Nageswara Rao Ji: You are Perfectly Right

 

Nageswara Rao Ji: You are Perfectly Right

Shrikant G. Talageri 

 

Recently I wrote an article “Nageswara Rao Ji: You Are Wrong”. That was about Nageswara Rao asking us to “believe” that we are winning (even when we are not) on the faith principle that blindly “believing” we are winning will automatically lead us to winning.

Earlier, I had written an article “Shourie, Savarkar, M. Nageswara Rao and Hindutva” to point out how very grossly wrong he was when he wrote as follows: “Savarkar was never my ideal for the simple reason that, contrary to popular and populist perception, he was not a Hindu or Hindutva ideologue. On the contrary, he was an atheist, allegedly non-vegetarian and was not against cow-slaughter. However, I am least bothered about his personal beliefs and dietary preferences as I consider them to be trivial. My objection is more fundamental to his ideas and prescriptions about who is a Hindu”.

He had gone on further to say: “he [Savarkar] denominates Hindu religious identity to a territory, which is absolutely unacceptable […] all that Savarkar did was to paraphrase the Westphalian Territorial Nationalism of the Europe to Indian context by drawing some elements from Abrahamic theology and Hindu imagery and idioms. Except for the name ‘Hindutva’ in the title, which he borrowed from Chandranath Basu’s book of 1892, there is nothing Hindu either in his book or in his ideology. All that he talks about was Indian Territorial Nationalism.”

 

 I am not claiming he has changed his opinion about who is a Hindu. Or has he? I am confused by his latest tweet:

https://x.com/MNageswarRaoIPS/status/1991582858457272377

Dear Sri

@RajivMessage

Ji, I sincerely appreciate your tireless efforts in uniting organisations that work for Hindu interests. However, I am baffled by your conscious choice to avoid the word “Hindu” and instead use “Sanatani,” as seen in this video. Some others hide behind the “Indic” label because they are strangely ashamed to call themselves Hindu without apology. Yet “Hindu” is: - The universally recognised modern indigenous name of our ancient religion; - The constitutionally, legally, and officially accepted term in India; - The globally understood identity of our people In contrast, terms like “Sanatani” or “Indic” are neither officially recognised nor widely known outside very small circles. This raises a serious question: If even our most prominent intellectuals and self-proclaimed “Hindu warriors” are reluctant to proudly call themselves Hindu without apology or substitution, how can they (or the organisations they lead) ever achieve anything truly substantial and lasting for the Hindu cause? Hindu society is already facing confusion on multiple fronts. Let us not add to that confusion by promoting yet another vague, substitute label for our ancient religion. “Hindu” is a proud, clear, and globally understood name. It is our religious identity. Let us own it—unapologetically.

12:32 AM · Nov 21 202512:32 AM · Nov 21 2025

He is absolutely right in everything he says here. Yet this does not still constitute a direct reversal of what he had written when criticizing Savarkar: he may still be maintaining that Savarkar’s definition constitutes “Westphalian Territorial Nationalism”.

But see what one of the many (non?-)Hindus objecting to his tweet says and how he replies to him:

https://x.com/KapilGo22435183/status/1991698058141450341

“Sanatani includes many more Dharmic brothers - Sikhs, Jains etc. We need to use both.”

8:09 AM · Nov 21 2025

Nageswara Rao replies as follows:

https://x.com/MNageswarRaoIPS/status/1991700834372186567

“Read the marked portion.”

8:20 AM · Nov 21 2025

The marked portion he shows (and stands by) is that very same constitution which clearly says that the term Hindu includes Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains. Clearly, the constitution he is citing with approval clearly defines “Hindu” as anyone following any religion which is not born in areas outside the Cultural “Territorial Nation” that is India.

So has Nageswara Rao accepted that Savarkar’s definition was right after all? And does he take back as incorrect his insulting allegation that “he [Savarkar] was not a Hindu or Hindutva ideologue”? If Savarkar was “not a Hindu”, what was he, and how would Nageswara Rao define “Hindu” in a way that would include Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains but exclude Savarkar? Does he mean the Constitutional Article that he “marked” excludes Savarkar from being a Hindu?

 

The other criticisms in the comments to his very correct latest tweet (above) show equal lack of sense of proportion or even common sense itself:

I.

https://x.com/KapilGo22435183/status/1991702824166846548

“Sir, common man on street is not into details. If you ask someone in Punjab - who is Hindu and who is Sikh - it is not exactly the same. Somehow the identities are different”

8:28 AM · Nov 21 2025

So would “some common man in Punjab” say that a Sikh is a “Sanatani” or an “Indic” even while refusing to classify him as a “Hindu”? It would indeed require a very uncommon man to say that.

[Strangely, even the Google AI overview knows that “"Sakal jagat mein Khalsa Panth gaaje / Jage dharma Hindu sakal bhand bhaje" ("The Khalsa sect will roar around the world. Hinduism will awaken, its enemies will flee.") is a couplet widely attributed to Guru Gobind Singh Ji, the tenth Sikh Guru”].

 

II..

https://x.com/dione_energy/status/1991737851747455323

“You are right sir but Sanatan includes all (Aghor, Vaam, Kapalik, Kaul + many more including 1000+ kuls ) but "Hindu" don't... Now Hindus are mostly centric to vaishnavism...”

10:48 AM · Nov 21 2025

“Hindu” only means a “Vaishnav”?!! Nageswara Rao does not bother to reply to this nonsense except with “kuch bhi…”, but the neo-prophet continues:

https://x.com/dione_energy/status/1991749282534441269

“Yes sir... Hinduism is branch of Sanatan dharma just like Jainism, Buddhism (Tantrik Buddhism)....”. [For some reason he fails to go the whole hog and say: “Yes sir... Hinduism (Vaishnavism) is branch of Sanatan dharma just like Shaivism, Shaktism, Jainism, Buddhism (Tantrik Buddhism)....”].

11:33 AM · Nov 21 2025

I have already written a detailed article on the utter unacceptability of this blatantly revisionist neologism, “Hindu Dharma or Sanātana Dharma?”:

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2024/04/hindu-dharma-or-sanatana-dharma.html 

 

III.

Another tweeter goes off at a casteist tangent:

https://x.com/ShadanguleP/status/1991692696877236325

“Nageshwar Rao Ji, Hindu Dharma:- Includes Varnashrama Dharma. By “Sanatan” these Sanghi’s means Hinduism without Varnasharama dharma. They want to propagate that Varna is not by birth and only by Kritamaan Karma or Purushartha. Rajiv Ji, Bageshwar Dham Ji all are into this game”

The first sentence is right “Hindu Dharma Includes Varnashrama Dharma” – when it includes every kind of religion except religions with extra-territorial origins, naturally it also includes “Varnashrama Dharma”.

But then he seems to go on to suggest that “propagating” that “Varna is not by birth and only by Kritamaan Karma or Purushartha” is some undesirable “game” being played by “Sanghis…Rajiv Ji, Bageshwar Dham Ji”. Well, more people should play this “game”!

 

IV.

Then this tweeter has me completely baffled:

https://x.com/svaramsunitha/status/1991747502245310571

“It should be the other way round. Rajiv ji should be baffled by the usage of "Hindu" for our religion. You talk about deracination of Hindus in many of your tweets. Usage of "Hindu" itself contributes to deracination. Because it masks our original identities.”

11:26 AM · Nov 21 2025

https://x.com/svaramsunitha/status/1991752815497343343

“Usage of "Hindu" is unacceptable because it wipes out other identities such as Shaiva, Vaishnava, Brahmana, Kshatriya etc. Using "Hindu" identity is leading to the gradual death of various other identities. This is how DERACINATION is happening.”

11:47 AM · Nov 21 2025

So “the usage of "Hindu" for our religion” is “baffling” “unacceptable” and “itself contributes to deracination”!! HELP!

 

Wouldn’t it be better if people really concerned about the present and future of Hindus (by any name) and Hinduism (by any name) took up cudgels against the Real Issues confronting Hindus and Hinduism instead of turning around and training their guns on the only completely correct name for our religion, culture, civilization and identity: i.e. “Hindu”?  

Nageswara Rao Ji, I really must appreciate the way you (and so many other intrepid intellectual pillars of Hindus and Hinduism) take bold stands on social media like Twitter (X) where you lay yourself open to trolls of the most unimaginable kind. I, in contrast, it appears, am taking a safe stand by avoiding jumping into this quicksand of Twitter, Facebook and other “Social Media” and operating only on my personal blogspot.