Open Access Research Article
RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA
Published Paper
Article Details
RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA
AUTHORED BY - TANMAY BANSAL
ABSTRACT
Nationalism in simple terms means
devotion towards one’s nation or nation-state and developing a feeling that
one’s nation is superior to others. For a major part of the 20th
century, nationalism was seen as a force of battling colonialism in Africa and
Asia.[1]
However, in the post-independent India, nationalism has been molded by several groups
ranging from different religions, castes, cultures etc. This paper wishes to
answer the question whether religious nationalism is existent in India and what
effects it has had on the country’s functioning?
INTRODUCTION
Religious nationalism, or the
synthesis of religious and national identities and objectives, is a component
of nationalism that is gaining prominence. Religious and national identities
coexist and even reinforce one another, rather than secular nationalism simply
displacing religious identities and allegiances. Such religious nationalism
becomes a potent force in reinforcing popular religiosity and attitudes,
empowering religious organizations to influence policy in a vast array of
sectors, and shaping the patterns of inter- and intra-state violence. These
findings have two ramifications: the need to engage in improved metrics and
operationalization of religious nationalism, and reassessing the very logic of
state and nation building.
Despite the fact that religious
nationalist groups are so diverse, they appear to have many common characteristics.
To begin with, the majority of religious nationalist parties have a puritanical
element that colors their political platforms and subsequent methods of
government. Second, in many nations, religious nationalists argue for economic
austerity or draconian anticorruption measures through moral appeals and
rhetoric. Thirdly, religious politics frequently reveals a majoritarian
nationalism that strives to redefine the foundation of national identity in a
way that excludes or marginalizes religious minorities.
In India, the mixing of religion and
politics is not a novel phenomenon. This blending initially began with official
patronage of the Brahminical Vedic tradition in which state backing of religion
insured that clerical leaders would, in turn, protect the state. In India's
early state forms, the rajas controlled political power but were dependent on
the legitimation of brahmins, whom they paid with safety and monetary resources
guarantees.[2] In sharp
contrast to China, for instance, where religious authorities were subject to
elites with coercive and economic power, brahmins in India possessed a high
degree of moral authority independent of governmental power, for according to
the Manu Rules, the Brahmin or the priest was higher than the Kshatriya or the
warrior in the caste system.[3] In
1947, with the overthrow of the British Raj, India's new constitution
established a secular republic that did not have a tight church-state
separation as in many Western democracies, but rather a "principled
distance" between religion and the state. Under this umbrella, the
government attempted to maintain a balanced acceptance of India's diverse
religious sects without unfairly favoring any one sect.
However, in order to maintain tabs on
the following of law to the teeth, it is important to question, whether this
distance successfully maintained? If not, how and which has religion influenced
politics or visa-versa? How has the said influence, impacted the growth and
development of other religions in the country? And finally, can the said
differences be eliminated?
LITERATURE REVIEW
In order to derive a definitive
response to the said questions, it is pertinent to review the hypothesis and
conclusions reached by theories answering similar questions before this.
Irfan Habib in
his article Nationalism in India: Past
and Present, counters the once famous argument that India was never unified
before the British rule. He states “that India was widely recognized as a
country by the knowledgeable among its inhabitants from quite ancient times,
when, looking at its social and cultural uniformities, they could easily mark
the universal presence of the inequities of caste system, or the prevalence of
Sanskrit as the language of the learned.”[4] It
would be important to note the difference between a country and a nation in the
said scenario. While India truly could be classified as a country due to the
Magadha or the Mughal empires, it was actually the attached sentiment and
symbols like Bharat Mata, Charkha and the tri-color which made it into a nation
during the unification under the British rule. It is interesting to note that
before 1947, the only basis of being classified as a nationalist was the
opposition of the British rule; thus, contrasting parties like the RSS and the
Muslim League were classified under the same umbrella. He further notes that
what was supposed to be a welfare state, is now nothing more than a divided
economy and a concentration of opportunities for the ‘privileged classes’.
Bipin Chandra
in his journal article Secular and
Democratic India on the Threshold of the New Millennium, stated, “It was
one of the great triumphs of Indian National Movement that, despite the
partition of India in 1947 and the barbaric and horrendous riots and killings
and migration of millions that accompanied it, the Indian people accepted secularism
as a basic value, enshrined it in the constitution, and set out to build a
secular state and society.”[5]
However, the author then recognizes the changes that have erupted in the last
couple of years and how they have change the face of the country, towards the
worse. In the early years of the new millennium and 21st century,
communalism is unquestionably the nation's most significant challenge. This
difficulty has two kinds. One is the political challenge posed by the RSS-BJP's
successful occupation of the political ground of the alternative party to the Indian
National Congress, a position it is expected to maintain for many years. Thus,
there is a clear and present danger that the Indian State may become sectarian.
The second aspect of the expanding communal difficulty is the communalization
of Indian society. This political opportunism has a tendency to make communal
parties and groupings legitimate and even legitimize communism in the eyes of
the general public. The National Movement and the Nehru era rendered communism
a terrible word, although this is becoming less and less the case. Community
violence is a consequence or feature of the propagation of communal ideology.
The core of communalism, however, is the propagation of communal ideas and thought
patterns. The effort for social reform must be increased, and not just to
combat communalism. This purpose, however, necessitates the complete elimination
of communalism. The battle must also lead to the adoption of the best of
ancient and modern ideals. Hindu, Sikh, Muslim, and Christian communalisms are
viewed as variations of a single communal worldview. It becomes evident that
one must simultaneously resist all of its versions.
ANALYSIS
There are two kinds of nationalisms
prevalent in India in terms of religious nationalism. Secular nationalism,
which combines a commitment to territorial integrity with the cultural concept
of political plurality, whereas Hindu nationalism mixes territorial unity with
Hindutva, or the view that India is fundamentally a government by, for, and on
behalf of the Hindu majority group.
Secular Nationalism- The Indian Constitution has many characteristics of a traditional
secular state. It grants residents religious freedom and forbids discrimination
on the basis of religion. The country's constitution also guarantees every
person universal suffrage, regardless of religion or social status, in
contrast to the majority of democracies, which expanded the franchise to women,
minorities, and the poor only gradually. Nonetheless, the Indian Constitution
gives adequate grounds for state intervention in religious matters. For
example, the constitution recognizes both collective and communal rights, as
well as the rights of religious minorities. The state is required by law to
support educational institutions administered by religious organizations.
Therefore, not only can the state properly intervene in a nation's religious
matters, but it can also do so without neutrality limits. In truth, India's
secular approach openly recognizes religion, contrary to what opponents may
assert. Supporters of the country's unique approach contend that neither
complete separation nor a full acceptance of the majority religion, Hinduism. would
have been sustainable in India's pluralistic, democratic government. In light
of India's astounding religious and cultural variety, providing Hinduism
preferential attention would have necessitated sacrificing India's syncretic
traditions. Taking into mind India's formation in the context of the partition
of the subcontinent, calls to separatism, and the possibility of foreign
interference, a secular approach helped maintain a diverse polity together at a
time when the nation was under considerable strain. In addition, proponents of
India's type of secularism argue that the constitution had to grant the state
the authority to rectify disparities and harmful social practices that arose
from particular religious traditions.
Hindu Nationalism- It’s proponents believe that Hinduism, not the delicate balance of all
ethnic and religious groupings in India, is the fundamental basis of the
nation's identity. In the opinion of Hindu nationalists, India's Hindu identity
is significant both for its own sake and because it has the capacity to produce
the type of cohesive national community required for social stability and
international recognition. However, their argument that India is the birthplace
of Hinduism and thus, is a Hindu country seems to be flawed, for it is also the
birthplace of Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism. They contend that the territory
internationally recognised as contemporary India is intrinsically related to an
old religious and cultural Hindu tradition that takes precedence over all other
traditions found within contemporary India's borders. Some historians have
suggested that the mixture of religion and culture is deliberate: the two
cannot be separated according to the majority of Hindu nationalist ideologies.
This mentality contradicts the secularist perspective, which regards religion
and culture as separate categories.
With the electoral triumph of the
Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party since the late 1990s, India's
electoral climate has witnessed a rise in religious content (BJP). Under Prime
Minister Narendra Modi, the BJP has had a resurgence over the past seven years
after experiencing a decline during the majority of the 2000s. The recent
electoral triumph of the BJP has once again brought to the forefront an
alternative nationalism based not on secular ideals but on the premise that
Indian culture is identical to Hindu culture. This break from India's secular
legacy, which was originally harmed by the Congress Party's self-inflicted
wounds, presents grave concerns regarding India's political future and its
longstanding adherence to the motto "unity in diversity." The
Congress Party's relations with religion and propensity to meddle in issues
inside and amongst religious communities opened fresh chances for the Bharatiya
Janata Party. The latter party quickly abandoned its initial moderate stance
for a more strategic Hindu identity-building agenda that might capitalize on a
growing sense of Hindu vulnerability. The 2014 election result was a
breakthrough for the BJP and the Hindutva ecosystem, something many insiders
had denied was achievable. The Hindutva politics of the BJP is evident from
it’s politics in portions of Uttar Pradesh, particularly the western regions
surrounding Muzaffarnagar, which had suffered ethnic violence between Hindus
and Muslims in 2013, they did not shy away from polarising sectarian rhetoric.
Similarly, in the border state of Assam, the BJP leveraged the delicate topic
of Bangladeshi migration to bolster its support. From Ram-Mandir to Rohingya
migrants, and from the Citizenship Amendment Act to the Removal of Article 370,
all have in some way or the other been given a religious angle and thus act as
a promoter of the idea of Hindutva.
This extremism has taken a huge boost
from identity politics. Speeches by minority leaders across the nation is a
fuel for increasing this feud. Hindu nationalists take cover under such events
to further their agenda and push for a Hindu Rashtra. It should be truly
alarming that an ex-law minister of the largest democratic and secular nation
of the world called for the removal of the word Secular from the preamble of
the constitution.[6]
CONCLUSION
The above stated comparison between
Secular and Hindu Nationalism show a transition in Indian history, before and
after the 1980’s. As stated, all the three commonly identified requirements of
religious nationalism have been ticked by the Hindutva movements. It has puritanical
element that has been evident from their governing and stances on issues like,
rights of third gender, wherein they argue, that such unnatural acts and people
are against the idea of our culture and religion. Secondly, they have an
economic motive for gathering wide support, in terms of anti-corruption
movements. And finally, they aim to redefine the identity of the nation’s
citizens which aims at leading to the feeling of exclusion for one or more
religions in the country, in this case, Muslims and Christians.
The ideas of Hindutva holds the power
to incite violence to an extent which may lead to a civil war, something which
turned out to be the bloodiest and biggest migrant movements in the world, not
less than 75 years ago. The success of the secular, democratic, and socialist
forces in facing this challenge will depend not only on the practice of the
Indian people, but also on the theoretical effort required to lead and analyze
the actions of social forces.[7]
[1] Gellner,
E. (n.d.). (1991) The Com ing of Nationalism and Its Interpretation: The
Myths of Nation and Class.
[2] Peter Friedlander,
“Hinduism and Politics”, 70-71, in Routledge Handbook of Religion
and Politics, ed. Jeffrey Haynes (Abingdon: Routledge, 2016)
[3] Francis
Fukuyama, “The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman
Times to the French Revolution”, 159, (New York: Farrar,
Straus and Giroux, 2011)
[4] Habib, “Nationalism in India: Past and Present.” Social
Scientist, vol. 45, no. 3/4, 2017, pp. 3–8. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26380341. [Accessed 2 Nov 2022]
[5] Chandra, “Secular and
Democratic India on the Threshold of the New Millennium.” Social Scientist,
vol. 27, no. 9/10, 1999, pp. 3–17. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3518099. [Accessed 9 Nov. 2022.]
[6] Thehindu.com.
(2015). Preamble row: Govt. not to remove words ‘secular’, ‘socialist’.
[online] Available at: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Preamble-row-Govt.-not-to-remove-words-%E2%80%98secular%E2%80%99-%E2%80%98socialist%E2%80%99/article60117148.ece [Accessed 2 Nov. 2022].
[7] Chandra, “Secular and
Democratic India on the Threshold of the New Millennium.” Social Scientist,
vol. 27, no. 9/10, 1999, pp. 3–17. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3518099. [Accessed 9 Nov. 2022.]
Article Information
RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA
Authors: TANMAY BANSAL
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/06/29
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.