In recent socio-political scene in India, there have been quite a few palavers on Hindutva vs Hinduism, with people taking the cudgels for/ against the inter-operability of these two words; especially in context of contribution of one Vinayak Damodar Savarkar- the chief proponent of former term.
The so called liberals seem to take side with following a "age old, softer, philosophical" Hinduism while the right-wingers seem to be vying for the rise of Hindutva - a "new-age, action-orientied, in your face, militant" connotation.
The following piece is my attempt, through tracing of linguistic origins , to decipher these two words as they were intended to be used; and their evolution over time. It IS NOT about appropriating my opinion or philsophical differences, but rather laying out verifiable facts in the annals of Hindi, Sanskrit, English and vernacular literature/ records from definitive descriptions of each word.
Before even delving into Hinduism vs Hindutva debate, one needs to understand that the first is a term of English origin, while the latter of Bengali (Yup!) and thus, even though having same morpheme(root word"Hindu"), they have a totally different lexicogeny. It is this key difference, which has manifested itself into the present day debate. So just a minor detour from our topic, let's unpeel the proverbial onions to understand the difference between -ism and -tva!
And even that was an all-encompassing, eternal, universal, all-inclusive essence of reality/ truth. Hence the famous maxim
Now that this detour has been taken, hopefully it would become easily clear why there is a sea of difference between the two suffixes added to same the root word- Hindu, which first appeared as Hndwy to represent a populace in certain geographic location, conquered in 6th century BC by Persians, under Darius I. No wonder therefore, that the word itself doesn't appear in any text pre-dating that time; but does appear in a number of inscriptions thereafter.
तं देवनिर्मितं देशं हिंदुस्थानं प्रचक्षते ||
I found it quite astonishing how the symbolism of these words has gone topsy turvy in a matter of 120 years, and a story worth telling- so that the words, like all other things don't get vilified in future due to lack of our understanding about their origins.
The so called liberals seem to take side with following a "age old, softer, philosophical" Hinduism while the right-wingers seem to be vying for the rise of Hindutva - a "new-age, action-orientied, in your face, militant" connotation.
The following piece is my attempt, through tracing of linguistic origins , to decipher these two words as they were intended to be used; and their evolution over time. It IS NOT about appropriating my opinion or philsophical differences, but rather laying out verifiable facts in the annals of Hindi, Sanskrit, English and vernacular literature/ records from definitive descriptions of each word.
Before even delving into Hinduism vs Hindutva debate, one needs to understand that the first is a term of English origin, while the latter of Bengali (Yup!) and thus, even though having same morpheme(root word"Hindu"), they have a totally different lexicogeny. It is this key difference, which has manifested itself into the present day debate. So just a minor detour from our topic, let's unpeel the proverbial onions to understand the difference between -ism and -tva!
Religion and Dharma (धर्म): the first bone of contention.
One of the fundamental errors of English dictionaries is the the western translation - "Religion" of an eastern word "Dharma" and hence considering Hinduism as a religion.
The two equally well accepted etymologies for the English word "religion" exist.
One set of etymologists believe the origins lie in the root Latin word relegere meaning to go over again and again (re-again, legere-read/speak)- mostly attributed to Cicero: Qui omnia, quae ad cultum deorum pertinerent, diligenter retračiarent, & tanquam relegerent, sunt dići religios i,e. They are "religious" who continuously repeat things which refer to worship of gods- a reference to the monastic tradition of chanting hymns.
Note that Legere itself comes from the Proto-Indo-European root leg meaning
"to collect, gather" which has given rise to multitude of words like
lecture , legal, legacy, lexicon, legend, legitimate, religate,
sacrilege etc,
On the other hand, there are others who attribute the origins to a very similar sounding (but different meaning) Latin word relegare which means "to bind" ; as used in religionum animum nodis exsolvere' by Lucretius, meaning- I proceed to free the mind from tight knots of rituals, as animals from snares
Thus religion, as western concept, was more about outward forms of positing exact (binding) rituals and expressing them ; thence the original meaning of the word Religious- devout/ expressive of devotion.
The Sanskrit word धर्म (Dharma) , on the other hand has the root - धृ (dhri) , which means "to support, hold, bear, firm" as evident in similar words such as - धरा (one which bears) , धरती (earth-the bearer) , ध्रुव (pole star, which holds the directions) धृति (firm), धैर्य ( patience), धृष्ट( resolute, in a negative sense) and its तद्भव (derivative)- ढीठ.
The oldest known usage of the word धर्म occurs in Rigveda itself, and can be loosely translated as "that which is established, & steadfast/ firm"
कविमग्निमुप स्तुहि सत्यधर्माणमध्वरे देवममीवचातनम् ॥ (Rigveda 1.012.07)
i.e. Praise Agni in the sacrifice, the sage whose ways are truly ever steadfast, God who drives grief away.
Subsequently, loose definitions of what symbolizes धर्म are recorded somewhat on the lines of-
धृति: क्षमा दमोऽस्तेयं शौचमिन्द्रियनिग्रह:।
धीर्विद्या सत्यमक्रोधो दशकं धर्मलक्षणम्।। (Manusmriti 6.91)
i.e. Dhriti- Patience, Kshama- Forgiveness, Dama- Self control, Asteya- Honesty, Saucha- Cleanliness, Indriya Nigraha- Sense control, Dhee- Sense of reasoning, Vidya- Knowledge, Satya- Truthfulness are the symptoms of following Dharma.
Thus, ancient Indian texts laid emphasis as Dharma being an abstract concept and an inner reality (and not necessarily outwardly manifested in rituals and practices, as the western "religion"). It is the Dharma of a bee to give honey, of a cow to give milk, of sun to shine, and so on. That is why there are multitude of Dharmas listed, applicable depending on the context - Nitya/Sanatan Dharma (the most commonly preferred title for an overarching tradition) being only one of them.
And even that was an all-encompassing, eternal, universal, all-inclusive essence of reality/ truth. Hence the famous maxim
एकम सत्यम विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति - Rigveda (1.164.46)
- one truth, but multiple paths to it
The most appropriate latin translation for this word should have been from its Latin cognate (cousin word) - Firmus (not surprisingly, meaning firm). It ought to be noted that the same root in Proto_Indo-European apparently gave rise to words such as
- δράσσομαι (drássomai, “to hold, seize”) & drachma (something worth holding/seizing- i.e. money/ silver coins )in ancient Greek - which in turn made its way back into Sanskrit as द्रम्म meaning gold coins and consequently दाम & दमड़ी in Hindi.
- 𐭦𐭥𐭦𐭭 (ZWZN /drahm- meaning someone who is held captive) in middle persian
- Dirham (again currency connotation) in Arabic
- Dram in English
-ism and -tva(त्व) -- therein lies the devil
 |
| "Hndwy"on Statue of Darius |
There have been various alternative histories provided in recent times trying to make the word Hindu much older than it really is, mostly through WhatsApp forwards, but none hold water on closer inspection.
A much touted example is the purported shlok, from Rigveda's Brihaspati Samhita/ Agama :
हिमालयं समारभ्य यावत् इंदु सरेावरम् |A much touted example is the purported shlok, from Rigveda's Brihaspati Samhita/ Agama :
तं देवनिर्मितं देशं हिंदुस्थानं प्रचक्षते ||
Starting from Himalayas and extending upto Indu sarovaram (Indian
Ocean) is the nation created by God which is known as 'Hindusthan'.
Always cited without any specific mandala reference, the flaw in aforementioned origin story is simple- there does NOT exist a thing called "Brihaspati Samhita of Rigveda", nor is there any Brahaspati Agama in the set of 213 .
The very common suffix -ism is a sort of circular reference, a noun form of a verb, which denotes the actions associated to the noun or adjective to which it is attached . Hence any -ism like Marxism, terrorism, -theism, Judaism etc denotes the "acts" associated with the teaching/ meanings of respective nouns- i.e. Marx, terror, Theos (god), Jews.
So just as the western concept of religion, -ism is also about outward/ action oriented manifestation of rules/tenets/dogmas.
on the other hand, Sanskrit -tva (त्व) is a भाववाचक तद्धित प्रत्यय ( abstract noun forming suffix) denoting the concept of "essence" (intrinsic quality or भाव ) and depicts a qualitative association with associated noun.
The correct corresponding English suffix would have been -ity and not -ism, as forner is used in making abstract nouns from adjectives and meaning "condition or quality of being ______,"
The correct corresponding English suffix would have been -ity and not -ism, as forner is used in making abstract nouns from adjectives and meaning "condition or quality of being ______,"
examples being- मनुष्यत्व (humanity), व्यक्तित्व (personality), अमरत्व (immortality) etc.
Finally Onto Hinduism & Hindutva
As for the word Hinduism (or Hindooism), several scholars and Wikipedia cite 1817 as the date for the first known occurence and attribute it to Raja Ram Mohan Rai .
However, in my own research, I have been able to find an earlier reference to the word "Hinduism" in the Asiatic Journal of May 1816, in reference to "Hinduism in Bali" vs "Hinduism in India". The text seems to refer the word in the "action oriented" sense, as one would expect from the etymological definition above.
To cite: "...Hinduism of Bali, which can only be treated of with propriety and correctness after a more thorough acquaintance with the practical duties, and some knowledge of what is contained in their sacred records, it may be affirmed without hazard...."
 |
| Portion of Asiatic Journal 1816, first usage of "Hinduism" |
To cite: "...Hinduism of Bali, which can only be treated of with propriety and correctness after a more thorough acquaintance with the practical duties, and some knowledge of what is contained in their sacred records, it may be affirmed without hazard...."
Hindutva- as a written word, first appeared on the scene in Calcutta Review of July 1894, a bi-annual periodical started in 1844. It refers to a Bengali language work - Hindutva--Hindur Prakrita Itihas by Babu Chandra Nath Basu, which propounded the Advaita Vedanta school of thought! The article in CR refers to this work in these terms- "It aims at being an exposition of the deepest and abstrusest doctrines
of Hinduism, not in a spirit of apology, not in a spirit of bombast, but
in a calm and dispassionate spirit. His sole object is to compare, so far as lies in his power, the leading doctrines of Hindu faith with those of other religions, which, in the present case, mean Brahmaism and Christianity... "
Thus it seems, that the intended representations of the words Hinduism & Hindutva when promulgated for the first time, were actually bang opposite of what we have come to understand them as today. Hinduism was an action-representing noun, supposed to represent the set of customs, ceremonies, and rituals, as practiced by Hindus, and it could differ from one place to another (as is evident from the observation made above). Hindutva , on the other hand was to be the "essential intrinsic quality" of a hindu -all inclusive, in search of enlightenment by doing his work righteously ( i.e. following steadfastness). It didn't matter, per Hindutva, if and how you practiced specific rituals, followed one good or another or none!
I found it quite astonishing how the symbolism of these words has gone topsy turvy in a matter of 120 years, and a story worth telling- so that the words, like all other things don't get vilified in future due to lack of our understanding about their origins.
