knows the Vedas and Puraanas.
    ਭਗਤ ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀ
     
  6. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    Well i think you misunderstood Pk70 ji ..the word 'Hinduism' is 150 years old ..The word 'Hindu' is still older since the invasions happened, however i shall not call it Puratan.
     
  7. pk70

    pk70
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,582
    Likes Received:
    627
    Rah Khalsa Ji, They have just used a word to define a group of people having their beliefs, as “Ism means “a distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice” So they did nothing wrong by defining already existing doctrine being practiced by a group of people, so my stress was already existing doctrine and its practice through out centuries.. Now lets have look at an idea, I think you like it( I may have assumed, if I am incorrect, forgive me) that is to call Hindu who lives in Hindustan. Literally that is also incorrect, that is why I disagree with it; but let me say for a second, in stead of calling our country India, we should force the world to call it “Hindustan”, right? It is not a bad idea; I will go for that as other countries did it. Then, people living in Hindustan should be called” Hindustani” not Hindu. People living in Pakistan are known as Pakistani, etc. Even the short form is”Hindi” not “Hindu”( Ham Hindi hain, hai ye Hindustan Hamara..)So I feel, unnecessarily this word Hindu that defines people having a doctrine and already they have been practicing it over centuries is being forced upon people who feel uncomfortable with it due to their different faiths and literally its incorrect use in this context. Why so many efforts are put to label citizens with a word that doesn’t match with the word” Hindustan and people living in it are Hindustani” concept? To progress and make a country a winner in the world competition, mature leaders always think about improving the unity of the country than labeling its citizen with some ones’ dreamed word to dent the unity.
     
  8. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    The emotions which people have in the word 'Hindu' is quite different related to other name. Now America is a land of multiple faith and culture. If people who are migrants or who are converts to another faith object to the name 'AMERICA' will the native americans want to change the name of the country ??? This is ridiculous.

    I am quoting John Howard ..read this speech ..and this is a message to all who feel Hindustan is not Bharat and want to change..be it people of any faith ..this goes for all of you


    [​IMG]
    Prime Minister John Howard - Australia

    Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.

    Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: 'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.'

    'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'

    'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!'

    'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

    'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'

    'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom,

    'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.'

    'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'

    Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, American and Canadian citizens will find the backbone to start speaking and voicing the same truths.

    If you agree ... please SEND THIS ON
     
  9. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    Hindu race.

    Rajkhalsa ji

    What is a Hindu "race." If as you say, that "Hindu" as a term has only been around for 100 years, then how can the word Hindu denote a "race?" If this were true, then we would have some very fast-moving gene pools in India. :)

    I do agree that the word "Hindu" is inappropriately applied as if it were a single religion.

    Are you also arguing that Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists in India are part of the Hindu race?:confused: Or are you headed in this direction?
     
  10. pk70

    pk70
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,582
    Likes Received:
    627
    Raj Khalsa Ji

    What all this has to do with a concept of calling people Hindus who live in Hindustan (a country officially known only as Bharat or India?) What John Howard is saying is not relevant in this context; I wonder even why you have quoted him in this context. He is against those who try to dent the unity of the country in their own agendas, people from all faiths are happy to be called Indians or Bharti. India is no where close to Australia and America in context of immigration pursuits therefore such problem is not inevitable at all, so issue is totally different Raj Khalsa ji. The word “American” has no religious doctrine attached to it as the word “Hindu” has save for its primitive resident’s identity and they are well distinguished by addressing them Native Americans. There English has been used for centuries, does it applicable to Hindi in India? Answer is no. Still Hindi is accepted as a national language and it can never be mother tongue of all Indians. My point is very simple, why a person living in HINDUSTAN needs to be called HINDU instead of HINDUSTANI or HINDI? In those countries you mentioned, there are no fourteen languages existed for centuries with full fledged grammars either. Hindu, a term used for people practicing a doctrine for centuries, can how be justified to be used as nationality- expression. There is not a single valid reason for its justification as it is even incorrect in its use.
     
  11. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    rajkhalsa ji

    As noted:


    "Hindutva (Devanagari: हिन्दुत्व, "Hinduness", a word coined by Vinayak DamodarSavarkar in his 1923 pamphlet entitled Hindutva: Who is a Hindu? ) is the term used to describe movements advocating Hindu nationalism.

    In India, an umbrella organization called the Sangh Parivar champions the concept of Hindutva. The sangh comprises organizations such as the RSS, Bharatiya Janata Party, Bajrang Dal, and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad.

    This ideology has existed since the early 20th century, forged by Veer Savarkar, but came to prominence in Indian politics in the late 1980s, when two events attracted a large number of mainstream Hindus to the movement. The first of these events was the Rajiv Gandhi government's use of its large Parliamentary Majority to overturn a Supreme Court verdict granting alimony to an old woman that had angered many Muslims (see the Shah Bano case). The second was the dispute over the 16th century Mughal Babri Mosque in Ayodhya — built by Babur after his first major victory in India. The Supreme Court of India refused to take up the case in the early 1990s, leading to a huge outcry. Tempers soon flared, and a huge number of nationalist Hindus from all parts of India razed the mosque in late 1992, causing nationwide communal riots. The razing of the mosque and subsequent conflict arguably lifted the BJP and Hindutva to international prominence."


    Thus Hindutva is not older than 105 years making it younger than Hinduism, if of course we accept your assessment, by 45 years. Consequently Hindutva cannot describe the essence of Hinduism because it is not old enough -- 45 years too young.

    And that minor mathematical discrepancy matters only if one accepted the argument that Hindutva describes the essence of the Hindu. This idea that Hindutva describes the essence of the Hindu was a concoction of Sri Veer Sarvakar -- who invented Hindutva in the first place. So of course he is going to make loud political claims that his brainchild defines what it is to be Hindu. His brainchild, Hindutva, gave rise to Indian nationalism -- which to many Sikhs is a form of Indian fascism.

    "Sarvakar includes all Dharmic religions in the term "Hindusim" and outlines his vision of a "Hindu Rashtra" (
    Hindu Nation) as "Akhand Bharat" (United India), stretching across the entire Indian subcontinent." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindutva:_Who_is_a_Hindu?

    So Sarvakar is saying that Sikhs are Hindus too? Here we go....
     
  12. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    There are many issues coming up ..we will handle each one at a time ..to answer Pk70 ji ..John Howard's speech is related ..the difference here is migrants and converts. Those who object to the word 'Hindu' are converts to other faiths and having a separatist mindset connect 'Hindu' to religion. There is a strong feeling in them to dust off reminencies of their ancestoral faith. They are the ones who strongly relate and oppose.

    Bharat has accomodated the voices of such people, due to which there has been minority appeasement. They object to any reference of hindu, dont want to sing Vande Mataram. They are hell bent on going the opposite way. The speech of John Howard is a clear message which had to be sent to even such minorities in India (Bharat or Hindustan you can decide ), if your mentor faiths give you this identity, then go to them, there is no accomodation for another partition of the country.Anyone who nurtures separatist ideas is free to 'LEAVE' to anywhere they feel they and their ways and ideas are accepted.
     
  13. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    rajkhalsa ji

    Who are you referring to in this statement?

    "Those who object to the word 'Hindu' are converts to other faiths and having a separatist mindset connect 'Hindu' to religion. There is a strong feeling in them to dust off reminencies of their ancestoral faith. They are the ones who strongly relate and oppose."

    Just asking ;)
     
  14. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    Let me repeat myself

    This idea that Hindutva describes the essence of the Hindu was a concoction of Sri Veer Sarvakar -- who invented Hindutva in the first place. So of course he is going to make loud political claims that his brainchild defines what it is to be Hindu. His brainchild, Hindutva, gave rise to Indian nationalism -- which to many Sikhs is a form of Indian fascism.

    "Sarvakar includes all Dharmic religions in the term "Hindusim" and outlines his vision of a "Hindu Rashtra" (
    Hindu Nation) as "Akhand Bharat" (United India), stretching across the entire Indian subcontinent." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindutv..._is_a_Hindu%3F

    So Sarvakar is saying that Sikhs are Hindus too? Here we go....
     
  15. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    Aaad ji ...this reference is to anyone and everyone who wants to break my country. Those who had divided the country in the past and those who have aims to break it once more.Converts to a different faith and ideology both come into picture. I being a Sikh have never felt like a 'minority' in this country. Some situations happen however that would never mean for me to think like a separatist
     
  16. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    The idea of hindutva was revisited by Savarkar and given proper form. There is no such thing as Indian 'fascism'. Had the majority of this country been 'fascist' Sikhi wouldnt have been in existance. The so called phobia is created by politically ambitious so called Sikhs. They are the ones who have always rubbed salt on the healing wounds of 1984.
     
  17. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    Aaad ji the subject matter you are getting is not entirely right ..it is from wikipedia ..where things expressed can be in a different way or can be wrong. Savarkar ji has always separated Hindutva and hindusim
     
  18. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    Fascism primarily functions around a non-secular, cultural ideology that leaves no room for a person, for he/she is defined along those cultural parameters by birth. When such an ideology becomes the basis for the creation of a State, then we are in essence producing a fascist State. All efforts at State formation that is touched by orthodox theology have thus the potential for turning fascist, in as much as one of its formative ideologies is fascist.

    http://www.proxsa.org/politics/hindutva/hindfasc.html
     
  19. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    You could be wrong too :wink: We need to go back and analyze all the claims.

    "Hindu nationalism is a nationalist ideology that sees the modern state of the Republic of India as a Hindu polity [1] ("Hindu Rashtra"), and seeks to preserve the Hindu heritage. Although the concept of "Hindu Rashtra" has been used in slogans and pamphlets of the Bharatiya Janata Party[citation needed], the main group that promotes this ideology, it has not been clearly and unambiguously defined in any of their literature. The notion of "Hindu principles" (Hindutva) promoted by this group is intended to be inclusive of the multiple indigenous traditions of India, including Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism. However these religions do not consider themselves to be Hindu. Hindu nationalism has played a crucial role in the recent history of India and that of Hinduism." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Rashtra
     
  20. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96
    Aaadji ..The link you sent me wants to prove India as fascist ..there is a lot of lies and concoted statements..I wish you could visit India yorself and see the difference.
     
  21. Archived_member7

    Archived_member7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    96

Share This Page