That Which Shall Not be Named is Now Explained

Most Indian regional languages use Tattva Shastra as an equivalent of Philosophy. The word Philosophy–meaning love(r) of knowledge or wisdom–is quite inadequate to define or explain the full import of Tattva Shastra.

One of the fundamental aphorisms that embodies the whole of Sanatana Dharma in it is Tat Tvam Asi (You are That). The Tvam or Tva concerns us here.

Tva in its fullest sense can also mean “the state of becoming the object itself.” Like sugar that merges its identity with water upon dissolution. That is how I define Hindutva: Hindu + Tva(m).

As a political movement, Hindutva was a product of its time in the pre-Independence days. An essential product because the Congress party steadily began making ridiculous concessions to extremist Islamic demands. Not too many people remember that the Congress party was dubbed as a party of “Hindus who sought to tyrannize the Muslim minority.” That refrain continues to date sung by our Prime Minister. On the other side of the fence, the Muslim leadership gave robust calls to restore the pristine Islamic glory that was India under the Mughals. Hindutva as a political ideology grew in both strength and numbers when the Congress party’s subsidences to Muslim demands accelerated under Mahatma Gandhi’s leadership.

The version of Hindutva one hears and reads about in the media is heavily biased against it. Issues like the Babri Masjid and Gujarat violence are blown out of proportion to convey the impression that Hindutva stands for only this. Some vocal proponents of Hindutva need to share part of the blame for this representation because the climate of today’s public discourse has altered. A small picture of a RSS worker with a Trishul in his hand splashed across front pages and TV screens convey very powerful impressions. Indeed, the most powerful and respected defenders of Hindu causes stemmed from, and are located outside organizational frameworks.

Hindutva is simply a revival of the rich spiritual tradition of India sans numerous evils that crept in with time. It has nothing to do with banning western clothes or books or films. Least of all, it doesn’t concern politics, a common Leftist misrepresentation, which equates a Hindu spiritual head with a Mullah. Hindutva seeks to revive, expand, and promote the way of life that gave birth to concepts like Rta, Dharma, and Brahman. The fact that few understand these terms and/or ridicule them as backward, illogical, and fictitious makes the need for their revival more urgent. These concepts and their application to practical life has made possible the “tourist attractions” (temples, sculptures, etc) that India offers.

Most political parties who profess Hindutva are ignorant, confused, power-hungry or all of the above. The ones who work towards reviving the Hinduism based on what I just mentioned are typically outside the pale of politics. The kind of politics practised today cannot revive Hindutva–at best it results in antics like banning Western clothes, distributing Trishuls etc.

The true revival of Sanatana Dharma should begin by practising it till you finally manifest it within yourself: Tat Tvam Asi.

Crossposted on Desicritics.

8 comments for “That Which Shall Not be Named is Now Explained

  1. July 11, 2007 at 6:21 PM

    Babri Masjid and Gujrat violence were two isolated incidents that occurred 10 years apart. Besides both of these were triggered off by other acts. If this is what the “secular trolls” have to show in terms of Hindu atrocities on the hapless Muslims, I must say I don’t find it very impressive.
    Now let us compare these “violent” activities with the religion of peace. 8853 acts of terror since 9/11.
    http://thereligionofpeace.com/

  2. Ot
    July 11, 2007 at 6:19 PM

    Comrade As-Is-Known-Aikath-To-Himself cleverly tries to defend communism:

    “How is this different from commies who say “the version of communism you saw in Soviet Union is not the real one” or things like that?”

    You don’t need a Soviet Union to judge that communism is a philosophy of hate. That judgement can be arrived at by studying the basic definitional doctrines of communism.

    For instance, violent antics, such as “revolution of the proletariat”, are central to Communism. Communism recommends and endorses blood bath to achieve a “socialist” state. A preoccupation with violence permeates communist “thought”. Indeed, independent scholars have come to view communism as belonging in same category of hate ideologies like fascism, never mind the Left-wing propaganda of Communism being a polar opposite of (supposedly “right-wing”) fascism.

    A brutal state like the Soviet Union is but a natural consequence of a hate phiolosphy like communism. If communism were a reasonably peaceful doctrine to begin with, but somehow resulted in a Soviet Union, then commies could argue that Soviet Union was not “real” communism. However, as matters stand, commie apologists can’t use that excuse, because violence and totalitarianism are central to communism, not an aberration. Which is why EVERY communist state ended up being a brutal state.

    In India, we have been fortunate enough to escape the brutality of communism to a large extent. But you can still see the frightening portents of what a communist state would bring to us: Nandigram, routine murder and rape by maosts and naxalites, the depradations by communist cadres in Kerala and WB, suborning the state apparatus to party’s interests, the complete polarization and divisions of people into political camps, the ideological fanaticism, the propaganda, the demonization of oppoenents, intolerance of dissent, the treason, the selling out to communist powers like USSR earlier, and China now … That is communism for you!

  3. July 11, 2007 at 12:19 PM

    Not so. I’m here. Also I find it extremely amussing that someone who calls himself “shadows” talks about other “trolls”…

    =====================

    Ohh do you consider yourself a troll ??? I was referring to someone else actually ;)

    BTW, whats so extremely amusing?? I guess I can call myself lights instead of shadows and still do that …

  4. July 11, 2007 at 12:17 PM

    Shuvro..

    Someone who links to someone else’s blog is commenting on my id :) Interesting..

  5. July 10, 2007 at 8:10 PM

    even the regular secular trolls are missing.

    Not so. I’m here. Also I find it extremely amussing that someone who calls himself “shadows” talks about other “trolls”…

    Good article, actually. Interesting explanation of Hindutva.

    These lines — The version of Hindutva one hears and reads about in the media is heavily biased against it. Issues like the Babri Masjid and Gujarat violence are blown out of proportion to convey the impression that Hindutva stands for only this.

    How is this different from commies who say “the version of communism you saw in Soviet Union is not the real one” or things like that? The Hindutva that is available for public consumption is what will lead people to judge it. If that’s a problem, please give us the “real” Hindutva instead.

  6. July 10, 2007 at 12:38 PM

    Well Sandeep,

    Over two days and not many comments.. even the regular secular trolls are missing :)

    Good post…

  7. RC
    July 8, 2007 at 9:33 PM

    You should take a look at this new book. The contributors have a strong pedigree.

    http://www.invadingthesacred.com

Leave a Comment