Dr. Shashi Tharoor, in his scholarly masterpiece Why I Am a Hindu, clearly articulates what kind of Hindu he is:
“My notion of Indianness and Hinduness is very much caught up in what Dr. Radhakrishnan so memorably spoke of as a view of life. That view of life has very little room for intolerance, for dogma, for attacks on others because of what they do or do not believe. I am a Hindu and I am a nationalist, but I am not a Hindu nationalist. My nationalism is unquestionably, all-embracingly Indian.”—Why I am a Hindu, New Delhi, Aleph Books Company, 2018, p. 198
No one can disagree with Tharoor if they accept Dr. Radhakrishnan’s idea that this “Indian” life is essentially a “Hindu way of life.” But where is this Hindu or Indian view of life, with all its shortcomings and strengths, actually lived out? Primarily in India, where the majority of Hindus reside. While some diasporic Indians strive to maintain it abroad, its roots remain firmly in Indian soil. Since Hindus never invaded other lands or forcibly converted others, this way of life was never imposed elsewhere.
However, what happens when others, here Abrahamic faiths, except Jews—who are still Indians, part of our home and family—step forward and say, “Your way of life is wrong. If you want to go to heaven and avoid eternal hell, you must accept our way of life, which is based primarily on religion rather than civilization”? How should we respond?
While the Hindu way of life includes religion and rituals, it is fundamentally a dharmic way of life, centered on Purusharthas—Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha. But now, when We, the People of India, who have only one land to live this way of life, feel threatened by external forces and their internal agents—backed by foreign powers, money, and muscle—what defense do we have?
Tharoor’s vision of tolerance and openness is noble. Indeed, we have welcomed refugees, accommodated diverse faiths, and engaged in dialogue. But what happens when a senior figure, observing this, steps in and declares to “the others”: Get up and get lost!—even standing between us and them? What are we supposed to do?
Should we fall at his feet, pleading, “Please don’t rebuke them! They have a constitutional right to propagate their faith, and we, as a tolerant people, are mandated to listen to them. After all, beyond our Constitution, their God and Creed also command them not only to preach but to convert us!”?
Now, the senior figure, unimpressed, grabs us by the hair, lands a punch on our nose, and growls: “Stay quiet and mind your business if you want to remain part of this family! Otherwise, go live in their quarters. We’ve already given them a share of our home. But don’t think it’ll be easy for you—we’ll make sure you neither stay peacefully here nor move there!”
The “other,” seeing this, retorts furiously: Don’t challenge us! You don’t know the powerful backing we have! The senior, unfazed, delivers another punch: You fool, get lost! Most of your backers have already been neutralized through quiet diplomacy.
At this point, the pseudo-secularist intervenes: “This is nothing but fanaticism and fascism! Why not let them have a dialogue first? Issues should be settled through discussion, not bullying or violence.”
The senior, now amused, agrees to a dialogue—knowing full well where it will lead.
The Dialogue
Senior [S]: Fine. Tell us all the good about your way of life and the bad about ours.
The Other [TO]: No, we’re not here to compare and contrast. We came to save people from hell and send them to eternal heaven.
S: And what must we do for that?
TO: First, you have to accept our God.
S: Okay, then?
TO: Then you can ignore Him—like we have—but you must still accept our denominational creed.
S: Alright. Then what?
TO: Then you can also ignore the creed—like we have—but you must still accept our code of life, which has been prepared and approved by our bosses in the West (either in Rome or elsewhere). This is the only way to escape hell and enter heaven.
S: But your code has all the same shortcomings as ours. You’ve simply retained most of our ways under different names. That’s a bit confusing.
TO: True! It’s like fusion music—neither classical nor Western, just a mix of both. A hybrid. Neither Indian kichadi nor Western porridge. This is what our bosses in the West cooked up, using their civilizational ingredients in their Western vessel. Initially, we struggled with it, but we’ve adjusted. So, if you want to reach heaven, this hybrid way is your only option. It’s not permission, just a temporary concession for you. Our bosses have allowed us to retain some of our old superstitions and blind faith, even if they aren’t sanctified, just to make the transition easier. In fact, you needn’t take our God or Creed seriously anymore—most of us already don’t!
S: Okay. What if we follow our own way of life in an Indian vessel while still keeping your God and Creed at the center—just as we do with our deities in Hinduism?
TO: No, no! That’s not possible. The problem isn’t your way of life—it’s your vessel, which you still call “Hindu.” Even if you rename it “Indian,” that’s still unacceptable. According to our creed and code, we are Christians first and Indians second—only for passports and Aadhaar cards!
The Aftermath
After witnessing this “wonderful” dialogue—mediated by the pseudo-secularist—the victim, still nursing his bleeding nose, sighs: “Just leave me alone. Let me live my life in this country without joining either camp or dreaming of their heaven. If I follow their way of life, with its endless rules and restrictions, my life will become hell on earth. Then what’s the point of reaching heaven?”
The “Other” leaves, somewhat satisfied at having managed another “dialogue”—thanks to the pseudo-secularist—but still attempts to fetch water with a leaking vessel and a frayed rope. The senior, knowing exactly how this game ends, walks inside with a smirk. And the pseudo-secularist, unsure which quarter to join—still belonging to the whole family but fitting nowhere—remains like the proverbial washerman’s dog, neither belonging at home nor at the riverbank. Meanwhile, the victim clutches an ice pack to his bruised nose, contemplating the absurdity of it all.
Ashram, 19-3-2025
Leave a Reply