“We speak often of the Hindu religion, of the Sanatan Dharma, but few of us really know what that religion is. Other religions are preponderantly religions of faith and profession, but the Santan Dharma is life itself; it is a thing that has not so much to be believed as lived. This is the Dharma that for the salvation of humanity was cherished in the secluded peninsula from of old. It is to this religion that India is rising. She does not rise as other countries do, for self or when she is strong, to trample on the weak. She is rising to shed the eternal light entrusted to her over the world. India has always existed for humanity and not for herself, and it is for humanity and not for herself that she must be great”. [1]
The origin of the term Hindutva can be traced back to Chandranath Basu, a Bengali litterateur, who first used it in his 1892 work ‘Hindu Prakriti Itihas’ [2] meaning History of Hindu Nature. However, it is widely associated with Vinayak Damodar Savarkar due to his influential work on ‘Hindutva.’ Etymologically, ‘ism’ typically signifies a binary conflict with other ideologies, while ‘tva’ denotes the essence of the concept it describes. Therefore, Hindutva, etymologically, represents the essence of Hindu Dharma or the Hindu religion in Western terms. In contrast, Hinduism implies the assertion of the Hindu religion, akin to how terms like Marxism, Islamism, or Socialism are framed. Interestingly, the global perspective, often influenced by Western viewpoints, differentiates between Islam and Islamism, referring to the Christian religion as Christianity without parallel terms like Christism or Christianism. However, Hinduism and Judaism are categorized without such distinction, placing Hindus and Jews within the brackets of Hinduism and Judaism.
The term ‘Hinduism’ was introduced in the popular lexicon by Sir Monier-Monier Willimas via his handbook Hinduism. This handbook was published in 1877 by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge [3]. This intellectually dishonest terminology is the seed behind the vicious anti-Hindu narratives over the last 150 years. The debate between Hinduism and Hindutva is essentially an artificial discourse engineered by Western influences. This notion is substantiated by the active involvement of various Western groups with anti-India sentiments in academia, exemplified by their organisation of events such as ‘Dismantling Global Hindutva’. Strikingly, this mirrors the historical pattern of the 19th century, where the demonization of Hindus served the purpose of national demoralization and undermined the foundational principles of Sanatana Hindu Dharma. This strategy was implemented by certain Western groups, particularly to counteract the innate strength of Hinduism’s inclusive ethos.
The Congress party and the Dravidian ideology embodied by the DMK have played a perplexing role, blending elements of colonial, missionary, and Marxist distortions of Sanatana. Despite holding a virtual monopoly on political power and shaping media narratives for nearly a century, the Dravidian parties have been unable to eradicate Sanatana culture in Tamil Nadu. What’s more, they have failed to deliver on their commitment to ensure ‘social justice,’ further complicating their narrative against Sanatana Dharma.
In the term “Hindu Dharma”, the first word, i.e.. “Hindu” is an unbounded word. It signifies all that is Sanatana or Eternal. And then there is Dharma, which means “That, which sustains”. Thus, Hindu Dharma signifies all that which eternally upholds everything; an individual, a family, a community, a society, and even nature — both animate and inanimate. In contrast, Hinduism is totally different because it is suffixed with an “ism”. The term “ism” is defined as an oppressive and discriminatory attitude or belief. In the mid-nineteenth century United States of America, the phrase “the isms” was used to collectively refer to radical social reform movements and various non-mainstream spiritual or religious movements in a derogatory manner. The term “Hinduism” should be understood in such a context. It is for such reasons that many of our elders preferred the term “Hindutva” over Hinduism as the former is a more accurate term since it includes the gamut (spectrum) of all that the word “Hindu” implies.
We agree with them and should do the same. Hindutva is not a complicated word. It simply means Hinduness. Others have used the alternative “Sanatana Dharma”, often abbreviated as “San¯atana”. Here, the term “San¯atana” works as an adjective indicating Hindu Dharma’s eternal nature.
In the present public discourse, many academicians and intellectuals regularly portray Hindutva as the antithesis of Hindu Dharma, i.e. extremely negatively. Some of them argue like that because of their ignorance. Most are anti-Hindutva because of their visceral hatred and biases against Hindu Dharma. Many politicians driven by political agendas and personal prejudices have also joined that group and are criticizing Sanatana Dharma, or Sanatana, with increasing regularity and vitriol. On behalf of the global Hindu community, the World Hindu Congress declares that such malicious criticism of Hindutva, or Sanatana Dharma, or Sanatana, or Hindu Dharma targets the Hindu society and all that is beautiful, just, good, and noble in it. These are attacks against goodness itself. The “World Hindu Congress” strongly condemns such attacks and urges Hindus worldwide to manifest Hindutva through organized global efforts and to overcome those who are engaging in such anti-Hindu attacks and bigotry so that we are victorious.
Hindu philosophy’s alignment with the scientific method and empirical evidence breeds apprehension, prompting certain forces to tarnish the authentic essence of Hindu Dharma. They employ a diluted version, often labelled as ‘Hinduism,’ camouflaged in evangelical rhetoric. The Hinduism versus Hindutva debate is, in essence, a fabricated discourse. Hindutva represents the profound teachings of the Bhagavad Gita, articulated by luminaries like Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo. This stands in stark contrast to the timidity embodied in missionary teachings, selectively admired by the West to shield Hindus from the profound wisdom inherent in their ancient tradition.
[1] Sri Aurobindo, Uttarpara Speech, May 30, 1909
[2] Hindur Prakrita Itihas: Basu, Chandranath Publication date: 1892; Topics: C-DAK; Collection: digitallibraryindia; JaiGyan; Language: Bengali.
[3] Hinduism Monier-Williams, Monier, Sir, 1819-1899.
Hindutva | All Rights Reserved
