By Madhu Hebbar
This is a 3-part series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 (this article)
Hindutva, like all nationalisms, is context-dependent, shaped by India’s pluralistic yet fragmented society and its history of external domination. Far from being supremacist, it reflects a pragmatic response to historical challenges, with a global outlook that critics overlook. The principle swadesho bhuvana trayam* exemplifies this adaptability, urging diaspora Hindus to be loyal to their adopted nations while preserving cultural identity. A fair assessment of Hindutva, compared to Vivekananda, Western models, and Hazony’s framework, reveals its legitimacy as a nationalist ideology.
Hindutva’s cultural nationalism is not theological supremacy. Savarkar’s definition of a Hindu as one who sees India as fatherland and holy land emphasizes geographic and cultural loyalty, not religious exclusivity. It includes Indic faiths, reflecting India’s pluralistic heritage, but excludes Islam and Christianity due to their external holy lands, a criterion rooted in historical resistance to conversion and cultural erasure. Critics argue this excludes non-Hindus, yet they ignore that India’s 200 million Muslims and Christians are integral to its society, with constitutional rights intact. Hindutva’s rhetoric, while sometimes deemed divisive, aims to unify, not oppress, much like Western ethnic nationalism sought cohesion amid diversity.
Recent statements by RSS leaders like Dr Mohan Bhagwat align with the RSS’s long-standing view that Hinduism is not just a religion but a cultural framework (sanskriti) encompassing India’s civilizational heritage. By defining India as a Hindu Rashtra, it suggests that all residents, including Muslims and Christians, are part of this cultural legacy, as their ancestors were likely part of India’s Indic traditions.
Vivekananda’s nationalism offers a contrast. His spiritual universalism embraced all faiths, rejecting the idea that non-Hindus are less Indian. Some claim that, while Hindutva shares his goal of cultural revival, its political activism and cultural hierarchy can appear less inclusive. Yet, Vivekananda’s apolitical approach was less suited to India’s modern challenges, where political assertion counters decades of perceived minority appeasement. Hindutva’s pragmatism fills this gap, aligning with Hazony’s view of nationalism as a balance between cultural loyalty and self-determination.
Western nationalisms provide further context. Civic nationalism, like in the U.S., unites through shared values but can marginalize religious identities (e.g., debates over religious symbols in public spaces). Ethnic nationalism, like Germany’s, prioritized cultural unity, often excluding minorities, yet it is rarely vilified today. Hindutva’s cultural focus is similar, yet it faces harsh criticism, partly due to academia’s discomfort with religious nationalism. Hazony’s argument—that nationalism fosters diversity by allowing nations to preserve their identities—supports Hindutva’s resistance to globalist cultural homogenization, such as Western secularism or Islamic universalism.
The swadesho bhuvana trayam or vasudhaiva kutumbakam principle underscores Hindutva’s global adaptability. Through organizations like the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh, diaspora Hindus in the U.S., UK, or Australia engage in civic life—voting, volunteering, and interfaith dialogue—while celebrating Hindu festivals. This mirrors civic nationalism’s call for integration and Hazony’s vision of cooperative nation-states, challenging the narrative of Hindutva as insular.
Vivekananda’s universalism, which saw spiritual values as borderless, aligns with this, though Hindutva’s cultural specificity makes it more actionable for diaspora communities.
In conclusion, Hindutva is unfairly maligned by left-leaning academics whose secular bias misrepresents its context-driven nature. Like Western nationalisms, it responds to historical challenges; like Vivekananda’s vision, it seeks cultural revival; like Hazony’s framework, it defends sovereignty against globalism. Its global outlook, embodied in swadesho bhuvana trayam or vasudhaiva kutumbakam, shows a nationalism that is neither exclusionary nor supremacist but a legitimate expression of Hindu identity. By judging Hindutva through its historical and cultural lens, not ideological prejudice, we can appreciate its role in a diverse world of nations.
Sources
Hazony, Yoram. The Virtue of Nationalism. Basic Books, 2018.
Vivekananda, Swami. Speeches and Writings of Swami Vivekananda. G.A. Natesan & Co., 1897. Specifically, the “Address at the Parliament of Religions, Chicago, September 11, 1893.”
Savarkar, Vinayak Damodar. Hindutva: Who is a Hindu? Veer Savarkar Prakashan, 1923 (reprinted editions available).
Golwalkar, M.S. Bunch of Thoughts. Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, 1966 (for RSS interpretations of Hindu cultural principles, including swadesho bhuvana trayam).
Maha Upanishad, Verse 6.71–72 (for vasudhaiva kutumbakam). Translated in: Olivelle, Patrick. The Early Upanishads: Annotated Text and Translation. Oxford University Press, 1998.
Bhagwat, Mohan. Speeches and statements, including Vijayadashami addresses (2020–2024), reported in Organiser (RSS-affiliated magazine) and RSS official publications.
Thapar, Romila. Cultural Pasts: Essays in Early Indian History. Oxford University Press, 2000.
Jaffrelot, Christophe. The Hindu Nationalist Movement in India. Columbia University Press, 1996.
*Swadesho Bhuvana Trayam” is a Sanskrit phrase that translates to “My country is the three worlds” or “The three worlds are my homeland.” It reflects a profound sense of universal belonging, suggesting that one’s true home encompasses the entire cosmos—earth, heaven, and the intermediate realms—transcending narrow geographic or national boundaries
About the Author
Madhu Hebbar, an engineer, is an IIT graduate, living in the greater Los Angeles area. He is a practicing Hindu and an avid reader who is interested in Eastern philosophies and their general application to Western challenges. He is engaged in coaching youngsters interested in Hindu civilizational history, universal values, and their modern-day relevance. He has contributed to many intellectual engagements for a decade-plus in the Hindu community across the U.S. He is a keen student /observer of the media, trying to understand motives, narratives, and their impact on people and society.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Voice of Hindus. Any content provided by our contributors or authors is their opinion.
About Author
