• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

New form of Hinduism called Hindutva

Status
Not open for further replies.

prasad1

Active member
A new form of Hinduism is emerging around the world: one that is tired of being seen as passive and tolerant, like a suffering docile wife. It wants to be aggressive, violent. So it prefers Durga and Kali to the demure Gauri; Shiva as Rudra and Virabhadra and Bhairava rather than as the guileless Bholenath or the august Dakshinamurthy; and the Krishna of the Mahabharat to the affectionate Bhagavata Krishna. It visualises Ram without Sita. It wants its Ganesh to lose that pot belly and sport a six-pack ab. All this while insisting, with violence if necessary, on the values of vegetarianism and seva and ‘giving up the ego’, which is the principle of ‘sanatana dharma’ — not just a religion but a way of life.
This new form of Hinduism is what we call Hindutva. We can call it a sampradaya, a movement within the vast ocean of Hinduism that has many such movements, traditions, forces and counterforces. Hindutva sampradaya, like all sampradayas in history, insists it is the true voice of Hinduism. Like all sampradayas, it rejects all alternative readings of Hinduism.
And so, when you direct them to an article, ‘The Hindu View on Food and Drink’ by S. Ganesh and Hari Ravikumar on IndiaFacts.com, which draws attention to the fact that while Vedic scriptures do value the cow, they have no problem with the consumption of bulls and oxen and barren cows, members of the Hindutva brigade will question the credentials of the authors and their Hinduness, invariably in language that is hyperbolic, rhetorical and violent. There is no room for discussion or nuance here. The only language is force and bullying. Where is this coming from?
It comes from institutionalised paranoia: a belief that innocent Hindi-speaking rural Bharat needs rescuing from an evil English-speaking India that favours Nehru, from the liberals who equate Hinduism only with casteism, and from Euro-American scholars who insist Shiva is a ‘phallic’ god. And, to be fair, there is a modicum of truth in their argument.
In his book Rearming Hinduism, Vamsee Juluri expresses outrage at the way Hinduism is being projected in the U.S. That outrage and anguish is genuine, and can be felt in the NRI community that has increasingly become more and more vocal, even aggressive. When ‘liberals’ deny this outrage and anguish, it seems to consolidate the paranoia of the Hindutva sampradaya. When the liberal press dismisses the book by Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Temples — What Happened to Them, as right-wing propaganda, and gleefully declares that the Hindu memory of Muslim kings destroying thousands of Hindu temple is just not true on the basis of Richard Eaton’s Temple Desecration and Muslim States in Medieval India, you start wondering if the scientific and historical method is simply designed to mock all things that a traditional Hindu simply assumes to be true. When the banning of radical literature does not meet with the same outrage as the banning of Wendy Doniger’s Hindus: An Alternative History, a section of the population starts feeling that they are alone, isolated and rejected, by the people who claim to be fair and just and liberal.
How do you strike back at those who simply invalidate your memories and beliefs by constantly quoting science and facts? You simply create your own narrative and dismiss theirs. And this is what is happening in the beef-eating discourse. It is a symbolic attack on the ‘educated Indian’ who did not stand up for Hinduism in the international arena. And the Muslims, sadly, are the tragic collateral damage.
In the 1980s, we saw how the then Congress government tried to appease the Muslim orthodoxy in the Shah Bano case by diluting even a Supreme Court judgment that gave maintenance rights to divorced Muslim women, but did not bother to appease the Hindutva sampradaya in the Roop Kanwar sati case when the court declared sati a crime and not a religious act. In these cases, women were simply symbols in a fight where religious orthodoxy was demanding its place in a secular nation state. Now, it is the turn of the cow to be that symbol.
When the secular nation state tilts in favour of one religion and seems to be persecuting another, there is bound to be a backlash. And that is what we are facing now: a karma-phala (karmic fruit) of karmic-bija (karmic seed) sown by the Congress on the one hand, when it unashamedly appeased Muslim religious orthodoxy, and the liberals on the other, who endorsed their secular and rational and atheistic credentials by repeatedly projecting Hinduism as only a violent and oppressive force. Let us ponder on our contribution to the rising tide of ahimsa terrorism, while the still starving ‘rescued’ cow wades through garbage in Indian towns and villages, eating plastic.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/holy-cow-unholy-violence/article7727157.ece?homepage=true
 
The author is either confused or had a peg of Bacardi before sitting to write this copy pasted piece. Whatever is said in other paragraphs has been completely negated in the last para. What does he convey? Will mr. Prasad please oblige?
 
The author is either confused or had a peg of Bacardi before sitting to write this copy pasted piece. Whatever is said in other paragraphs has been completely negated in the last para. What does he convey? Will mr. Prasad please oblige?
Whether it will be correct if say,

" Hinduism is religious; but Hindutva is political ".
 
D N Jha is a historian, former member of the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) and expert on ancient and medieval India. Speaking with Eram Agha, Jha discussed how researching beef led him to live with police protection, why beef-eating raises certain hackles — and why he thinks Hindutva’s history is a mystery:



I faced difficulties when my book Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary Traditions was published in 2001. A Hindutva brigade vandalised my house, burnt copies of my book and demanded my arrest — I received threats of all kinds, including death.
I remained under police protection for over two years. A Hindutva organisation filed a case against me and got an injunction on publication and circulation of the book, thus effectively banned. But I challenged the ban and succeeded in getting it lifted. I also got the book published from London. Thus, I defied the ban — but was in police protection for years.


Well, my book based on textual studies shows beef-eating was quite common in the Vedic period when cattle were sacrificed frequently. But it appears from a close examination of texts that the practice was gradually given up by Brahmins, who relegated it to untouchable castes. During the medieval period, the practice of killing cows for food came to be associated also with Muslims.
Since the late 19th century, the cow was increasingly thought of as a mark of ‘Hindu’ identity — Muslims have been stereotyped as beef eaters and the Hindu right always asserted, wrongly, that Muslims brought beef eating to India.
With BJP coming to power, beef has assumed unprecedented importance in contemporary Indian politics. Beef ban politics is part of BJP’s attempt to project India as a country of vegetarians, evident from restrictions on non-vegetarian food in educational institutions.


They belong to the Hindu right. Their obsession is understandable — with no participation in India’s freedom struggle, they are seeking legitimacy from the past. In the process, they are concocting history.
The past as seen by the Hindu right is a negation of the progress Indian historiography made since Independence — it’s a denial of rational, scientific methods of writing and researching history.

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatime...&utm_campaign=TOInewHP&utm_medium=Widget_Stry
 
In directing States to show “zero tolerance” to attempts to “weaken the secular fabric” of the country, the Union Home Ministry was voicing its concern at the widening social acceptance of communal violence as a normal part of everyday life. The lynching in Dadri of Mohammad Akhlaq for “eating beef” was an extreme case, but the circumstances that led to the murder were not dissimilar to those in many other parts of the country following the political mobilisation along communal lines against cattle slaughter. That the Ministry thought it fit to issue the directive despite law and order being a State subject indicates the seriousness of the situation in several States. Many Hindutva activists have projected cow slaughter as a deliberate assault on the religious sensitivities of Hindus by butchers and traders and exporters belonging to other religions. In such a situation, it would not take much effort on the part of extremist elements to portray any meal in a non-Hindu family as a grave provocation. Thus, the advisory issued by the Ministry — warning against the exploitation of religious emotions or sentiments and calling for the “strictest action as per law” against the culprits — demands the urgent attention of State governments. Law enforcers need to act at the very first sign of trouble.
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/edi...e-new-normal/article7731262.ece?homepage=true
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top