In quest of Hindu nationalism
by Kanchan Gupta on 05 Nov 2018 11 Comments

[As the Ram Janmabhumi reemerges into the public limelight only to be pushed back once again by a Supreme Court unable to decide between holding day-to-day hearings to settle the title suit expeditiously or further prolonging the vexatious dispute while maintaining an express pipeline for so-called public interest matters, we republish a book review of Girilal Jain’s posthumous, The Hindu Phenomenon, by eminent journalist, Kanchan Gupta, who emphathised with the cause in those heady days of Hindu resurgence and reaffirmation – Editor]

 

Just before he fell ill and was admitted to hospital, never to return home again, Girilal Jain would often tell his close friends about how was working on a book in which he would grapple with the question of Hindu nationalism.

 

This book had been in the making for the past many years – first in the depths of his mind later in the form of notes. Any other author would have taken much less time in putting together a manuscript, but not Girilal Jain, and this was primarily because he could not limit his scope to a few ideas and thoughts. Each day for him brought forth new ideas, new discoveries, new links in the chain he was meticulously building to substantiate his thesis. As a result, Girilal Jain could never stop adding to the broad outline of his book.

 

After his death last July, the draft and notes, much of it hand-written, were found in his study. These have been put together to give shape to his dream of publishing a book that would put into historical perspective the reassertion of Hindu nationalism and pride. With politically incorrect title like The Hindu Phenomenon, it is bound to raise hackles in many quarters, especially among professional secularists who can be expected to savage its contents.

 

But this will not detract from the fact that Girilal Jain’s book be the first of its kind and seeks to present an alternative explanation for the assertive mood among Hindus. Even otherwise, this is not the first time that Girilal Jain’s views will run into rough weather: Even during his lifetime, he faced violent knee-jerk reactions to his writings which were not in tune with the fashion of the day.

 

A magazine editor, who masquerades as a Marxist and takes time off now and then to protest against “fascist attacks the freedom of expression,” once publicly demanded that Girilal Jain’s writings should be banned. Hopefully, he will now raise the demand that the book be proscribed - it will at least serve the limited purpose of drawing attention to what is clearly a grossly underestimated work of intellectual brilliance.

 

Unlike many other contemporary intellectuals, many of them academicians of repute, Girilal Jain did not think in terms of territorial states but civilisations. For him, any useful discourse was possible only in the context of a whole millennium.

 

As he explains in the introductory chapter, “Why do I think in terms of a whole millennium which, on the face of it, is fragmented at so many points? My reason is simple. The beginning of the millennium witnessed the beginning of the assault on Hindu India and as we approach its end, we can clearly see the approach of the end of that assault. Only on a superficial, so-called rational view, can it be regarded as an accident that the millennium which began with the destruction of hundreds and thousands of our temples should be drawing towards a close amidst an unprecedented upsurge on the question of the construction of a Ram temple at a site which millions of ordinary Hindus regard as the avatar’s janmabhoomi.

 

It is this premise which forms the core of The Hindu Phenomenon. Girilal Jain looks at the civilisational aspect of Hindu nationalism, emphasising on its cultural identity, to argue that it is different from all other forms of nationalism. He explains the various stages of the growth of Hindu nationalism, the shaping of its cultural, social and political contents.

 

He shows how 1857 marked a watershed insofar as the emasculation of the then traditional leadership was concerned; with the banishment of the last Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar, it marked the closure of an era that had begun with the arrival of Mahmud Ghaznavi in the 11th century.

 

Quoting extensively from diverse sources, Girilal Jain has outlined the shaping of modern nationalism and its synthesis with Western concepts. He shows how the “history of the past two centuries has been the history of the rise of Hindus after a lapse of centuries of Muslim invasions and rule.”

 

By his own admission, this is a “wholly revisionist view of history” which will be resisted by the “dominant elite which has both made history in this period and written it”. But then, the entire book is a rejec­tion of conventional wisdom that has ruled our thought pro­cess and thereby facilitated the stranglehold of this dominant elite over society at large. In a sense, Girilal Jain has cocked a snook at the thought police.

 

“It never occurred to me till recently that the Hindu-Muslim problem, as we faced it in the whole of this century, was the result of an old civilisational stalemate and that Partition had finally ended it in favour of Hindus in three-fourths of India,” says Girilal Jain for whom “our civilisation is universal in the deepest sense of the term by virtue of its being the only primordial civilisation to have survived intact and not to have degenerated into a nar­rowly defined religion”.

 

For Girilal Jain, Hindu natio­nalism is not exclusivist but inclusivist and transcends the barriers of a nation state. He did not see the assertion of the Hindu identity in its narrow religious context but as an attempt to re-invigorate the spirit of our civilisation and culture. The fight, for him, is not between Hindus and Muslims but Hin­dus and a state that has gone astray.

 

The section on Nehru and the foisting of what later came to be known as the Nehruvian model, is particularly interest­ing as it demolishes more than a few myths that have been perpetuated by the dominant elite. As Girilal Jain explains, Nehru’s secularism “did not provide, even in theory, for a cultural synthesis. It sought to bypass the civilisational-cultural issue altogether”.

 

Much as his critics would love to brand him as a “Hindu fundamentalist” or even a “communalist”, Girilal Jain, as The Hindu Phenomenon shows, was a Hindu who was proud of his cultural heritage and saw the Ayodhya move­ment as not merely an agita­tion against a derelict disputed structure but an attempt at Hindu self-renewal and self-assertion.

 

His view of history is entirely different from the manner in which we have been told to view history. No less remarka­ble is the scholarship of a man who spent a lifetime first work­ing for and later editing what used to be the country’s best newspaper: Despite his profes­sional commitments, he found the time to read and under­stand India’s past which has a direct bearing on the nation’s future.

 

THE HINDU PHENOMENON

Girilal Jain

UBSPD Rs 75

 

Courtesy

The Pioneer, 30 July 1994

User Comments Post a Comment
The Congress is replacing cultural nationalism with dynastic nationalism. This is what happened to England in 1066, following the Norman Conquest. For the next 400 years, England was ruled by French dynasties, Normans and Plantagenets until the death of Richard III in the Battle of Bosworth in 1485 at the hands of Henry Vii, Tudor.
Congress is trying to impose an alien dynastic rule over a different society and culture. Nehru himself was totally alienated from his ancestral culture.
N.S. Rajaram
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
The print copy is available on amazon for around 6k!

However, there is a pdf copy at http://www.girilaljainarchive.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/The-Hindu-Phenomenon-1.pdf
Bharati
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
Our simple teachings-adhithi devo bhava- and prayers-loka samastha sukhino bhavanthu- are sufficient to tell the world about our unique culture which should have been accepted by the world, hook, line and sinker. History is proof that we not only preached about these ideals but actually lived up to them. It was our misfortune that Nehru became our first Prime Minister and pursued the divide and rule policy introduced by the colonizers with much more intensity and his contemporaries were gullible enough not to identify it and stop it. In fact even the Ram Janmabhumi issue should have been resolved then what with India having got divided on religious grounds and Ayodhya was very much part of the Hindu majority part of the divided nation.
P M Ravindran
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
Very nice article, thanks for sharing. Would love to read the book.
SANJEEV NAYYAR
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse

Swargeeya Shri .Girilal Jain ji was one of the rare and unique intellectuals in India, who recognized the demonic faces behind the masks of secularism, liberalism and communism. He was proud of his Hindu tradition which transcended the barriers of south Asia into south east Asia and western world. His aspirations are carried ahead by his daughter Sandhya ji to whom we are obliged for keeping alive that tradition.
B.S.Harishankar
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
Amazon is selling the book for Rs 325/- Paperback

https://www.amazon.in/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_1_9?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=girilal+jain&sprefix=girilal+j%2Caps%2C306&crid=3EO8V08WA45Q7

Editor
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
Thanks!

This is what I'd seen! -

https://www.amazon.in/Hindu-Phenomenon-Girilal-Jain/dp/8186112324
Bharati
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
It is worth noting down the broad vision of the great man, late, Girilal Jain's correct contention or conclusions (1) Hindu nationalism is not exclusivist, (2)the fight is not between Hindus and Muslims, but Hindus and a state gone astray.
The country under both nehru and Mahatma Gandhi had, indeed, gone astray by nehru's dynastic policy, overlooked by M K Gandhi..
Girilalji has also rightly pointed out that nehru's secularism did not provide cultural synthesis.
Panikkath krishnanunni
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
@N.S.Rajaram.
I must thank Rajaram sir, for being Liberal and generous enough to Nehru, by describing nehruvian policy as "dynastic nationalism"
The fact, however remains, that, Nehru never understood the meaning of the noble concept "nationalism".
British dynastic nationalism differs from nehruvian dynastic nationalism. In the latter the essencial properties of nationalism are missing and it would be more apt to say that it was just mere dynastic imperialism, worse than those ruled by the Kings six hundred years ago.
Panikkath krishnanunni
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
A fine review. Looking forward to reading the book. Thanks Sandhyaji.

As Kanchan Gupta points out : the dispute is not between Hindus and Muslims but between Hindus and a state gone astray.
Dr. Vijaya Rajiva
November 05, 2018
Report Abuse
I had purchased and read the book in 1998 and four or five times subsequently, and after reading this old republished review, I am reading the book once again.
Shankaranarayana Hebbar
November 06, 2018
Report Abuse