Download idea of hindutva: a thematic exploration in savarkar`s political writings

SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 IDEA OF HINDUTVA: A THEMATIC EXPLORATION IN SAVARKAR’S
POLITICAL WRITINGS
DR. PREM ANAND MISHRA*
*Assistant Professor,
Peace Research Centre,
Gujarat Vidyapith, Ahmedabad.
ABSTRACT
This paper investigates the idea of Hindutva emerging in the political writings of Vinayak
Damodar Savarkar. Savarkar’s political writings differentiate Hinduism and Hindutva. For
Savarkar, Hindutva is more general and a political concept while Hinduism explains the religion.
However, Savarkar political writings show his idea of Hindutva has much to with cultural and
social regeneration of Hindu society than political. This study argues that by coining the term
Hindutva Savarkar attempted to construct a collective Hindu identity in India that was a complex
implication of Western social –political theory of his time and Hindu philosophy.
Pinnacle Research Journals 1 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com Although, at surface level his political thought seems emerging from his violent revolutionary,
terroristic anti -colonial nationalism and its relation to Hindu nationalism, however, at deeper
level, his political thought is the product of his European intellectual orientation that he had from
the study of vast literature of Western European social –political philosophers. Furthermore, this
study argues that his political writings reflect a constant conflict between his dream of Hindu
nation and reality of secular nationalism of his time which is still echoing in contemporary
Indian political scenario, both at the level of discourse and practice. To support the above
arguments, this study employs key political writings of Savarkar to prove its points.
KEYWORDS: Hindutva, Hinduism, fatherland, holy land.
______________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
The political writings of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (1883-1966) represent a temporal and
materialistic approach to the interpretation and construction of his times’ existing Indian political
reality. Although, at surface level his political writings seem emerging from his violent
revolutionary, terroristic anti -colonial nationalism and its relation to Hindu nationalism,
however, at deeper level, his political arguments appear to be the product of his European
intellectual orientation that he received from the study of vast literature of Western European
social –political philosophers. His concept of Hindutva- central to his political writings- which
attempts to uphold both his ‘imagined Indian/Hindu nation’ as well as method of defining
‘collective Indian/Hindu identity’ was a complex implication of Western social –political theory
of his time and Hindu philosophy. His political writings further reflect a constant conflict
between his dream of Hindu nation and reality of secular nationalism of his time which is still
echoing in contemporary Indian political scenario, both at the level of discourse and practice.
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 SOURCE, NATURE AND FOUNDATION OF SAVARKAR’S POLITICAL THOUGHT
Pinnacle Research Journals 2 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com Savarkar’s political life can be divided in two phases. In first phase since childhood to 1910, he
was ardent revolutionary nationalist who was devoted to eliminate British rule. Afterwards,
during his imprisonments year (1911-1924) to his death, he stood as a prophet of Hindu
nationalism who propagated the political philosophy of Hindutva through his writings and
action. Close study of his writings suggest that, although, he derived his basic idea of the
Hindutva both from Indian and foreign sources, however, he received motivation, direction and
realistic suggestion from the writings and activities of political and social thinkers of Europe. In
this connection, there is argument that Savarkar had little time for studying all the different
schools of Hinduism, and moreover he was deeply suspicious of philosophical tenets founded on
Holy Scriptures (Sharma: 125). On the other hand, he was deeply influenced by the European
philosophers. He studied the philosophy and ideas of Political Economy of James Mill (17731836) and J. Stuart Mill (1806-1876) in detail (Sharma: 127). Especially, their notions of
liberalism, individual freedom, and ideas on democracy had a deep impact on his mind. Further
he was impressed with the philosophy of evolution proposed by Herbert Spencer (1820-1903).
As Woolf notes, from Herbert Spencer and Charles Darwin (1809-1882) he adopted the
controversial idea of the ‘survival of the fittest’ which is without doubt the underlying theorem
of Savarkar’s ‘Panch-sheela’ towards the social and political transformation of the Indian society
(Wolf:5). His philosophical outlook also got strengthened by studying the works of Jeremy
Bentham (1748-1832). Savarkar himself wrote, ‘From then on I began to acknowledge this
principle of morality as the touchstone of all my pursuits, of my ethical standards, and of my
behaviour’ (SSV: 1:206). In addition, it is possible to find remarkable elements of Auguste
Comte (1798-1857) in his political and social thoughts, for example the importance given to the
service of humanity as the best of human ends (Lederel: 138). From all these European authors
he studied the basic principles of social and political life, interpreted them through Indian eyes,
and used them to propose his best approach towards the social and political problems of India
(Wolf: 5).
Influenced by these European philosophers, Savarkar developed peculiar views on the God,
universe and human being. According to him, human beings live in this world and not in a
transcendental one, thus, the universe had nothing to do with the people and how they arranged
their worldly life. Moreover, he claimed that ‘the forces in the universe are to a little degree for
Man, but to a greater extent they are against him’ (Keer: 204). From this Savarkar developed a
exceptionally utilitarian ethics that seems the bedrock of his political writings, as he claims,
“We must say that what is beneficial for mankind is good and what makes us suffer is bad. It is
absurd to say what God likes is beneficial for man or vice versa, because they are false notions.
We live in the Universe but the Universe does not belong to us. To a great extent, it is
unfavourable and to a very small extent favourable to us. We must appreciate this and face the
heavenly occurrences. That is true Nature. That is the real worship of the God of universe”.
(Godbole: 338)
Thus, ‘Man is the maker of his fortune and cause of his misfortunes. No divine power does any
good or evil to human life. Man himself is responsible for the successes and failures, sweets and
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 bitters of his life. Reason and intelligence leads one to light and ignorance to darkness’
(Godbole: 339).
In his socio-political analysis Savarkar was in favour of scientific reason than religious
dogmatism. He argued that all religious scriptures are man-made. In his view, “What does not
stand the test of scientific reason ought to be verily discarded even if it appears in the Vedas,
Avesta, Quran, Bible, Book of Moses and the like. It is not true that an age of your is necessarily
an age of truth! It is incorrect to think that everything that is ancient is necessarily sacred and
worthy of worship”. (SSV: 4:579)
Thus, for him no religious scripture is valid for all times. He did not consider any religious
scripture to be unchangeable and valid for all times. Further, “I shall apply the test of present day
science to all the wisdom and ignorance present in these scriptures. Only then shall I
unreservedly practice and update what is essential for upholding and rejuvenating the nation!”
(SSV: 3:364).
Apart from this scientific temper, Savarkar incorporated many other Western theories in
Hinduism and developed a peculiar notion of Hindutva employing them in Indian context. Wolf
states, “Savarkar interpreted various concepts like utilitarianism, rationalism, humanism
(universalism), pragmatism and realism and tried to apply them in the Indian context as
cornerstones for the progress of his countrymen. He attempted to compose a worldly philosophy
of life consisting of a portfolio of elements drawn from ‘classical Indian thought’, western social
and political philosophy and his own experience and observations”. (Woolf: 19)
Pinnacle Research Journals 3 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com HIS POLITICAL WRITINGS AND ORIGIN OF HIS POLITICAL THEORY OF
HINDUTVA
Savarkar’s writing can be divided in three categories: non political literature, historical studies
and political statement. If his historical studies The Indian war of independence (1908), and ‘Six
Glorious Epochs’ narrates his specific view on Indian History, his political writings, Essentials
of Hindutva (1923), 'Hindu-pad-paadshaahi (1925), and Hindu-Rashtra Darshan (Six lectures
given in Hindu Mahasbha from 1937 to 1942 ) presents his focused view on Hindutva, Hindu
polity and Hindu Sangathan respectively. To get a clear idea of Savarkar’s political theory, key
ideas of these texts can be examined.
It is very surprising that his first influential text, which is interpretation of the history (The Indian
war of independence, 1908) of India in modern times, shows his nationalist orientation rather
than ‘Hindutva reference’ against colonialism. Giving a sign of passionate nationalists, he
refuted the claims of British historians that the revolt of 1857 was just a Sepoy mutiny having
nothing to with the general mass of the country. He argued that fundamental motive of it was the
liberation of the country from the clutches of British rule. Moreover, this revolt of 1857 was
India’s first war of independence owing to fact that it essentially, was the natural manifestation
of the feeling of independence visiting the hearts and minds of the patriotic soldiers’ right from
the western to the eastern part of the country. Savarkar had tremendous admiration for this sense
of innate freedom of the sepoys, as it was rooted in the indigenous ideals of Swadharma and
Swaraj.
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 This book had tremendous effect on Indian nationalists. In fact, at political level, his conclusion
about a general state of war, fired by an intuitive but coherent idea of a nation, and overriding
communitarian difference, gave a radical genealogy to the Extremists and revolutionary
terrorists, who could now turn for inspiration to the violently anti-colonial and – indeed
nationalist- resistance of an earlier generation. Thus Savarkar’s interpretation of Indian history
was fully nationalist that challenged both colonial conceptions of India and re-vitalized
nationalist sentiments.
Interesting point of his writing in this book is that his account of the War of Independence of
1857 makes a strong case for ‘feelings of mutual friendship’ between the Hindus and the
Muslims. There is acknowledgement in it of the enmity between Hindus and Muslims but that is
brushed aside as being ‘born out of ignorance’. In fact there are lyrical passages in it where
Savarkar talks about members of the two antagonistic faiths partaking of the ‘same milk of the
breasts of the Motherland’ and becoming one.
However one finds a paradigm shift in Savarkar’s ideology, when turn to his seminal text
Essentials of Hindutva written in 1923. This text has taken a place of Classic, as far as the
ideology of Hindutva and Hindu nationalism are concerned. It is difficult to provide correct
explanation for Savarkar’s ideological movement from violent Indian revolutionary nationalism
to the concept of exclusive Hindu nationalism in a space of about 15 years. His biographer
suggests that his experience of Muslim prisoners while in prison was largely responsible for that
(Keer: 234). However his published prison letters to his brother during 1918-20 do not mention
any such thing what Keer argues.
Pinnacle Research Journals 4 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com Savarkar’s Essentials of Hindutva is an attempt to define and construct the idea of Hindu,
Hinduism and Hindutva. The text begins with the problem and anxiety of naming. Thus, one may
notice in the text that there is a rather strained, complex, confused and confusing argument for
preferring Hindu rather than Bharat, and later a contemporary, transcendental political Hindutva
rather than the hitherto diverse/sectarian polymorphous Hinduism.
However the text seems based on the powerful assumption that reads, as Savarkar points out, that
Hindu is not a word but a History. Thus, beginning with historical analysis, Savarkar imagines
three fundamental bonds that would conjoin the Hindus as a common entity, namely, Rashtra
(territory), Jati and Sanskriti. Thus territorially, a Hindu is one who feels being attached to the
geographical tract extending between the rivers Sindu (Indus) and Brahamputra, on the one hand,
and from Himalaya to the Cape Comorin on the other hand. This geographical specification
indeed becomes identical to what has traditionally been considered to the land of India for
centuries. Thus, ‘ …the first requisite of Hindutva is that he be a citizen of Hindusthan either by
himself or through his forefathers,” However Savarkar argues in same sentence, “yet it is not the
only requisite qualification of it, as the term Hindu has come to mean much more than its
geographical significance’ (Savarkar: 113). This leads him to introduce the idea of common
blood or Jati which is typical in his political construction of Hindutva. As far as his notion of
Jati is concerned, he considered,
“The Hindus are not merely the citizens of the Indian state because they are united not only by
the bonds of the love they bear to a common motherland but also by the bonds of a common
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 blood. They are not only a Nation but also a race-jati. The word jati derived from the root Jan to
produce, means a brotherhood, a race determined by a common origin,-possessing a common
blood”. (Savarkar: 114)
This racial demarcation of the Hindu was seemingly not meant to claim any kind of superiority
of Hindus in comparison to other races but to distinguish them from others. Furthermore
Savarkar wrote that the trait of Hindutva encompassing the life of the inhabitants of this part of
land would remain ineradicable, as the impulse of his Hindu blood would make him feel the
pride of being Hindu. His argument is,
“A Hindu believing in any theoretical or philosophical or social system, orthodox or heterodox,
provided it is unquestionably indigenous and founded by a Hindu may lose his sect but not his
Hindutva-his Hinduness—because the most important essential which determines it is the
inheritance of the Hindu blood. Therefore all those who love the land that stretches from Sindhu
to Sindhu from the Indus to the Seas, as their fatherland consequently claim to inherit the blood
of the race that has evolved, by incorporation and adaptation, from the ancient Saptasindhus can
be said to possess two of the most essential requisites of Hindutva”.(Savarkar: 117,118)
A third important aspect of his idea of Essentials of Hindutva is the ‘commonality’ of Hindu’s
cultural root. Thus,
Pinnacle Research Journals 5 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com “Hindus are bound together not only by the tie of the love we bear to a common fatherland and
by the common blood that courses through our veins and keeps our hearts throbbing and our
affections warm, but also by the tie of the common homage we pay to our great civilization—our
Hindu culture, which could not be better rendered than by the word Sanskriti suggestive as it is
of that language, Sanskrit, which has been the chosen means of expression and preservation of
that culture, of all that was best and worth-preserving in the history of our race. We are one
because we are a nation a race and own a common Sanskriti (civilization)”. (Savarkar: 118)
After this discussion on ‘essential implications of Hindutva’, Savarkar attempts to define
civilization in his text. According to him, “Civilization is the expression of the mind of man.
Civilization is the account of what man has made of matter. If matter is the creation of the Lord,
then civilization is the miniature secondary creation of man” (Savarkar: 119). For him the story
of the civilization of a nation is the story of its thoughts, its actions and its achievements.
Literature and art tell us of its thoughts; history and social institutions of its actions and
achievements. On this basis Savarkar argues about the commonalities of Hindus, ‘as our history
tells the story of the action of our race, so does our literature taken in its fullest sense tell the
story of the thought of our race’ (Savarkar:119).
Further, the works of art and architecture are also a common inheritance of our race, whether
they are representative of Vaidik or Avaidik school of thought. He then discusses that the
common institutions and a common law, feast and festivals, rites and rituals of Hindus, although
Hindus may differ in details are nevertheless both the cause and the effect of the basic unity of
our race.
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 On this basis Savarkar concludes, “These ... constitute the essence of our civilization and mark
us out a cultural unit. We Hindus are not only a Rashtra, a Jati, but as a consequence of being
both, own a common Sanskriti expressed, preserved chiefly and originally through Sanskrit, the
real mother tongue of our race. Everyone who is a Hindu inherits this Sanskriti and owes his
spiritual being to it as truly as he owes his physical one to the land and the blood of his
forefathers.” (Savarkar: 123)
Summarizing all these, he reaches to a very complex definition of who is Hindu,
“ A Hindu, therefore, to sum up the conclusions arrived at, is he who looks upon the land that
extends from Sindu to Sindu-from the Indus to the Seas,-as the land of his forefathers —his
Fatherland (Pitribhu), who inherits the blood of that race whose first discernible source could be
traced to the Vedic Saptasindhus and which on its onward march, assimilating much that was
incorporated and ennobling much that was assimilated, has come to be known as the Hindu
people, who has inherited and claims as his own the culture of that race as expressed chiefly in
their common classical language Sanskrit and represented by a common history, a common
literature, art and architecture, law and jurisprudence, rites and rituals, ceremonies and
sacraments, fairs and festivals; and who above all, addresses this land, this Sindhusthan as his
Holyland (Punyabhu), as the land of his prophets and seers, of his godmen and gurus, the land of
piety and pilgrimage. These are the essentials of Hindutva—a common nation (Rashtra) a
common race (Jati) and a common civilization (Sanskriti). All these essentials could best be
summed up by stating in brief that he is a Hindu to whom Sindhusthan is not only a Pitribhu but
also a Punyabhu”. (Savarkar: 134)
Pinnacle Research Journals 6 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com In fact, Punayabhumi and pitribhumi are most debatable terms in Savarkar’s political thought.
Generally accepted, Punyabhu or Punyabhumi is defined as a country where one earns one
‘religious merits’. However as Woolf argues Savarkar seems interpreting this more in a patriotic
way than a religious one. In this context, his sense of patriotism is expressed by his notion of
‘martyrdom’, conceived as heroism and hero-worship (Woolf: 12).
In fact, on the one hand, Savarkar describes Punyabhu as mentioned above ‘the land of [his]
prophets and seers, of his Godmen and gurus, the land of piety and pilgrimage’ and on the other
hand, it is also the land in which ‘every stone [here] has a story of martyrdom to tell! This means
that the Punyabhu or ‘Holy land’ is where one earns merit through patriotism and not through
religious worship.
As far as pitribhumi is concerned, he later on clarifies,
“Hindusthan is a Fatherland .... to us not because it is a land entirely unlike any other land in the
world but because it is associated with our history, has been the home of our forefathers, wherein
our mothers gave us the first suckle at their breast and our fathers cradled us on their knees from
generation to generation.” (HRS: 9)
Applying this canon , Savarkar asserts that the converts to Christianity and Islam could not be
considered as Hindus despite sharing common culture and life style due to the fact that though
they regard Hindusthan as their father land, they do not regard it as their holy land. Here one
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 might notice, by this Savarkar appears to be advancing his interrelated agenda of bringing about
broad based Hindu Sangathan on the one hand and prelude the believers in the other religion s
from such a Sangathan.
One of the important points that his text makes at different places and in different context is his
notion of Hinduism and Hindutva. Savarkar differentiates between Hinduism and Hindutva.
First of all he argues 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”. ( Savarkar: 74)
Further, “Hinduism means the ' ism ' of the Hindu; and as the word Hindu has been derived from
the word Sindhu, the Indus, meaning primarily all the people who reside in the land that extends
from Sindhu to Sindhu, Hinduism must necessarily mean the religion or the religions that are
peculiar and native to this land and these people. If we are unable to reduce the different tenets
and beliefs to a single system of religion then the only way would be to cease to maintain that
Hinduism is a system and to say that it is a set of systems consistent with, or if you like,
contradictory or even conflicting with, each other.” (Savarkar: 126)
On the other hand, “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. Hindutva embarrasses all the departments of thought and activity of the whole Being
of our Hindu race”. (Savarkar: 73-74)
Pinnacle Research Journals 7 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com In the last part of his text, he praises, ‘Unique Natural Blessings to Hindusthan’ and its culture
incomparable to any country of the world.
In short, Savarkar attempts to construct the Hindu identity on the basis of Hindutva. His
argument is that the Aryans who settled in India at the down of history already formed a nation
now embodied in the Hindus. Their Hindutva, according to him rests on three pillars –
geographical unity, racial features and a common culture. It is important to note that Savarkar
minimizes the importance of religious criteria in the definition of Hindu by claiming that the
Hinduism was only one of attributes of Hindutva. This might be read as a fact that like most
ethno –religious nationalist, Savarkar was not believer but an Ideologue. It can also be explained
as an attempt to deal with the extreme religious differentiation within Hindu society – a fact that
would diminish his idea of homogeneous community. Thus the Hindutva of Savarkar is primarily
represents an ethnic community possessing a territory and sharing the same racial and cultural
characteristics. On the other hand, Savarkar’s ideology of Hindutva can be seen rooted in the
vision of Hindu solidarity. It was in fact a political construct whose antecedents lay in the
cultural ethos of Hindus. He maintained that in spite of having numerous external
differentiations, internally, Hindus are bound together by certain distinct cultural, historical,
religious, social and linguistic commonalities.
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 Apart from the text Essentials of Hindutva, Hindu Rashtra Darshan or six presidential addresses
to the Hindu Mahasabha, is important source to discuss Savarkar’s political thought.
Savarkar’s six presidential addresses to the Hindu Mahasabha collected in the form of Hindu
Rashtra Darshan shows his idea of Hindu nation as well as his idea of Swaraj- a term employed
by all nationalists including Gandhi( 1869-1948), Tilak ( 1856-1920) and Aurobindo (18721950) to define a nation against British colonialism.
Like other nationalists for Savarkar, Swarajay ( Savarkar writes Swaraj as Swarajya in his
writings) did not only mean the political Freedom of our country or land or the independence of
the geographical unit called India but for him Swarajay was needed as ‘Our country is endeared
to us because it has been the abode of our race, our people, our dearest and nearest relations and
as such is only metaphorically referred to, to express our national being’(HRS: 9). Here the idea
of race might be underlined. It leads to his Hindu conception of India that he points out
‘Therefore Indian swarajya or Indian swatantrya means, as far as the Hindu Nation is concerned,
the political independence of the Hindus, the freedom which would enable them to grow to their
full height’( HRS: 9).
Thus according to him, Swarajya to the Hindus must mean only that 'Rajya' in which their
'Swatva', their 'Hindutva' can assert itself without being over lorded by any non-Hindu people,
whether they be Indian Territorial’s or extra-territorial.
Pinnacle Research Journals 8 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com For this Swarajya, Savarkar emphasizes on language. Thus, his Swarajya includes Sanskrit
nishtha Hindi as national language. According to him, “By Hindi we if course mean the pure
'Sankrit Nishtha' Hindi, as we find it for example in the 'Satyartha Prakash’ written by Maharshi
Dayanand Saraswati. How simple and unstained with a single unnecessary foreign word is that
Hindi and how expressive withal!” (HRS: 47).
For Savarkar, this ‘Sanskrit Nishtha’ Hindi had nothing to do with that hybrid, the so-called
Hindusthani which was being hatched up by the Wardha scheme. Savarkar calls this a ‘linguistic
monstrosity’ that must be ruthlessly suppressed. He was so keen to use this pure Hindi that he
called that it is bounden duty of Hindus to out ruthlessly all unnecessary alien words whether
Arabian or English, from every Hindu tongue. However, again showing a utilitarian stance, he
said that he was not against the English.
“We are not against the English or any other language; nay, we insist on the study of the English
as an indispensible necessity and a profitable passport to world literature. But we must not allow
the influx of alien words into our language without checking their pass and testing their
necessity”. (HRS: 47)
Hindu Rashtra Darshan also points out his method to attain Swarajya. Unlike Gandhi who
employed principled nonviolence for Swaraj, Savarkar’s saw the use of nonviolence in very
narrow and strategic sense. Moreover he was open to use violence against the aggression of
British. As far as armed revolt as a part of his political theory is concerned, in principal he does
not rejects it, however, in given Indian political situation, he does not approve it also on strategic
ground. During Second World War, on the possibility of national armed revolt against British
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 as British were engaged at war front, Savarkar strategically argued that as India was disarmed,
disorganized and disunited thus an armed revolt against England on a National scale could not be
thought that situation.
Although, this stance shows Savarkar’s insight to see the situation, however, there was a clear
political ethics behind this. In his words,
“…the most practical factor and one which ought to be common to all of these schools of moral
thought and which alone can practically serve to distinguish a moral act from an immoral one, a
virtue from a vice, the good from the bad is the utilitarian principle that everything that
contributes under a given set of circumstances to human good is moral, a virtue and the opposite
is immoral, a vice under those given circumstances; that all mortality is essentially human”.
(HRS: 83)
Based on this philosophy, Savarkar saw political theory of absolute nonviolence as crime. Thus,
judged from this utilitarian ethics, according to him, the principle of absolute non-violence and
condemning all armed resistance even to incorrigible aggression could not but was ruled out as
“absolutely impracticable, anti human and therefore positively immoral”. Thus absolute nonviolence that means non-violence under all circumstances causes an incalculable harm to
humanity.
However for Savarkar, relative non-violence on the whole was doubtless a virtue so preeminently “contributing to human good as to form one of the fundamentals on which human life
whether individual or social can take its stand and evolve all social amenities” ( HRS: 83)
Pinnacle Research Journals 9 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com . According to him, law of nature or the will of God, there is no room for absolute non-violence.
His argument is that ‘man could not have saved himself from utter extinction nor could have but
led the precarious and wretched life of a coward and a worm had he not succeeded in adding the
strength of artificial Arms to his natural arm’ (HRS: 84).
Based on this Savarkar observes that ‘The belief in absolute non-violence condemning all armed
resistance even to aggression evinces no mahatmaic saintliness but a monomaniacal
senselessness’ (HRS: 84). Thus according to Savarkar Gandhi’s political programme based on
the monomaniacal principle of absolute non-violence is not worth a moment’s consideration.
Thus, as a pragmatic political theorist, if on the one hand, he rules out the extreme remedy of an
armed rising on a National scale, on the other hand, he also criticizes other extreme of absolute
non-violence, that condemns all armed resistance even to an incorrigible aggression, is also ruled
out not only on practical grounds alone but even on moral grounds.
In Savarkar’s vision, Swarajay must mean the Hindusthani Swarajay in which Hindu, Moslem
and all other citizens all have equal responsibilities, equal duties and equal rights. However such
Swarajay would not tolerate a particular community on religious grounds to get itself cut off
from the Central Government, demand portions of our country which is the inalienable basis on
which this our national Swarajay stands and any such aggressive claim on the part of a
community would be immediately put down as an act of treachery by the united strength of the
Central Government.
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 Therefore, he opposed the demand of Muslims for the grant of separate electorate in India. He
claimed that being bestowed with such preferential treatment, Muslims would probably be
handed down the right of:
“..exercising the political veto on the legitimate rights and privileges of the majority and call it
swarajya ....The Hindus do not want a change of masters, are not going to ...fight and die only to
replace an Edward by an Aurangzeb simply because the latter happens to be born within the
Indian borders, but they want henceforth to be masters themselves in their own house, in their
own land.” (HRS: 45)
As far as the Rights of non-Hindu Minorities is concerned, Savarkar maintains the principles of
'one man one vote.' Further the public services to go by merit alone. Moreover, fundamental
rights and obligations to be shared by all citizens alike irrespective of any distinction of race or
religion. However, according to him, “...any further mention of minority rights is on principle
not only unnecessary but self-contradictory, because it again introduces a consciousness of
majority and minority on communal basis.” (HRS: 53)
Pinnacle Research Journals 10 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com Thus, on the question of minority rights, the approach of Savarkar was in consonance with his
broad conceptualization of the philosophy of Hindutva. Therefore, it is not surprising to see that
he stated the crux of the Hindu Sanghatanist ideology in such a way, ‘Hinduise all politics and
Militarize Hindudom !’
Like Mahatma Gandhi, Savarkar also gave a constructive programme. This included,
intensifying efforts on conducting a whirlwind campaign at every village and town and city to
remove untouchability. Further he suggested that all universities, colleges and schools should
make military training compulsory to students that could secure their entry into the Naval, Aerial
and Military forces and institutions. His third programme included preparing the Hindu
Electorate to the utmost measure possible to vote only for those Hindu Sanghatanists who openly
pledge to safeguard Hindu interests
From these one might conclude that Savarkar was not only an armchair philosopher but a
political activist too. In fact, one of the political actions was his programme of removal of
untouchables which was hailed by Gandhiji also. Eradication of untouchability is the foremost
and absolute dharma. It is desirable in the extreme to build pan-Hindu temples that are freely
open to all Hindus irrespective of their caste rather than build separate and exclusive temples for
untouchables…While it is important to build new pan -Hindu temples, it is equally important to
throw open old temples to all Hindus. The seemingly impossible task of untouchability
eradication can made possible by change of mind that will consolidate Hindus, thus, he said,
“…that the removal of untouchability is a task as easy to be tackled as it is bound to strengthen
Hindu consolidation. It will be nothing short of a victory won in the battlefield if we, within five
year’s time, can sweep out untouchability from the face of our country by killing the very idea of
not touching our co-religionists on ground of birth in a particular caste alone, and removing
automatically the special disability, some economical and some social, from which those of our
religious brothers are suffering most unjustly at this hour. It is only a change of mentality and
nothing more than that can achieve this seemingly insuperable task.” (HRS: 126)
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 CRITICAL EVALUATION OF SAVARKAR’S POLITICAL WRITINGS
Savrkar’s political writings represent a blend of Hindu philosophy, Western materialism and his
own experience and mediation. However, Savarkar’s life and work, and his literary
compositions present paradoxes and controversial phenomena. There are two schools of thought
regarding Savarkar’s political writings. One school of thought sees his political vision
(Hindutva) as the greatest danger to the foundation of modern secular state democracy and
multiculturalism. On the other hand, second school of thought sees Savarkar and his political
theory as a legitimate and ambitious form of democratic self-determination. In spite of these
debates, it can be said, Savarkar’s political theory is a distinct ideological formulation that
focuses on the homogeneity of the Hindu population living in a particular tract of land and
having the urge to create a nation based on the cultural moorings of the majority of the people.
Pinnacle Research Journals 11 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com If fact, Savarkar’s political writings can be located in the broad framework of intersection of
colonialism, nationalism and Hindu revivalism. The intellectual tradition of Hindu revivalism as
a form of nationalism and counter - colonialism had two streams, called Hinduism and Hindutva.
If Hinduism was religious –personal in nature based on religious –philosophical basis of Hindu
way of life providing a code of moral and religious ethics, as seen in the case of Vivekanad
(1863-1902), Tilak (1856-1920) and Dayanand (1824- 1883), the notion of Hindutva was based
on the reconstruction of politico –cultural system of country in such a way that Hindus would get
an absolute preponderance in the affairs of the country. Savarkar’s contribution as political
theorist is that he tried to refine and re-shape the ideology of Hindutva as viable theoretical
construct. Moreover, he might be called the propagator of Hindutva, protector of Hindutva, and
organizer of Hindutva. On the other hand, Savarkar was also presenting a Hindu response to
prevailing nationalism of his time in very strategic way,
“As a spokesman of majority interests, Savarkar formulated an ideology which could demolish
the claims of national parity made by the Muslims, negate the territorial concepts of nationhood
propagated by Congress, blunt the edge of the demands made by the Depressed Classes and
prevent atomization of the Hindu community.” (Dixit: 131)
Yet this theoretical construct of Hindutva had negative side too. Savarkar political thought and
his idea of Hindutva: who is Hindu a basic text for nationalist Hindus, illustrates the mechanism
of Hindu nationalist identity building through the stigmatization and emulation of threatening
others. Second Savarkar’s nationalism seems based on ‘threatening others’. These threatening
others are suspected because of their divided loyalty or because of their low level of civilization
measured as measured in terms of nationals virtues. Thus, as one observer comments,
“Savarkar politicised religion and introduced religious metaphors in politics. He pioneered an
extreme, uncompromising and rhetorical form of Hindu nationalism in Indian political discourse.
His life exhibited an unwavering pursuit of a single idea: to establish India as Hindu nation. Even
today, Savarkar remains the first and most original, prophet of extremism in India.” (Sharma:
124)
SAJMR Spectrum: A Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.1 Issue 8, November 2012, ISSN 2278‐0637 Savarkar has also been charged as being an ideologue whose political construct of Hindutva did
not impress many people in India. As Dixit points out,
“Savarkar’s ideology failed to release its political goal because it lacked the strength that comes
from the mass support. His unidimensional approach to politics –protection of Hindu interests
against Muslim encroachment –had no relevancy for the Hindu masses.” (Dixit: 135)
Finally, Savarkar and his idea of Hindutva have the object of attention and the centre of
academic as well as public controversy in past and contemporary India because of his militant
activism and nationalism during the struggle for Independence. Yet, one might see, controversies
about Savarkar are mostly polemical in nature that do not take into account the philosophical
tenets underlying his social and political thoughts. Unfortunately, both Indian as well as Western
scholars have focused only on some particular fragments of his thoughts and action without
analyzing his various theoretical concepts in a complex and coherent framework.
Pinnacle Research Journals 12 http://www.pinnaclejournals.com REFERENCES
1.
Dixit, Prabha. The Ideology of Hindu Nationalism, in Thomas Pantham and Kenneth L.
Deutch (eds.), Political Thought in Modern India, New Delhi: Sage Publication, 1986.
2.
Godbole, V.S. Rationalism of Veer Savarkar. Thane: Itihas Patrika Prakashan:
Thane.2004.
3.
Hindu Rashtra Darshan (HRS), speeches given by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in
capacity
of
President
of
Akhil
Bhartiya
Hindu
Mahasabhha.
www.savarkar.org/en/download.
4.
Keer , Dhananjay. 1988. Veer Savarkar. Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1988.
5.
Lederle, Matthew. Philosophical Trends in Modern Maharashtra. Bombay: Popular
Prakashan, 1976.
6.
Samagra Savarkar Vangmaya (SSV), Vol. 1-8, edited by Shankar Ramchandra, Pune:
Samagra Savarkar Vangmaya Prakashan Samiti, 2001.
7.
Savarkar, V.D. Essential of Hinduism, in S.K Chaudhary’s Great Political Thinker:
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, New Delhi: Sonali Publication, 2008.
8.
Sharma, Jiotirmaya. Hindutva: Exploring the Idea of Hindu Nationalism. New Delhi:
Viking/Penguin Book, 2003.
9.
Wolf, S. O. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s ‘Strategic Agnosticism’: A Compilation of his
Socio-Political Philosophy and Worldview in Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and
Comparative Politics, archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/vol. text server/.../HPSACP_Wolf.pdf.