Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) workers take part in a march on the occasion of the organisation’s centenary.
Credit: PTI Photo
The 100-year journey of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has seen the organisation thrive because of its adaptability. For a clearer picture of the RSS’ journey and growth, certain misconceptions need to be dispelled and certain core principles need to be better understood.
A misconception is that the RSS sets an agenda and then mobilises society through its cadre to rally around that agenda. It is the other way around. The RSS takes up issues that society feels very strongly about. The RSS passed a resolution in 1959 on the Kashi Vishwanath temple, but the first mass movement for temple construction was taken up for the Ram temple at Ayodhya in the 1980s. The RSS went with the mood of Hindu society that was then predominantly demanding the construction of a Ram temple in Ayodhya.
This functional strategy of the RSS to move along with the society, rather than trying to move society in a different direction, has its origin in one of its core principles that has remained unchanged for the last 100 years. It is that the RSS is not an organisation within society, but one that seeks to organise it.
Another core principle is that its objective is to transform Indian society, and this will pave the way for the rest of the world. The RSS’ idea of transformation means everyone should truly live by the principle of ‘service to society’ and treat the world as one family (Vasudheiv Kutumbakam).
One core RSS principle that is unlikely to change is that once society is transformed, the RSS will merge into it, without seeking credit, believing the people themselves have brought about the change.
Another long-standing RSS belief is that society has only two kinds of people those who are part of the RSS, and those who will eventually join it. That’s why it engages with everyone, even its strongest critics.
Hindu Rashtra
The RSS’ core belief is that India is a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ not in the religious sense, but in ‘Dharma’ (a way of life). Regardless of faith, anyone who lives by the values of ‘Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah’ (May everyone be happy) and ‘Vasudhaiv Kutumbakam’ embodies Hindu Dharma. For the RSS, ‘Rashtra’ is not a territorial nation, but a socio-cultural concept without geographical boundaries. ‘Rashtra’ in Sanskrit means ‘that which takes one towards enlightenment’, and the RSS sees the ‘Hindu Rashtra’ as a set of values whose objective is to bring universal well-being and spiritual uplift of all.
Most commentators view the RSS’ philosophy from V D Sarvarkar’s ‘Hindutva’ lens, but the RSS’ concept of Hindutva leans more towards ‘spiritual nationalism’ rather than political nationalism. K B Hedgewar, the RSS founder, was deeply influenced by Sri Aurobindo, who propounded ‘spiritual nationalism’, which is reflected in the RSS' concept of 'Hindu Rashtra'.
Sri Aurobindo explained the concept of ‘Dharma’ comprehensively in his writings, as he said: ‘A greater sovereign than the King was Dharma, the religious, ethical, social, political, juridic and customary law organically governing the life of the people…The subjection of the sovereign power to the Dharma was not an ideal theory inoperative in practice; for the rule of the socio-religious law actively conditioned the whole life of the people and was therefore a living reality, and it had in the political field very large political consequences.’
In future, as the RSS takes up different issues, depending on the mood and needs of society, these core principles will remain unchanged. They will also continue to be the guiding framework of the millions of RSS volunteers and more than three dozen national-level ‘RSS-inspired’ organisations. Together, they wield a decisive influence in every walk of life.
What needs to be closely watched is how these principles will be taken globally over the next few decades.
Arun Anand has authored several books on RSS, including ‘The Soul of a Nation: Understanding Hindu Nationalism’.
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.