Does Hindutva Represent a "Semitization of Hinduism"?

 

Does Hindutva Represent a "Semitization of Hinduism"?

 Shrikant G. Talageri

 

Does Hindutva Represent a "Semitization of Hinduism"? Strangely, many people seem to think so. Anti-Hindu forces − even as they simultaneously whitewash actual Semitic religions (actually it should be "Abrahamic religions") and even hold them up as ideals of Humanitarianism, Social Justice, Peace and Love, while branding Hinduism as representing nothing but the Iniquities of Casteism and Misogyny − regularly attack Hindutva as being "un-Hindu" and a modern "Semitized" ideology opposed to actual Hinduism. But even undoubtedly and strongly pro-Hindu thinkers somehow seem sometimes to at least partially believe in this characterization, as the following tweet would seem to suggest:

 

I have already dealt with (the anti-Hindu aspect of) this characterization in detail in an earlier article:

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2020/04/hinduism-vs-hindutva-oxism-vs-oxatva.html

Basically, what this characterization suggests is that defending Hinduism from the attacks of its enemies and would-be-destroyers is automatically "un-Hindu". In another article, I have pointed out certain features in our Epic-Puranic stories which, if taken as representing "True Hinduism", would also suggest that this characterization could have some ground; but I have in that same article also pointed out that these Epic-Puranic stories could in fact be illustrations of how we should not behave, and the Hindu texts which tell us how we should behave are not the Epic-Puranic story sections but the wisdom books like the Panchatantra and Hitopadesa:

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2021/10/karna-and-yudhisthira-in-mahabharata.html

 

Koenraad Elst obviously does not have any anti-Hindu angle to his partial assent to this characterization. But, even from an abstract objective level, is this characterization even partially true, especially if we treat the Arya Samaj as the inspiration for the RSS and for Hindutva ideology in general?

Yes, the Arya Samaj, in its efforts to fight the colonial Evangelist and de-Indianizing forces, did adopt certain aspects of the enemies in the belief that this was the best way to counter them. But these aspects were merely in certain religious matters, such as trying to portray Real Hinduism as also being monotheistic and non-idol-worshipping, and also having a set of Supreme Canonical Texts ("the Vedas") which had to be treated as Divine/non-Human, Final and Eternal, as in Christianity and Islam. However, the very act of fighting enemies, and organizing a united front to do so, which is basically what Hindutva represents, cannot be attributed to the influence of either the Arya Samaj or the Abrahamic religions: it is (and should be) something natural and inherent to all human cultures.

[Incidentally, even this term, "Abrahamic religions", is not strictly correct in this context, because Judaism is also an Abrahamic religion, unlike the other Semitic religions of ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia and West Asia, but it stands apart from Christianity and Islam since its geography is restricted to the area of Israel (and does not extend to the whole world of humanity) and it does not share the feature of Proselytism which is so central to those two religions. So the enemy of Hinduism, which necessitates the ideology of Hindutva, is not "Abrahamic religions" as such but "Proselytizing Abrahamic religions"].

Of course, it is possible that Koenraad Elst had some other points in mind when he suggested that the Arya Samaj was the source for Hindutva. If so, those points would certainly merit investigation and debate. Perhaps just the fact that the Arya Samaj was the first to try to organizedly counter the Proselytizing Abrahamic religions on a large scale?