[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
'Hindutva' same as Indianisation: Supreme Court Judgement (Part 1)
'Hindutva' is used as Synonym of Indianisation: Supreme Court Judgement
The Supreme Court in the course of deciding an appeal in an election
petition, has interpreted the meaning of 'Hindutva' and 'Hinduism' as a
"synonym of 'Indianisation' -- i.e. development of uniform culture by
obliterating the differences between all all cultures co-existing in the
country."
The unanimous judgement given by the three-judge bench consisting of
Justices J.S. Verma, N.P. Singh and K. Venkataswami, on December 11, 1995,
has quoted earlier Supreme Court judgements and opinions of Dr. S.
Radhakrishnan, Dr. Toynbee and others in coming to the conclusion that
Hinduism represented a way of life. The appeal no. 2836/1989 was filed by
Dr. Ramesh Yashwant Prabhoo, a Shiv Sena candidate, against a judgement of
the Bombay High Court which had set aside his election under Section 123
(3 & 3a) of the Peoples Representation Act holding him guilty of use of
religion in his election campaign.
The interpretation given by the Constitution Bench is a constitutional as
well as a political landmark in which Justice J.S. Verma, writing on
behalf of the Bench, discussed the meaning of 'Hindutva' and 'Hinduism'.
The following are excerpts from the judgement dealing with Hinduism.
*********
The next contention relates to the meaning of 'Hindutva' and 'Hinduism'
and the effect of the use of these expressions in the election speeches.
We have already indicated the meaning of sub-section (3) of Section 123 of
the R.P. Act and the limit of its operation. It may be said straightaway
that any speech wherein these expressions are used, irrespective of their
meaning, cannot by itself fall within the ambit of sub-section (3) of
Section 123, unless the speech can be construed as an appeal to vote for a
candidate on the ground that he is a Hindu or to refrain from voting for a
candidate on the ground of his religion, i.e., he not being a Hindu. We
have also indicated that mere reference to any religion in an election
speech does not bring it within the net of sub-section (3) and/or
sub-section (3A) of Section 123, since reference can be made to any
religion in the context of secularism or to criticise any political party
for practising discrimination against any religious group or generally for
preservation of the Indian culture. In short, mere use of the word
'Hindutva' or 'Hinduism' or mention of any other religion in an election
speech does not bring it within the net of sub-section (3) and/or
sub-section (3A) of Section 123, unless the further elements indicated are
also present in that speech. It is also necessary to see the meaning and
purport of the speech and the manner in which it was likely to be
understood by the audience to which the speech was addressed. These words
are not to be construed in the abstract, when used in an election speech.
Both sides referred copiously to the meaning of the words 'Hindutva' and
'Hinduism' with reference to several writings. Shri Jethmalani referred to
them for the purpose of indicating the several meanings of these words and
to emphasise that the word 'Hindutva' relates to Indian culture based on
the geographical division known as Hindusthan, i.e. India. On the other
hand, Shri Ashok Desai emphasised that the term 'Hindutva' used in
election speeches is an emphasis of Hindu religion bearing no relation to
the fact that India is also known as Hindustan, and the term can relate to
Indian culture.
The constitution bench in 'Shastri Yagnapurushadji and Others vs. Muldas
Bhudardas Vaishya and Another, 1966 (3) SCR 242' held thus:
"Who are Hindus and what are the broad features of Hindu religion, that
must be the first part of our enquiry in dealing with the present
controversy between the parties. The historical and etymological genesis
of the word 'Hindu' has given rise to a controversy amongst Indologists;
but the view generally accepted by the scholars appears to be that the
word 'Hindu' is derived from the river Sindhu otherwise known as Indus
which flows from the Punjab. 'That part of the great Aryan race,' says
Monier Williams, 'which immigrated from Central Asia, through the mountain
passes into India, settled first in the districts near the river Sindhu
(now called the Indus). The Persians pronounced this word Hindu and named
their Aryan brethern Hindus. The Greeks, who probably gained their first
ideas of India from the Persians, dropped the hard aspirate, and called
the Hindus 'Indoi' ('Hinduism' by Monier Williams, p. 1).'
The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol IV, has described 'Hinduism'
as the title applied to that form of religion which prevails amongst the
vast majority of the present population of the Indian Empire (p. 686). As
Dr. Radhakrishnan has observed: "The Hindu civilization is so called,
since its original founders or earliest followers occupied the territory
drained by the Sindhu (the Indus) river system corresponding to the North
West Frontier Province and the Punjab. This is recorded in the Rig Veda,
the oldest of the Vedas, the Hindu scriptures which give their name to
this period of Indian history. The people on the Indian side of the Sindhu
were called Hindu by the Persian and the later Western invaders" ("The
Hindu View of Life" by Dr. Radhakrishnan, p.12). That is the genesis of
the 'Hindu'.
When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not
impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it.
Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any
one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any
one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not
follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does
not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion or
creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.
......The term 'Hindu', according to Dr. Radhakrishnan, had originally a
territorial and not a credal significance. It implied residence in a
well-defined geographical area. Aborginal tribes, savage and
half-civilized people, the cultured Dravidians and the Vedic Aryans were
all Hindus as they were the sons of the same mother. The Hindu thinkers
reckoned with the striking fact that the man and women dwelling in India
belonged to different communities, worshipped different Gods, and
practised different rites (Kurma Purana) Ibid p. 12).
Monier Williams has observed that 'it must be borne in mind that Hinduism
is far more than a mere form of theism resting on Brahmanism. It presents
for our investigation a complex congeries of creeds and doctrines which in
its gradual accumulation may be compared to the gathering together of the
mighty volume of Ganga, swollen by a continual influx of tributary rivers
and rivulets, spreading itself over an ever-increasing area of country and
finally resolving itself into an intricate Delta of tortuous streams and
jungly marshes..... The Hindu religion is a reflection of the composite
character of the Hindus, who are not one people but many. It is based on
the idea of universal receptivity. It has ever aimed at accomodating
itself to circumstances and has carried on the process of adaptation
through more than three thousand years. It has first borne with and then,
so to speak, swallowed, digested, and assimilated something from all
creeds." ("Religious Thought and Life in India" by Monier Williams, p. 57)
We have already indicated that the usual tests which can be applied in
relation to any recognised religion or religious creed subscribes to a
body of set philosophic concepts and theological beliefs. Does this test
apply to the Hindu religion? In answering this question, we would bare
ourselves mainly on the exposition of the problem by Dr. Radhakrishnan in
his work in Indian philosophy. ("Indian Philosophy" by Dr. Radhakrishnan,
Vol. I, pp. 22-23). Unlike other countries, India can claim that
philosophy in ancient India was not an auxiliary to any other science or
art, but always held a prominent position of independence ..... "In all
the fleeting centuries of history," says Dr. Radhakrishnan, "in all the
vicissitudes through which India has passed, a certain, a certain marked
identity is visible. It has held fast to certain psychological traits
which constitute its special heritage, and they will be the characteristic
marks of the Indian people so long as they are privileged to have a
separate existence." the history of Indian thought emphatically brings
out the fact that the development of Hindu religion has always been
inspired by the endless quest of the mind for truth based on the
consciousness that truth has many facets. Truth is one, but wise men
describe it differently. (..) The Indian mind has, consistently through
the ages, been exercised over the problem of the nature of godhead the
problem that faces the spirit of the end of life, and the interrelation
between the individual and the universal soul.
................. to be continued
Source: "Organiser", Dec. 24, 1995
-- Brijesh Singh Yadav
