By Dr. K. Jamanadas
01 December, 2004
days everybody talks of "Hindutva", they say Hinduism is not
a religion but a way of life. What are these concepts? What is the difference?
Why this difference? These are questions the Bahujans, SC/ST and religious
minorities should ponder over. All these acrobatics in phraseology,
are they not just to maintain supremacy of Brahmins? Ranjit Pardeshi
has discussed all such issues.
Instead of Hinduization,
the other word some times used is 'saffronization''. May be due to RSS
flag being of saffron color, this word came in vogue to suggest the
effect of Sangh. But even this word conceals the concept of the Sangh.
After all, saffron is the color of many other flags not necessarily
of RSS ideology. Even the color of robes of Buddhist monks could be
saffron. Therefore, neither Safronization nor Hinduization denotes the
true concepts the R.S.S. The proper word must be Brahminization.
RSS attempts to
reverse the ideology of Phule Ambedkar
Inequality in Hinduism
is well known, we do not need to refer to 'shastras' to learn about
that. All of the suffering masses know it. To combat this inequality,
Mahatma Phule suggested 'satya dharma' and Ambedkar accepted Buddhism
as the alternative. Phule and Ambedkar's alternative to Hinduism was
based on anti-women-slavery, analysis of Brahmin religion, equality
for all, anti caste, anti-brahmin shastras and ignoring idea of god.
The RSS activists
equate the Phule Ambedkar's ideas with the Renaissance in Hindu religion,which
they claim was brought about by people like Swami Vivekananda and Arbindo
etc. During early years of his struggle against Hinduism, Ambedkar DID
say that Hindu religion needs reforms. On the basis of that RSS now
claims that Ambedkar was also a 'Reformer of Hindu religion'. As a matter
of fact, Ramesh Patrange, in his 'Dr. Hedgewar aani Dr. Ambedkar' gives
an editorial in 'Bahishkrut Bharat' dated 21st December, 1928 as a whole
appendix. In that editorial Dr. Ambedkar had narrated the ill effects
of caste system and observed that if you have to avoid the destruction
of Hindu religion, you must get rid of Caste System. This perhaps in
the eyes of RSS is 'Reformer of Hindu religion' and doing same work
as Dr. Hedgewar. Thousand and one times Dr. Ambedkar had said that we
- the Dalits - are not interested in reforming Hinduism, but the RSS
has got selective amnesia about Ambedkar's teachings and they never
project such quotes of Ambedkar. This is one aspect of Hinduization.
It is note worthy that RSS never refers to Ambedkar's criticism on Brahminism.
They always call it reform of 'Hindu' religion and not Brahmin religion.
The other aspect
of Hinduization is whatever Ambedkar said about Islam to show the differences
from Brahminism is construed to wrongly project Ambedkar as having anti-Islamic
It must be remembered
in both these examples it is the preservation of vested interest of
higher castes that is involved. But it is projected as interests of
whole 'Hindu' religion and 'Hindu' people. What Samarasata Manch is
doing is the glorification of 'Hindu' identity and propagation of hate
of 'Muslim' identity, and their real interest is welfare of higher castes.
This internal aspect of Samarasata is always concealed. What they show
is just an external aspect like religion, religious symbols, mandir
Because of the concealment
of inner real aspects of so called Safronization or Hinduization, the
criticism against it is limited to external symbolism and thus RSS succeeds
in their politics. They can now take political advantages by limiting
the discussion to 'Hindu vs. Buddhists' or 'Hindu vs. Secularists' or
'Hindu vs. Muslims', and never 'Hindu vs. Brahmins', which should be
the real contradiction and which was brought forward by Phule, Shahu,
Periyar and Ambedkar. It is the duty of Ambedkarite movement -- a movement
for transformation of society -- to project these contradictions.
Internal aims are
Because of the projection
of only external aspects in contradiction, the RSS can depict religious
minorities or secularists as enemies of the majority Hindu 'Nation'.
For example, the upper castes, to safeguard their interests with the
capitalists or feudal landlords, involve the lower class / caste 'Hindus'
in conflict with the anti-Muslim politics. They declare the leftists
both Dalit as well as non-Dalit as 'Appeasers of Muslims', and thus
gain the sympathy of majority of 'Hindus' And the Dalits or Non-Dalit
Lower castes and even the Muslims do not realize the game-plan of RSS
and remain divided against their real enemy.
Babari Masjid --
Ram janma bumi contradictions
What is the real
contradiction in "Babari masjid Ram janma bhumi" conflict?
It appears externally as religious conflict for religious symbolism
between the symbols of Hindus and those of Muslims. But is it really
so? The real internal conflict is the caste conflict. How many lower
caste non-dalits (OBCs) realize this? When V. P. Singh tried to implement
Mandal Commission recommendations for the benefit of OBCs, the RSS started
the Rathyatra to scuttle this movement. Everybody will remember the
words of Bajpai that time, 'because they started Mandal, we started
Kamandal', which he said in an open interview. (Dharmayug, 90, q/b Pardeshi
Second example can
be cited of Gangal and Behre criticizing Mahatma Phule as 'foul smelling
dirt' about ten years ago. This was the reaction of the conservative
upper caste middle class elitists against the Bahujan castes. When protests
were made against this by the people in movements against caste, Senior
leader of RSS, Gopinath Munde opposed this stand with the backing of
second third level workers of lower castes like Dhangar, Mali, Vanjari
and other OBCs, under the Brahminic leadership of the Sangh.
Conflict of Riddles
When Dr. Ambedkar
wrote the Riddles of Rama and Krishna, he utilized the symbolism of
Rama and Krishna to represent the Brahminical social order of Chaturvarnya
with 'Brahmin' supremacy and not as the symbol caste of Kshatriyas.
The movements of transformation, failed to bring forward this aspect
of Ambedkar to the 'Hindu' masses and therefore it became easy for RSS
to project Ambedkar's writings as an attack on 'Hindu' gods and goddesses,
and they succeeded in organizing huge masses of 'Hindu' OBCs against
the Dalit Buddhist organizations, with consequent aftermath.
All these are the
examples of Brahminization, but are purposefully and wrongly termed
and projected as Hinduization or saffronization, thereby shifting the
emphasis The real concept that must be projected is that of Brahminization
and not Hinduization or Safronization It is absolutely necessary to
bring forward the contradictions among the Bahujans and Upper Caste
Hindus. Otherwise, it becomes easy for the Sangh forces to bring the
common masses under the name of 'Hindu religion' and utilize them against
those who want social transformation. The forces acting in Hinduization
are not the 'Hindu' Bahujans, but the Brahminic 'Alpajans'. This can
be brought forward only by the concept of Brahminization. For that purpose
it is necessary to preserve the ideals and idols of our great dignitaries
like Phule, Shahu, Periyar Ambedkar etc.
It must be understood
that it is always beneficial for the RSS and the makers of the caste
to divide and achieve the polarization of society in two warring groups
- 'Hindu' and 'non-Hindu'. The elite Brahmins can then maintain their
upper caste grip over the lower caste 'Hindus',-- the Bahujans --, in
the guise of expressing the glorification of Hindu identity as opposed
to that of Christians, Buddhists and Muslims. This provides them good
opportunity for the purpose. Chatrapati Shivaji who was a 'kulvaadi-bhushan'
(pride of lower caste kulvaadis), as described by Mahatma Phule,as he
came from peasants shudra caste, and rose to power by his own merit
and valor. He is now wrongly projected by the Brahminic historians as
'go-brahmin-pratipalak' (protector of cows and Brahmins), which he never
was, as proved by Shejwalkar by examining the original letters of Shivaji.
It was not Shivaji who called himself 'go-brahman-pratipalak', but it
were the Brahmins who called him so, when they approached him for favors.
In the coronation seal also it is mentioned 'kshatriya kulvantas' and
not 'go-brahmin-pratipalak' The kingdom he established was egalitarian
but the Brahmin historians call him founder of 'hindu paatshahi'. They
also project it was a kingdom of "Shree", some times they
projected Ramdas as Shivaji's guru. Enough has been written to disprove
these imaginary stories. Shivaji was never against the Muslims, but
they project him as enemy of Muslims and use his name as a symbol for
opposing the Muslim identity and instigate the lower caste Bahujans
against the Muslims during riots.
Hindus did not exist
before Muslim Rule
Before the non-Brahmin
castes, the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes were included within
the purview of 'Hindu' identity, there was a conflct and struggle between
'brahmins' and 'non-brahmins' in the religion, culture, philosophy,
history and the society itself. When there were 'varnas' and not castes,
the thumb of Eklavya was cut by Dronachaya to preserve the varna supremacy
of Arjuna, in the name of 'guru-daxina' for the education NOT imparted
by him. This grave injustice was glorified in the name of great 'guru-bhakti'
(devotion to guru). This shows the tendency of Brahminization during
During the Satvahana
times in early centuries of Christian era in Maharashtra, there existed
a process of Brahminization by assimilating on lower status, of lower
castes into same religious stream but it was always seen that the social
grading among the various castes was maintained without any change.
The author of Dnyankosha - the great Ketkar, explains this. It must
be understood the concept Hinduization is not historical. There were
no 'Hindus' before the Muslims came and the concept of 'Hindu' came
in existence during Turk Moghul era, and not before. Hence, the concept
of Hindu can not be used for guidance as a historical tool for transformation
There was an ideological
struggle between the Buddhists and the Vedantis, the basis of which
was contradictions in Varnas - the Brahmins against the non-Brahmins.
But the RSS Brahmin scholars can analyze this as "Hindu Vedantism"
against "Non-Hindu Buddhism", and the defiant language of
the today's Buddhists can be labeled as "anti-Hindu" and can
lead to riots. This is because in the name of 'Hindutva', the Bahujans
can be appealed to and organized by causing confusion amongst them on
the exploitation of caste - exploitation by the upper castes can be
About the 'Social
organization and expansive acts done by Brahmins', Ketkar explains the
activities of Brahmins during Vedic period. The aim behind these activities
was to maintain the supremacy of Brahmins. It was nothing but Brahminization.
The strategy applied during those days and techniques of cheating and
deception used that time are still being used by RSS today in a refined
manner. These techniques could be summarized as follows:
1. They relate the
old stories with the ancestors of original inhabitants and pretend that
their religion was same as that of Brahmins. This technique was used
during Vedic times. Today, it is being used to show that the Ambedkar's
Buddhism is same as old Brahminized Buddhism and aver that Ambedkar's
Buddhism is just a part of Hinduism. This is done through various conferences,
where even Dalai Lama and Guru Goenka participate.
2. During Vedic
times, they performed yajnyas like 'vratya-stoma' etc. to make the ineligible
people eligible for yajnyas. Today, they admit ineligible Dalit Buddhists
scholars in Samarasta movement and provide them posts, property and
prestige in Social organizations, Literary Organizations, Journalism,
Universities, Governmental Institutions and the like and use them as
propagators of RSS ideology.
3. It was necessary
during Vedic times to create a false history and to label the various
alien nationalities as prodigal sons and proclaim them to be the progeny
of some Brahmin 'rishi' on some non-Brahmin woman. Middle ages saw the
corruption of history in formulating origins of great non-brahmin saints,
like Raidas and Kabir Today the rebellious Phule is 'accommodated' as
son of "Hindu Ishwara', Phule's 'Nirmik' is projected as god, and
Dr. Ambedkar as 'a reformer of Hindu India'. These are the new strategies
applied these days.
4. Ketkar explains
that during the process of Brahminiation, two principles were adhered
One - it should
be on mass scale, and Two - the relative status of various caste groups
must be maintained in new caste situation and Brahmin supremacy not
being jeopardized. Today this has been transformed making a vote bank
in elections, to control the reservation policy for preservation of
upper caste interests, to accommodate the awakened Bahujans' identity
in the 'hindutva' at a lower status. While doing all these, to maintain
the Brahmin supremacy, is the real challenge for the RSS.
Only the names of
Hedgewar, Golwalkar, Deoras, Sawarkar etc. were in the scriptures of
Sangh in the past. They had now to add M. Gandhi, Phule, Ambedkar etc.
Some share in prestige, power, property has to be given to upwardly
mobile people from among the lower castes, but the main principle of
'not disturbing the social order of status of caste' is still rigidly
observed. As they have to establish the relation of original inhabitants
with their religion, now they started telling a false imaginary story
that Ambedkar visited the 'shakha' of RSS and found many untouchable
volunteers there. Ketkar had said that in olden times such imaginary
stories served a great cause of Brahminization, as some castes like
'Andhra' etc. were called 'Vishwamitra-putra'. So Sangh is now telling
us such imaginary stories. But even then, they do not disclose the vested
interests of their ruling upper castes in this imaginary unification
with lower castes.