Emerging Challenges to Christian Presence and Witness in India


Rev. Dr. Selvam Robertson
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, Centenary Edition (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989), 74.
[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) 27
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) 27
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.
[69] “Stamp out religion from civil laws, observes SC, ”The Hindu (Vijayawada)10 February 2015, 10.
[70] “Right to religion not above public morality :SC,” The Hindu (Vijayawada) 10 February 2015,10.
[71] Ninan Koshy, Religious Freedom in a Changing World (Geneva: WCC Publications,1992), 115.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Religio-theo-dialogical Approach

TAMILS, TAMIL AND ĀLVĀRS

Brahma Samaj