Hindu Cultural Nationalism in Colonial and Post-Colonial India

Analysis

By Angana Guha Roy 

India is a constitutional democracy.  It has walked a long way through the pages of history in defining its identity and aspirations. The paramount actuality of the Indian Republic is an outcome of the collective effort of people who consistently believe in its potential, territorial integrity, and sovereignty and have contributed towards its positive growth and progress. This article aims to assess the tenet of the Hindu cultural nationalism movement in colonial and post-colonial India.

The encroachment by external powers instilled a need to unite against a common enemy in the Indian subcontinent under colonial rule. While nationalism was the primary connecting point in the freedom struggle and efforts for nation-building, Hindu revitalization played a fundamental role in uniting people for the freedom movement.

Hinduism, now the third largest religion in the world, covers a wide array of spiritual traditions native to the people of the subcontinent. The Hindu reform movement in the colonial Indian subcontinent propagated the idea of territorial loyalty. Particularly during the British colonial period, it aimed at developing an inclusive cultural heritage opposed to Western materialism and monotheistic ideas of Abrahamic religion and tradition. The concept of the Abrahamic religion is tied to the idea of a singular religious identity in contrast to the multilayered religious tradition of the Indian subcontinent.

The ‘Hindu’ spiritual tradition in the Indian subcontinent has evolved through centuries based on cultural texts, rituals, and practices as opposed to creedal formulation of Abrahamic religious thought. The Hindu tradition in the Indian subcontinent evolved with other indigenous spiritual traditions like Jainism, Buddhism, and Sikhism. The plurality, tolerance, spirit of coexistence, and inclusivity that defined the very fabric of Hindu tradition in the subcontinent under colonial rule faced manifold challenges from invading powers.

Hindu revitalization movements’ push towards creating a singular, tolerant and inclusive cultural heritage was a step towards uniting against an ‘outsider’ or a common enemy inflicting economic exploitation, epistemic injustice, cultural imposition or hermeneutical marginalisation. It too was a response to the British policy of divide and rule, which was amplified with the introduction of the census system in 1871. The census in India played a significant role in exacerbating religious and caste divides. While the census aimed to gather data, it also formalised existing social structures and introduced new categories, inadvertently fueling animosity and political tension. The English invasion of India was organised, deeply exploitative and elaborately divisive, creating deep social and economic cleavages in the Indian subcontinent.

The temper of the freedom movement evolved in different parts of India under British rule, both in violent and nonviolent forms. Essentially, Hindu reform movements, which countered the notion of the superiority of western culture, led to the rise of the cultural and ideological basis of the independence movement in colonial India.

Hindu reform movements evolved, accommodating multifaceted and diverse views about the notion of ‘uniting’ the Hindu cultural tradition. Reformers like Ram Mohan Roy, Debendranath Tagore, Keshab Chandra Sen, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, and Swami Dayananda Saraswati actively contributed to shaping the Hindu reform movement initially.  Swami Vivekananda, a key figure in introducing Hindu spirituality and the philosophy of Vedanta to the Western world through his famous speech at the World Parliament of Religion in 1893, spoke about the potential of Hindu spirituality in countering Western materialism. In variance with a geocentric view of nationalism, Sri Aurobindo compared nationalism with Sanatan Dharma. Emphasising the intertwining nature of Sanatan Dharma and nationalism, Sri Aurobindo said, ‘When the Sanatan Dharma declines, the Nation declines.

By the turn of the 20th century, there was a confluence of ideas of nationalism and Hindu cultural nationalism. Revolutionary movements like Anushilan Samiti initially promoted the teachings of the Bhagwat Gita also turned to armed protests against British Colonial rule. Movements sprouted in London for Indian revolutionaries, too. The prominent trio of the Indian freedom movement, ‘Lal- Bal- Pal’, who rooted for self-rule and the self-sufficiency movement too supported Hindu cultural nationalism. Mahatma Gandhi, known to have played a pivotal role in India’s freedom movement, pitching for non-violent resistance, propagated concepts like Dharma and ‘Ram Rajya’, implying sovereignty of people based on pure morality, authority, peace, justice, and democracy. Madan Mohan Malviya, a prominent leader in the Indian National Congress, promoted the ideals of Hindu nationalism. In short, Hindu cultural nationalism emerged as a simple and effective currency of communication in uniting the Indian subcontinent against a common enemy. At a later stage, VD Savarkar propagated the idea of uniting culture, which was shared by all for whom India was the land of both their birth and birthplace of religion. 

In the contemporary period, cultural organisations like Ramkrishna Mission, ISKON,  and etc. continue to function outside the political domain in strengthening the cultural thread of Hindu spiritual tradition.

Disagreements persist over outreach strategies to promote Hindu cultural nationalism in the political and social spectrum, leading to a lack of political consensus on the issue. As a constitutional democracy, India openly debates vivid discourses in the intellectual and political spheres, creating room for healthy disagreements.

Nationalism in post-colonial India manifested and evolved, influencing political identity, policy and social dynamics. It manifested in plurality of thoughts, actions, approaches, divergences, and alignments in the way India collectively defines ‘Nation’ and ‘Nationalism’.

Disclaimer: This paper is the author's individual scholastic contribution and does not necessarily reflect the organization's viewpoint.