Emerging Challenges to Christian Presence and Witness in India
Rev. Dr. Selvam Robertson
Emerging Challenges to Christian Presence and Witness in India
Emerging Challenges to Christian Presence and Witness in India
Introduction
This paper is
an attempt to explain Hindutva as propagated and practiced by RSS ideologues
and its challenges for Christian witness in India as BJP the political arm of
RSS is at the centre with absolute majority. In the first place I have
graphically described the various attempts that are underway to communalize the
nation and its various instruments against religious minorities particularly,
Christians, without excluding the Muslims. And in the second place some issues
are highlighted, without causing panic, to reflect upon.
Hindutva,
Hindu and Hinduism
A sketchy
definition of these three terms can vividly reflect the tone and purpose of
them being revived and reinforced. To
start with, ‘Hindutva is a derivative word from Hindu and it is not identical
with Hinduism’.[1]
‘Hinduness’ is the expression more close to.
Hindutva embraces all the departments of thought and activity of the
whole Being of Hindu race.[2] It
is not a word but a history.[3]
The first essential of Hindutva is securing Hindusthan/Hindu Rashtra/Hindu
nation or the land of Hindus (geographical).[4] In
brief, Hindutva is a communal and majoritarion ideology and not a religion.
In the light
of Hindutva ideology, ‘a Hindu is the
one who looks upon India as his Fatherland (Pitribhu), who inherits the blood
of that race whose first discernible source could be traced to the Vedic
Saptasindhus , 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 as his Holyland (Punyabhu),
as the land of his prophets and seers, of his godmen and gurus, the land of
piety and pilgrimage.[5]
Hindus ‘are not only a Nation but also a race-jati.’[6]
There is a false assumption that ‘at some future time the word Hindu may come
to indicate a citizen of Hindusthan and nothing else. Whoever does not uphold
these characteristics are considered anti to them.
Jawaharlal
Nehru disagreed with these ideas and wrote, “the word ‘Hindu’ does not occur at
all in our ancient literature. The first reference to it in an Indian book is,
I am told, in a Tantrik work of the
eighth century A.C., where Hindu means a people and not the followers of a
particular religion. But it is very clear that the word is a very old one, as
it occurs in the Avesta and in old Persian.”[7]
However,
Hindutva derogatively distinguishes Hindus from Christians and Muslims in India
and places them second to Hindus as “we are Hindus even before we emerge from
the womb of our mother. We are therefore born as Hindus. About the others, they
are born to this world as simple unnamed human beings and later on, either
circumcised or baptized, they become Muslims or Christians.”[8]
From the point
of Hindutva, “Hinduism means the system of religious beliefs found common
amongst the Hindu people.”[9] And “Hinduism is only a derivative, a
fraction, a part of Hindutva."[10] Although protecting Hinduism and Hindus is
the main agenda of Hindutva, its objectives are multifaceted and they will
unfold as the paper progresses.
Hindu
Rashtra
In order to undo with the nationalistic and patriotic leaders and their
contributions towards Indian nation, and to usher in a Hindu nation, Hindutva
terms Territorial/Geographical Nationalism as ‘anti-Britishism’ and says it is different from true patriotism
and nationalism. The efforts to maintain unity in diversity are caricatured as
‘it was the scheming Britisher who planted in our minds perverted notions of
nationhood in a bid to break the proud and defiant spirit of the Hindus’. [11]
Again “the first thing he taught was that this was one great ‘continent’ and
not a country; and we are not one people
and one nation’.[12]
The present
maladies, of India like corruption, disintegration, are the outcome of the
present form of nationalism which was adopted in the place of a natural living
nationalism (Hindu). [13]
There is an
upsurge to establish a Hindu nation or Hindu Rashtra in the place of the nation
India. The declaration “Territorial nationalism has verily emasculated our
nation and what more can we expect of a body deprived of its vital energy?”[14]
is a vivid evidence to the communal schemes
of Hindutva which is undertaken by the RSS. Golwalkar writes, ‘the Rashtriya Swayamsevak
Sangh has resolved to fulfill this age-old national mission; verily this is the
one real practical world mission- if ever there was one.[15]
The Hindu
Rashtra ‘stands not only for political and economic unity but also for cultural
and religious unity’.[16]
Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader Praveen Togadia rejected the discourse of
development without “Hindu Rashtra”. He
said development would be of no use if Hindus were not “safe” at home. He asked
the “Hindus of the country to become one and prepare the way for Hindu
Rashtra.” He also provocatively said, “development is important, but what will
be its use when Hindus won’t be there at homes, and like Hindus in Kashmir,
they are thrown out of their motherland.”[17]
The very proposal of a Hindu Nation based on the foregone
stories and ideals contrary to unity in diversity is a concern for religious
communities, particularly, for Christian witness in India.
Hindu
Culture
Hidutva
ideology assumes a monoculture in the place of multi-culture in India. In the
words of Golwalkar “our concept of Hindu Nation is not a mere bundle of
political and economic rights. It is essentially cultural. Our ancient and
sublime cultural values of life form its life-breath. And it is only an intense
rejuvenation of the spirit of our culture that can give us the true vision of
our national life, and a fruitful direction to all our efforts in solving the
innumerable problems confronting our nation today.”[18]
Accepting other progressive and civilizing cultural aspects is dismissed as
“there can be no greater national humiliation than to be a mere carbon copy of
others. Let us remember that blind imitation is not progress. It only leads us
to spiritual subjection.”[19]
There is no
possibility at all to propose a monoculture in India. Nehru saw the possibility
of an Indian culture and not a Hindu culture and wrote “a Buddhist or Jain in
India is a hundred per cent product of Indian thought and culture, yet neither
is a Hindu by faith. It, is, therefore, entirely misleading to refer to Indian
culture as Hindu culture. In later ages this culture was greatly influenced by
the impact of Islam, and yet it remained basically and distinctively Indian.”[20]
Further “it is, therefore, incorrect and undesirable, to use ‘Hindu’ or
‘Hinduism’ for Indian culture, even with reference to the distant past,
although the various aspects of thought,
as embodied in ancient writings, were the dominant expression of that culture.”[21]
The danger of this communal program is that for the sake
of merely preserving age old customs and practices many reforms and services
may be hampered. And age-old social evils, that were annihilated or reformed
with hard labor, may again pop up.
One
Language
Hindutva is
against the development of non-Sanskrit languages and rich resources embedded
in them. It glories Sanskrit as ‘our mother-tongue- the tongue in which the
mothers of our race spoke and which has given birth to all our present tongues.
Our gods spoke in Sanskrit, our sages thought in Sanskrit, our poets wrote in
Sanskrit. All that is best in us- the best thoughts, the best ideas, and the
best lines- seeks instinctively to clothe itself in Sanskrit.[22]
Further “Sanskrit is to this day one of the greatest cementing factors of our
national life.”[23]
It is assumed that, one day “as a solution to the problem of ‘lingua franca’,
till the time Sanskrit takes that place we shall have to give priority to Hindi
on the score of convenience.”[24]
The pride and
prestige of other languages is wrongly twisted with other issues. For example
“the formation of linguistic states has given one more handle to politicians to
work up linguistic chauvinism in the minds of people.”[25]
Again “the poisonous theory of linguistic states has aggravated the claims for
‘right of self-determination’ and ‘right of secession’.”[26]
The
revolutionary contributions of Tamil literature and Dravidian contributions for
social change and political discourse are adversely portrayed saying a foreign
missionary falsely propagated in Tamilnadu, that ‘Tamil culture, Tamil language
and everything Tamil differed fundamentally from the rest of the Bharatiya
culture, language, etc., and that the Tamilians formed an independent nation by
themselves.[27]
Hindutva ideology suggests that ‘the theme present in the Tirukkural is
the same old Hindu concept of catuvidha-purushartha’[28]
and not a distinct value.
There are
innumerable dialects in India which do not have a script. Every ethnic group
wishes to have its own language. Our attempts to provide these millions with
the transforming word of God and all the previous and present liberative
witnesses in this direction are under question.
Muslims
and Christians
To form a
Hindu nation with one culture and one language Christian and Muslim presence is
an obstacle. Hence, Hindutva groups concentrate on infiltrating the notion that
the forefathers of Muslims were Hindus, that they should return to the Hindu
fold as self-respecting persons, that they should give up their aggressive mode
of the Moghul days and wake up to the realities of the present century and
merge in the national current of life.[29]
Hindutva questions the patriotism of Muslims and attacks them for enjoying the
benefits of a minority religious community. [30]
The Christians
are accused of ‘keeping themselves aloof from the freedom struggle’ and
practicing not Christianity but ‘churchianity’.[31]
Another allegation is that there is no true religion in them they are only
trying to further their political ambitions.[32]
It is falsely attached that ‘the open rebellion going on in the Naga Hills is
all engineered by the Christian missionaries was accepted even by Pandit Nehru.[33]
If the
Christians do not subscribe to the ideology of Hindutva ‘they will remain here
as hostiles and will have to be treated as such’.[34]
In the view of M.S. Golwalkar “together with the change in their faith, gone is
the spirit of love and devotion for the nation.”[35]
In a way,
these two minority communities are pictured as ‘working against the nation’, a
dangerous charge that can bring about very adverse consequences to these
communities. There are many efforts to
press Hindutva ideology in to service while the BJP government is at the centre
and to bridle the religious minorities.
Shaking
our Foundation
The inherent
secular character of Indian Constitution has bestowed freedom to call her
children proudly as Indians. However,
ever since the inception of RSS in 1925 there have been efforts to undo the
secular framework of our constitution and call India a Hindu nation. This has
become obvious when the time tested principle of ‘Secular State’ is again
dragged into controversy by the BJP Government in the centre. In one of the
Republic Day advertisements of the Union Government the facsimile of the
Preamble of the Constitution was shown without the words “Socialist” and
“Secular”. BJP leaders defended it
saying that it was the facsimile of the original Constitution which was signed
on 26th January, 1950, where the words “Socialist” and “Secular”
were not mentioned. It is also a fact that the words “Socialist” and Secular”
were added in the year 1976 by virtue of 42nd amendment of the
Constitution. Nevertheless the question
is whether the original Constitution without the words “Socialist” and
“Secular” was chosen because it better suited the ideology of the ruling party
or it was an inadvertent omission.[36]
It cannot be
an inadvertent omission because even the Union Minister for Information
technology, Ravi Shankar Prasad, suggested a debate on this issue. This is also
in line with the argument that had been advanced when Vajpayee was the Prime
Minister that the Constitution needed a comprehensive review.[37]The
‘Justice Venkatachelliah commission he had appointed did not suggest deletion
of the words Secular and Social even if they had been adopted by parliament in
the years of the State of Emergency’.[38]
The founders
of RSS maintained that the very notion of ‘secularism’ is western and it has no
relevance to our country. They also argued that the word ‘secular’ is nowhere
to be found in our Constitution; People are confusing ‘secularism’ with
‘nationalism’.[39]
In their effort to subvert the plurality/diversity and bring about a Hindu
Nation they say ‘let the Constitution be re-examined and re-drafted, so as to
establish this unitary form of Government’.[40]
It is a fact
“contrary to what many in the BJP seem to think, secularism is not a policy
option for a government, but one of the original principles that inform the
Constitution.”[41]
Any efforts to replace a secular state with Hindu state or Hindu nation will
have enormous difficulties for the religious minorities in India.
Curtailing
Freedom of Religion
Even before
the addition of the word ‘Secular’ in the Preamble to Indian Constitution,
Article 25 guaranteed freedom of conscience, and freedom to profess, practice
and propagate any religion as one of the fundamental rights. Although,
protecting the right of all persons to freedom of religion is the
constitutional duty of the government of the day, there is an effort to dilute
freedom of religion.
President
Mukherjee in his republic day address said we have always reposed our trust in
‘equality’ where every faith is equal before the law and every culture blends
into another to create a positive dynamic.[42]
Indian civilization has celebrated pluralism, advocated tolerance and promoted
goodwill between diverse communities. These values need to be preserved with
utmost care and vigilance.[43]
US President ,
Obama spoke in clear terms to a crowded audience of mostly young people at New
Delhi that our nations are strongest when we see that we are all God’s children
– all equal in His eyes and worthy of His love. Upholding Article 25 of the Indian
Constitution is the responsibility of government, but it’s also the
responsibility of every person.[44]
Obama also
said ‘diversity is our strength’. And we have to guard against any efforts to
divide ourselves along sectarian lines or any other lines. He, with a sense of
concern, forcefully declared, “India
will succeed so long as it is not splintered along the lines of religious faith
– so long as it’s not splintered along any lines- and is unified as one nation.[45]
Freedom of
religion is a fundamental right in Indian constitution and in the universal
human rights. A government that cannot ensure the fundamental rights guaranteed
by the Constitution equally to all its citizens will quickly lose its political
legitimacy and representative character.[46]
It is a
paradox that a few states in India have legislated anti-conversion laws. It is
more disturbing that the BJP government is creating disturbing situations to
bring in debate on freedom of religion and enact an anti-conversion law thereby
depriving the religious minorities their right to profess, practice and
propagate their own religion.
Religious
Tinge to Democracy
Democracy
helps religious minorities to express their concerns and grievances in a
peaceful, acceptable and parliamentary way. Indian President said, “the Indian
Constitution is the holy book of democracy.”[47]
It is also brought to the fore that “indeed, freedom of religion is integral to
any democratic society, and India, by definition, cannot remain a democracy
without allowing its citizens the freedom to practice a religion of their
choice.”[48]
Undermining
the significance of Indian democracy M.S. Golwalkar said, “the spirit of
democracy at its best, which confers the right of freedom of speech, thought
and action on the individual, is nowhere more fully recognized and practiced
than in the age-old Hindu tradition.”[49]
Comparing democracy with Hinduism is risky.
Another false
Hindutva understanding of democracy is that “in a democracy the opinion of the
majority has to hold the sway in the day-to-day life of the people. As such it
will be but proper to consider the practical conduct of the life of majority as
the actual life of the national entity. From this point of view also, efforts
to uplift the life of Hindus is national and not communal.”[50]
It is the
sacred principles of Democracy that helped the (numerically insignificant)
opposition in the parliament to prevent the government of the day from going
ahead with a debate leading to anti-conversion law. We should actively involve
ourselves in the democratic processes and exercise our democratic rights and
privileges. It is not a call for forming a religious political party but to be
vigilant and to learn to work with secular political parties and ideological
groups democratically to safeguard our constitutional privileges.
Growing
Intolerance to Reforms
The shooting
in Kolhapur, Maharashtra, of respected Communist leader and activist Govind
Pansare and his wife, on February 16th, 2015 and his consequent
death five days later drew the attention of many. Pansare,
spearheaded anti-road toll agitation, he ruffled the feathers of
right-wing groups when he published his best-selling pamphlet in Marathi, “Shivaji kon hota,” (Who was Shivaji?),
emphasizing the Muslim contribution in Shivaji’s Maharashtra . He was a tireless spokesman against the
eulogizing of Godse and was forever cautioning against the Godse cult taking
root among impressionable minds.[51]
Secular
progressives believe that there is an infiltration and dominance of right wing
groups in Maharashtra’s educational institutions. They also fear that all
eminent higher educational institutions in Pune, to an extent, veered towards
the ideology of the RSS.
Perumal
Murugan’s novel “ ‘Madhorubhagan’ (One Half Woman) is based on a ritual that
was prevalent during Pre-Independence era on the occasion of annual car festival of Sri Arthanareeshwarar
Temple in Tiruchengode, the abode of Siva in the form of half-woman, half-man.
It is the sacred temple to which childless couple flock to this day hoping to
extend their lineage.
As per the
ritual, in and around the Temple, childless women could go with any man on the
night of the festival. Any consenting man and woman could have sex. A child born out of such a relation was
treated as a gift of God. Classical
Hindu tradition refers to this practice as niyoga or niyoga dharma. It enjoyed
sanction of the society and religion.
The book
Madhorubhagan was first published in 2010 and now it is into fourth edition.
Protests seem to have been triggered only after the English translation ‘One
part woman’ was published by Penguin in 2014. ‘Why only now? Is the question
hanging on everybody’s mind? The protest is suspected to result out of an unholy
alliance of caste group and (Hindutva) religion which is dangerous.[52]
The Gospel has
been instrumental of transformation In India, be it sathi, child marriage,
human sacrifice, social discrimination, etc. We are called upon to continue the
service. As Hindutva ideology is
inherently intolerant towards social and religious reforms, there is a
possibility of our transforming efforts being challenged.
Revival
of an old argument
A popular
charge against Muslims in India has been that each man has four wives, and the
family ends up with 25 children, as opposed to the average Hindu with two or
three children. They will first outnumber and then totally overwhelm the Hindu
population, converting India into an Islamic state much as Pakistan and Saudi
Arabia.[53]
The same
allegation is leveled against Christians as well. M.S. Golwalkar wrote,
“everybody knows that only a handful of Muslims came here as enemies and
invaders. So also, only a few foreign Christian missionaries came here. Now the
Muslim and Christians have enormously grown in number. They did not grow just
by multiplication as in the case of fishes. They converted the local
population.”[54]
According to BJP MP Yogi Adityanath, due to the “mistakes of the past” the
population of the Muslims in the country “rose from 3 percent to 15 percent”
and that of Christians “from .01 percent to 3 percent.[55]
This notion continues to influence the thoughts of many BJP leaders too.
Every census
operation in India is followed by slogans calling for the “return” or Ghar
wapsi of people converted to Islam and Christianity, the limiting of population
of these two groups by compulsory family planning laws, a demand for Common
civil Code that would outlaw polygamy.[56]
BJP MP, Sakshi
Maharaj, at a function in Meerut in Uttar Pradesh, said the time has come when
a Hindu woman must bear at least four children in order to protect Hindu
religion. While Hindu families are opting for one or two child norm the Muslims
are having seven to eight children. He suggested that of these four children
the Hindus should send one of them to army and give another to Sant Samaj for
propagation of Hindu religion. The third should be sent to join RSS and the
fourth sibling should serve his parents. [57] Shankaracharya of Badrikashram,
Vasudevanand Saraswati, said Hindus should have ten children.[58]
Many Indian women had become victim of child rape in the guise of traditional
marriage, and now is presented as a political womb for the service of a
fundamentalist ideology and its aversion towards other communities.
This is purely
a communal propaganda towards attaining Hindu Majority political platform. It
is also aimed at developing communal hatred among people of different faiths in
order to gain political mileage. The increase in the number of Christians and
Muslims is interpreted as ‘a political strategy’ under the garb of religious
propagation’.[59]
The RSS notion of Hindu majority politically controlling the Muslim and
Christian minorities is an unsafe thought from the point of communalism, women
liberation, Christian witness, etc.
Home
coming/ Ghar Vapsi/ Reconversion
On the grounds
of unfounded fears of losing majority status the RSS has programs (Suddhi/Home
coming/ Ghar Vapsi) to reconvert people to Hinduism from the religions where
the dalits, discriminated and neglected of this country found liberation,
respect and acceptance. For the RSS, ‘it is their duty to call these our
forlorn brothers, suffering under religious slavery for centuries, back to
their ancestral home’. It is ‘a call for all those brothers to take their
original place in our national life’. It is also said “this is only a call and
request to them to understand things properly and come back and identify
themselves with their ancestral Hindu way of life in dress, customs, performing
marriage ceremonies and funeral rites and such other things.”[60]
Here religious conversion is mixed up with nationalism and culture.
Security
concerns is also attributed saying “conversion of Hindus into other religions
is nothing but making them succumb to divided loyalty in place of having
undivided and absolute loyalty to the nation. It is dangerous to the security
of the nation and the country. It is therefore necessary to put a stop to it.”[61]
Jawaharlal Nehru refuted this false allegation and said ‘Indian converts never
ceased to be Indians on account of a change of their faith’.[62]
Nevertheless,
starting from Swami Dayananda Saraswati’s Suddhi program, reconversion has been
a program of Hindutva. Mr. Togadia said
the VHP would focus on the movement against conversion of religious minorities.[63]
This is true in the case of Delhi
where, churches are burned; people going for prayer are stopped and beaten up;
forcefully Muslims are made to accept Hinduism in the name of Ghar Vapsi.[64] In
a context such as this our witness need to be vigilant and diligent to overcome
unfounded communal designs.
Communalizing History and Education
Hindutva
brigades are bent on developing a religious history particularly Hindu
religious history rather than Indian history, wherein Hindu heroes will be
interpreted as saviors of this nation.[65]
It is claimed
that ‘Hindus are the only people who have succeeded in preserving their history
which began from the Vedas’.[66]
The process of communalizing history is obvious in the method of the functioning
of the BJP government. For instance, the Indian Council of Historical Research
(ICHR) was entirely reconstituted with 18 fresh appointees including
office-bearers of the RSS- backed Akhil Bharatiya Itihas Sankalan Yojana
(ABISY). In reconstituting the council, the Union Human Resource Development
Ministry set aside the long-standing convention of reappointing members who had
completed just a single term.[67]
Another
dimension of communalizing is felt in educational institutions. For example
“the BJP Government in Gujarat, MP, Rajasthan and Haryana are introducing Hindu
religious texts in schools and making Saraswati Vandana and surya namaskar
Hindu rituals compulsory on schools even though they are contrary to Art. 28
and 29 of Constitution.”[68]
A Hindu history
in place of Indian history is a calculated effort to obliterate the real
historical process and to perpetuate communal unrest in the future. Making
education as a source of infiltrating Hindu view-pints is another perilous
attempt. A country like India needs a factual history and freedom to receive
desired education and knowledge.
A
Note of Caution
While
challenging situations are around, the minorities should not add to further
conflicts. The benefits of secular state, freedom of religion and democracy
should not be misused for interests that contravene the law of the land. In a
case challenging the jurisdiction of Indian criminal law over Canon Low the
Supreme Court underlined the need to “stamp out” religion from civil laws and
the Supreme Court expressed anxiety over the challenges faced by secularism in
the country. During the hearing, the
court referred to honor killing as an example of the dangers that may ensue if
religious or self-styled socio-political institutions were given legal backing.[69]
Khursheed
Ahmad Khan filed a petition against the Uttar Pradesh government’s decision to
remove him from service as Irrigation Supervisor for contracting a second
marriage when his first marriage was still in existence. Khan challenged that it violated his right to
freely practice his religion. Confirming the sacking of his service for bigamy,
the Supreme Court ruled that the fundamental right to religion did not include
practices which ran counter to public order, health and morality. It was also
pointed that ‘a practice did not acquire sanction of religion simply because it
was permitted’. Further “What was protected under Article 25 was the religious
faith and not a practice which may run counter to public order, health or
morality. Polygamy was not integral part of religion and monogamy was a reform
within the power of the State under Article 25,” The court further noted that “Sharp distinction must be
made between religious faith and belief and religious practices. What the State
protects is religious faith and belief. If religious practices run counter to
public order, morality or health or a policy of social welfare upon which the
State has embarked, then the religious practices must give way before the good
of the people of the State as a whole.”[70]
It
is a call for the minorities to be sensitive towards the constitutional
provisions. Efforts to thwart reforms under minority banner are
counterproductive to our witnessing.
Challenges
The very
communal idea of Hindutva, Hindu and Hinduism threatens the possibilities of
other religions being considered equal. It further intensifies intolerance
towards plurality/unity in diversity. Replacing secular state with Hindu state,
framing anti-conversion laws against freedom of religion and democracy being compared
with Hindu religious point of view are real challenges to our witnessing.
In order to
protect our constitutional rights we need to learn to work with secular
political parties and ideologies.
Religious
freedom has an important role in unifying a country. Peace depends on human
freedoms, and religious liberty is perhaps the most precious of such freedom.
Full religious liberty includes not only freedom from outside coercion and
suppression but also from the suppression or restriction of human rights within
each particular religious or belief community. The defense of religious liberty
is integral to the mission of the church and the affirmation of religious
liberty is inseparable from Christian witness.[71]
We may use our
communication and educational channels to raise awareness about the importance
of religious freedom which is especially essential for peace in our country and
in the world. Minority religious community needs to make clear distinction
between faith, belief and social practice within the framework of the
Constitution for healthy witnessing
The
strength of Christian witness includes courageous initiatives towards
reforms-social, religious, etc. Unless these transforming witnesses go
undisturbed there is an obstacle to Christian witness and the salvation of
God’s creation. The reforms brought about by early missionaries and secular
ideologies like DK was quite impacting. We need to incorporate these aspects
along with other forms of Christian witness.
The
perception that religious minorities are threat to the nation requires
deliberate correction/adjustment from us to instill trust in our programs. We
also need conscious paradigm to present untainted Christian image free from
political. Also, there need to be alertness to democratically dissent any
efforts to Hinduvise Indian history and education.
From the point of theology we need an
ecumenical theological vision. No theology is absolute. We need to honor the
possibility of multiple interpretation and perspectives for positive witnessing. A united Christian persuasion along with
other minorities, political parties and ideologies can even change the 1950
Presidential order depriving Christian dalits of their government privileges.
Dialogical,
living and witnessing is essential for a plural society like ours. For example ISKCON is taking initiatives to
have dialogue with Christians in spite of both being mission oriented
traditions. While asking whether developmental promises have unevenly induced young
Indians to overlook communalism, we need to resolutely live the ‘life of Jesus
Christ’.
Religion and Dialogue
[1]Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 6th ed. (New Delhi: Bharti Sahitya an, 1989), 4.
[2] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?,4.
[3] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 3.
[4] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 82.
[5] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 6th ed. (New Delhi: Bharti Sahitya Sadan, 1989),115-116.
[6] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 84. (jati from jan)
[7]
Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India
[8] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
3rd ed., Reprint (Bangalore: Sahitya Sindhu Prakashan, 2000),117.
[9] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 102-103.
[10] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 3.
[11]M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts, 156.
[12] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
134.
[13] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
78.
[14]M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts, 149.
[15] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
9.
[16] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
129.
[17] “Development without Hindu Rashtra is
of no use: Togadia,” The Hindu (Vijayawada
January 2015, 10.
[18] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
34.
[19] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
42.
[20] Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India, 75.
[21] Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India, 75.
[22] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 95.
[23] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of
Thoughts,112.
[24] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of
Thoughts,112.
[25] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
114.
[26] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
220.
[27] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
217.
[28]
M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,112.
[29] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
143.
[30] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
185.
[31] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
159.
[32] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
189.
[33] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
191.
[34] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
194.
[35] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
125.
[36] Irfan Engineer, “Preamble, Secularism
and Constitution,” NCC Review Vol.
Cxxxv /1 (January- February, 2015): 37.
[37] John Dayal, “Raj Dharma in 2015,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/5 (02-08
February. 2015): 33.
[38] John Dayal, “Raj Dharma in 2015,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/5 (02-08
February. 2015): 33.
[39] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
162.
[40] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
227.
[41] “Secularism is not a policy option,” The Hindu (Vijayawada) 19 February 2015,
8.
[42] John Dayal, “Raj Dharma in 2015,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/5 (02-08
February. 2015): 32.
[43] John Dayal, “Raj Dharma in 2015,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/5 (02-08
February. 2015): 32.
[44] Kay Abey, “Obama’s Parting Shot,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/5 (02-08 February.
2015): 28.
[45] Kay Abey, “Obama’s Parting Shot,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/5 (02-08
February. 2015): 29.
[46] “Secularism is not a policy option,” The Hindu (Vijayawada) 19 February 2015,
8.
[47] John Dayal, “Raj Dharma in 2015,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/5 (02-08
February. 2015): 32.
[48] “Secularism is not a policy option,” The Hindu (Vijayawada) 19 February 2015,
8.
[49] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
337.
[50] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
165.
[51] “Death for dissent and disbelief,” The Hindu (Vijayawada) 23 February 2015,
9.
[52] G. John, “The Writer is Dead,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/4 (26
Jan.-01 Feb. 2015): 15.
[53] John Dayal, “Saffronising the Womb,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/4 (26
Jan.-01 Feb. 2015): 28.
[54] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
127.
[55] “Jihadi Politics, not poverty, the problem: Adityanath
,” The Hindu (Vijayawada) 25 February
2015,
7.
[56] John Dayal, “Saffronising the Womb,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/4 (26
Jan.-01 Feb. 2015): 28.
[57] John Dayal, “Saffronising the Womb,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/4 (26
Jan.-01 Feb. 2015): 30.
[58] John Dayal, “Saffronising the Womb,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/4 (26
Jan.-01 Feb. 2015): 30.
[59] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
128.
[60] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
129.
[61] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
170.
[62] Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India, 62.
[63] “Development without Hindu Rashtra is
of no use: Togadia,” The Hindu (Vijayawada
January 2015, 10.
[64] Lima VM, “Letter to the Editor,” Indian Currents vol.xxvii/5 (02-08
February. 2015): 7.
[65] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 45.
[66] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 93.
[67] “Saffron hue in revamped ICHR,” The Hindu (Vijayawada) 2 March 2015, 1.
[68] Irfan Engineer, “Preamble, Secularism
and Constitution,” NCC Review Vol.
Cxxxv /1 (January-February, 2015): 37.
[71] Ninan Koshy, Religious Freedom in a Changing World (Geneva: WCC
Publications,1992), 115.
Comments
Post a Comment