Hindu Hinduism Hindutva
Hindu Hinduism Hindutva
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
http://www.jstor.org
ON HINDU, HINDUSTAN, HINDUISM AND HINDUTVA
ARVIND SHARMA
Summary
This papersets out to examine the emergenceand significanceof the word Hindu
(and associatedterminology)in discourse aboutIndia,in orderto determinethe light
it sheds on what is currentlyhappening in India. It concludes that the word, and
its derivatives,contain a series of semantic bivalences characterisedby unresolved
tensions, and furtherthat these tensions help account for the complexities generated
by the inductionof the word Hindu (and associated terminology) in modem Indian
political discourse.
(FerozsonsUrdu-EnglishDictionary:
A ComprehensiveDictionaryof CurrentVocabulary
[Karachi:Ferozsons,n.d.] p. 821.)
I
Arguably the earliest traceable use of the word Hindu appears in the
Zend Avesta (Jackson 1922:324-325):
The first chapter of the Avestan Vendidad (whatever may be the age of the
chapter)containsan allusionto a portionof NorthernIndiain a list which it gives
of sixteen lands or regions, createdby Ahur Mazda and apparentlyregardedas
underIraniansway. The fifteenthof these domains, accordingto Vd. 1, 18 was
Hapta Hindu, 'Seven Rivers', a region of 'abnormalheat', probably identical
with the territoryof SaptaSindhavas,'Seven Rivers', in the Veda(see especially
Rv. VIII, 24, 27).
This 'India' was still confined to Sind, for it was under Xerxes
that "for the first time in history an Indian expeditionary force fought
on the soil of Europe" and even stormed the "bloody defiles of
Thermopylae." The 'Indian' recruits to the army were called by two
names: "Gandharians and Indians," thereby confirming that while the
former were "from the province of Gandhara" (listed as a separate
province), the Indians were "from the provinces controlled by the
Persian empire to the east of the Sindhu and described as Sindhu in
the Achaemenian inscriptions" (Mukherji 1951:42).
The word Hindu derives, by common consent, from the word
Sindhu. It is remarkable that the direction of transformation of Sindhu
->Hindu->Ind is paralleled in the account of the Buddhist pilgrim
Xanzuang (= Hiuen Tsang, 7th century), by the words Shin-tu--Hien-
tau--Tien-chu, and even more surprising that it becomes In-tu, at
which point its connotation overflows into the religious, at least in
Xanzuang's interpretation of it (Beal 1969 [1884]:69):
Names of India
On examination, we find that the names of India (Tien-chu) are various and
perplexingas to theirauthority.It was ancientlycalled Shin-tu,also Hien-tau;but
now, accordingto the right pronunciation,it is called In-tu.The people of In-tu
call theircountryby differentnames accordingto theirdistrict.Each countryhas
diverse customs. Aiming at a general name which is the best sounding,we will
call the countryIn-tu. In Chinese this name signifies the Moon. The moon has
manynames,of which this is one. For as it is said thatall living thingsceaselessly
4 Arvind Sharma
II
Thus in the ancient world the formations from the original word,
Sindhu, bifurcated semantically along different lines, as the word trav-
elled to the west and the east. In its Persian and Greek acceptation
the word became a signifier of a region (which was restricted to the
lower Indus in the case of the early Persians and extended to cover the
whole of India in the case of the Greeks). In its Chinese acceptation it
possessed a religious dimension as explained by Xanxuang. When In-
dia came in contact with Arabia, and later the Islamic world, the same
word, Sindhu, again gave rise to two words, whose meanings became
both more distinct and more settled when compared to the usages of
the ancient world, crystallizing as Hind (through Sind) to denote the
land of India and Hindu (from Sindhu) to denote the follower of a 're-
ligion' (though not without some overlap, as discussed later).
The first use preceded the second. India was known as al-Hind in
pre-Islamic Arabia (Wink 1990, 1:195-6), and consequently the word
Hindu simply meant an Indian until it acquired a religious connotation
(B.N. Sharma 1972:128). Even after the word Hindu had acquired
On Hindu,Hindustan,Hinduismand Hindutva 5
Brahmans think and believe, for they are specifically trained for
preservingand maintainingtheir religion. And this is what we shall
explain, viz. the belief of the Brahmans"(Sachau 1914, 1:39). It is
clear that who speaks for Hinduism was an issue then as it is now,
althoughAlblruinichose to resolve it in his own way. (3) Is Hinduisma
creedalor an ethnic religion?Alblruindescribes Hinduismwith gusto
but when it come to defining it there are problems. At one point he
veers towardsa creedaldefinition(1:50):
As the wordof confession,"Thereis no god but God, Muhammadis his prophet,"
is the shibboleth of Islam, the Trinitythat of Christianity,and the institute of
the Sabbaththat of Judaism,so metempsychosisis the shibbolethof the Hindu
religion. Thereforehe who does not believe in it does not belong to them, and is
not reckonedas one of them.
The usage of the word Hindu in the subsequent period retains the
two ambiguities (1) whether it refers to a region or a religion and (2)
whether, as religion, it is to be understood in a centralist or pluralist
manner. Thus during the Delhi Sultanate (c. 1200-1526) the word
Hindu, on the one hand, denoted a religion, on the other, a region, and
it imprints this ambivalence on geography, if the Arabian traveller Ibn
Battuta is to be believed. He states that Hindu Kush ("Hindu-killer")
became known as such "because of the number of Indian slaves who
perished in passing" (Enc. Brit. 1967, 11:514; H.G. Rawlinson 1980
[1913]:193) its snows. Would these Indian slaves not have been mostly
Hindu?
By the time the Delhi Sultanate was replaced by the Moghul Empire,
after it had been consolidated by Akbar the Great (r. 1556-1605), the
question of defining Hinduism once again began to pose the kind of
problems it has before and since. A well-known text of this period is
the Dabistan-i-mazahib, which attempts an overview of the religious
landscape of the empire. Irfan Habib writes (Joshi and Josh 1994,
3:185):
Therewere the religious traditionscoming from ancientIndia,which by Mughal
times began to be describedunderthe term 'Hindu'. The authorof Dabistan-i-
Mazahib is hard put to describe what the beliefs of a Hindu are and ultimately
he takes shelter in a very convenient position-Hindus are those who have
10 Arvind Sharma
been arguingwith each other within the same frameworkof argumentover the
centuries.If they recognise each otheras personswhom we can eithersupportor
oppose in a religious argument,thenboth partiesare Hindus.The Jains,although
they rejected Brahmanism,were still Hindus because they were arguing and
polemicising with Brahmins. Such argumentswere not taking place between
Hindusand Muslims. The Muslims did not shareany basic terminologywith the
others.Muslims hadtheirown framework,an ideological framework,the semitic
framework ...
III
It is importantto interruptthe discussion of the religious signif-
icance of the word Hindu (to be resumed later) to cast a glance at
anotherword which had by now come into play, namely, Hindustan.
As we do so, we might do well to recognise that in the word Hindu
we confrontedtwo ambiguities(or a double ambiguity):(1) whetherit
signifies a geographicalor a religious referent,and (2) if it denotes a
religion then, what constitutesit?
The word Hindustan may well serve as a metaphorof the first
ambiguity.The word literally means 'the land of the Hindus' (Nag
and Burman 1947, 1:1) and had become a common word for India,
specially north India, by the thirteenthcentury.It raises the natural
query: how is the word Hindu to be taken here: as a resident of
a geographicalregion (Wink 1990, 1:125) or as the follower of a
particularfaith; or as the resident of a particularregion who is also
the follower of a particularfaith (Sreenivasan1989-133)? All these
senses are possible because of the tremendousdemographicoverlap
between the two categories.Ultimatelythe meaning remainsunclear.
One might initially think that an allusion to a 'place' (stan) in the
word itself would orientits meaninggeographically.This is indeed so
(Basham 1967:1-2; Nehru 1946:335) but the significance continues
to remain double-edged, for it could be taken to mean either the
On Hindu,Hindustan,Hinduismand Hindutva 13
Despite this lack of clarity (or because of it) the word Hindu, after
a brief period of flirtation with other words (Marshall 1970), was
adopted by the British to "characterize all things in India (specially
elements and features found in the cultures and religions of India)
which were not Muslim, not Christian, not Jewish, or, hence, not
Western" (Frykenberg 1989:31).
It is now time to pause and take stock before we venture into
the British period. By examining the history of the word Hindu,
and its usage, it becomes obvious that the word did not come into
common use until after 1000 AD. During this pre-1000 period India
represented a single politico-religio-cultural entity (Pande 1984:170;
Spear 1972:93). Subsequently its use gradually spread in such a way
that by the eighteenth century it became a common locution often
used by both insiders and outsiders (W.C. Smith 1962:70) to denote
a religio-cultural complex which was distinct from, also different from
and sometimes diametrically opposed to the Islamic presence.
In religio-cultural terms itself, the presence of another religio-
cultural complex now also characterised the land, namely, the Islamic.
The British presence in India introduced another religio-cultural com-
plex on top of it, namely, Western/Christian. Up to a point, the British
presence in India could almost be considered benignly neutral, if not
actually pro-Hindu, from a Hindu perspective. It has even been plausi-
bly argued that "the Company's Raj was actually, for most intents and
purposes, a de facto 'Hindu Raj"' (Frykenberg 1989:34).
By this, I meantseveralthings:-that the Raj, as an imperialsystem of rule, was a
genuinely indigenousratherthansimply a foreign (or "colonial")construct;that,
hence, it was more Indian than British in its inner logic, regardlessof external
interferencesand violations of thatlogic by Britain(especially duringthe Crown
period of this Raj); that, in terms of religious institutions,indigenous elites and
18 Arvind Sharma
local forces of all kinds were able to receive recognitionand protection,as well
as special concessions, from the State; and, moreover,that they had been able
to do this in directproportionto their ability-whether by power of information
control,numbers,noise, skill or wealth-to influencelocal governments.
A breach opens up after 1818, the year in which both the Maratha
Confederacy was defeated, thereby eliminating the last major chal-
lenge to British paramountcy in India and also the year in which James
Mill published his famous multi-volume work clinically entitled The
History of British India, which was really a phillipic against Hinduism
(Davis 1995:46).
Mill's History,an immense andthoroughindictmentfor the Indianpeoples, tried
to justify the need for British rule among a population supposedly unable to
govern itself. Mill especially condemnedHinduismblamingit for much of what
was wrongwith India.Hinduismis ritualistic,superstitious,irrational,andpriest-
ridden,Mill charged,at each step implicitly contrastingit with the deist version
of Christianitythat he believed to be the highest form of religion. For several
decades the EastIndiaCompanyprovideda copy of Mill's tome to new Company
officials embarkingfor India,to sustainthem in their sense of racialand cultural
superioritywhile in the colony.
The upshot of all these developments was the fact that another
religious communityapartfrom the Islamic, namelythe Christian,had
also been created.What needs to be clearly recognisedin this context
is the role of politics in positing these communitiesin an oppositional,
ratherthan an appositional,frameworkin relationto the Hindu. The
existence of the Jews and Parsis testifies to the fact that minorities
are not unknownto the Hindus but they did not pose a problem for
Hindu polity because their presence was not vitiated by the ruler-
ruled (i.e. political) factor. Until that factor emerged, even Islamic
presence was not perceived as a problem. Arab Muslim traderson
India's coasts "betweenthe seventh and ninth centurieswere treated
with toleranceby Hindu rulers and the legend of the conversionof a
CheramanPerumalRaja shows that they were allowed to propagate
Islam ... at least one [Muslim] contributed financially to a Hindu
temple" (Ahmad 1964:77). Even in the north, there "is persistent
local traditionin certainold centers in the heartof UttarPradeshthat
Muslim families had settled there long before the conquest of the
area by MuhammadGhuri. In the city of Benares, there are Muslim
mohallas, which, it is said, are anteriorin date to the conquest of
Benares by Muslims, and similar traditionsare currentabout Maner
in Bihar"(Ikram1964:32). Even afterthe alteredpolitical equationin
the north made the Muslim presence problematicalfor the Hindu, it
did not affect the south. Thus Abdul Razak,the Persianambassadorat
the Vijayanagarcourt, could write aroundthe middle of the fifteenth
century:"ThePeople [or Calicut]are infidels;consequentlyI consider
myself in an enemy's country,as the Mohammadansconsidereveryone
who has not received the Qur'an.Yet I admit that I meet with perfect
toleration,and even favour; we have two mosques and are allowed
to pray in public" (Radhakrishnan1939:312). Similarly, the Syrian
Christianpresence in India did not pose a problem for the Hindu,
but EuropeanChristianpresence became a problem,when Christians
became rulersand Hindusthe ruled.
This fluid situation,however,began to solidify in the post-Mutiny
period, once the rule of the East India Company was taken over by
the BritishCrown.This consolidationof Britishrule was accompanied
20 ArvindSharma
VII
The word Hindutvagained currencyafterit appearedas the title of
a book writtenby V.D. Savarkar,firstpublishedin 1923. V.D. Savarkar
and MahatmaGandhimay be regardedas the patronsaints of the two
distinct forms of Hinduism the ambiguity of the word Hindu gave
rise to. Paradoxicalas it might appear,both these trends arose out
of the same problematic-that of defining Hinduism.And both were
22 ArvindSharma
IX
The time has come to try to relatethese evolutions,or even convolu-
tions, of Hindutvato the basic thesis of the paper-that like the words
Hindustanand Hinduism,the word Hindutvais also caught up in the
ambiguityand ambivalenceof the word Hindu.
On Hindu,Hindustan,Hinduismand Hindutva 27
Post-Independenceconceptualdevelopmentsin Hindutvabasically
turnon two differentialaxes-of religion (and/or)cultureand nation
(and/or)state.Hindutvathoughtin generalhas triedto align itself with
the cultureaxis in termsof the firstset of termsandwith the nationaxis
in the second set of terms. Out of the religion/culturedivision, culture
would be viewed as a broadercategory,just as the nation would be
viewed as a broadercategoryin relationto state.Hindutvathoughtthen
has tried to connect itself with the more encompassingof the paired
categories,even occasionally at the expense of the other.
Its agenda has been to thereby solve the problem of the presence
of non-Hindu elements in Indian society and polity-primarily of
the Muslims and Christians,and secondarilyof such Buddhists,Jains
and Sikhs as do not respondto the general interpretationof the term
'Hindu'it offers.By invitingthemto partakeonly of Hinducultureand
not religion, it wants to make it socially easier for these communities
to become parts of the largerwhole. It seeks to accomplishthe same
end politically by identifyingitself with the aspirationof nationhood,
as opposed to the machineryof a state, so that all could then belong
to the Hindu nation in this reconstitutedsociety and the state could
then be effectively secular (Banerjee 1990:133). It is significantthat
the Hindutvarhetoricto this day has largelyandcentrallybeen thatof a
nation(HinduRashtra)ratherthanof a state (HinduRaj) (even Shivaji
spoke of 'Hindu svaraj,'not Hindu Raj) (Savarkar1969:57). The key
categoryis not Hindustatismbut Hindunationalism(Jain 1996).
The internal contradictionsof the word Hindu, however, imperil
these exercises, whetherone turnsto religion or culture.One crucial
move Savarkarinitiatedwas the tendencyto associate Hinduismwith
culture rather than religion. His motive in doing so was to create
a conceptual category for "Indianreligions" (as distinguishedfrom
"religions practised in India"). But with this end constitutionally
achieved (although still in contention) it soon evolved the locution
of Hindu culture, from within the space inside "Indianreligions,"to
embraceall the "religionspractisedin India,"in a manneranalogous to
the way it was employedby Savarkarto embraceall "Indianreligions"
while situated within Hinduism, through the concept of Hindutva.
28 Arvind Sharma
Two conceptions of Indian culture now vie with each other for
acceptance.
With the word Hindu, the two referents in terms of region or religion
were in contention;with the word Hindustan,this bivalence took the
form of nature of the region itself; in the realm of religion it surfaced in
the ethnic and in the universalisticorientationsof Hinduismand now
it manifestsitself in the realmof culture.
These developmentsreflect a difference in emphasis in terms of
the evolving world-view (or at least India-view) of Hindutva. But
On Hindu,Hindustan,Hinduismand Hindutva 29
X
Hindutvathus comes full circle. In trying to solve the problem of
Hinduidentitywith thatof Hindutvaidentity,it ends up becomingpart
of the problemonce again. One may now be on a differentpartof the
tree but one is still up the same tree.
This should not be taken to mean, however, that our exercise has
been in vain. Such an exercise does allow us to posit a bivalent
'Hindu' reality capable of multiple formulations in several ways:
local/global;geographical/civilizational;ethnic/universal,and so on. It
also enables one to identify four attemptsto engage this ambivalent
Hindu historical/empiricalreality: in terms of the categories of (1)
region; (2) religion; (3) culture and (4) nation. The first attempt is
representedby the wordHindustan,the second by the wordHinduism,
the thirdby the expression Hindu culture and the fourthby the teml
30 ArvindSharma
Hindutva.The list of the words which compose the title of the essay
acquirethe complexionof an inventoryas a resultof this exercise.
Because of the complex natureof the Indianreality each approach
runsinto its own limitations;each generatesits own dilemma.The re-
gional approachgeneratesthe dilemma:does Indiabelong to the Hin-
dus or do Hindus belong to India?The religious approachgenerates
the dilemma: Is Hinduism a religion like any other religion or does
it itself includeotherreligions, denominationallyor universalistically?
The culturalapproachgeneratesthe dilemma:Is Hinducultureconsti-
tutive of Indian culture or expressive of it? And finally, the national
approachgeneratesthe dilemma:Should India opt for the secularism
of Hinduismor the Hinduismof secularism?
At the heartof each lies the questioncentralto all issues of identity:
does the otherbelong to me or do I belong to it?
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ahmad,Aziz
1964 Studies in Islamic Culturein the Indian Environment.Oxford:Clarendon
Press.
Anderson,W.K. and S.D. Damle
1987 The Brotherhoodof Saffron: The Rashtriya SwayamasevakSangh and
HinduRevivalism.New Delhi: VistaarPublications.
Ashby, Philip H.
1974 ModernTrendsin Hinduism.New Yorkand London:ColumbiaUniversity
Press.
Baird,Robert
1993 (ed.) Religion and Law in IndependentIndia. New Delhi: Manohar.
Banerjee,Nitya Narayan
1990 Hindu Outlook.Calcutta:HindutvaPublications.
On Hindu, Hindustan, Hinduism and Hindutva 31
Basham,A.L.
1967 The WonderThat WasIndia. 3rd rev. ed. London:Sidgwick & Jackson.
Baylay, C.A.
1985 "The Pre-Historyof Communalism?Religious Conflict in India 1700-
1800."ModernAsian Studies 19:177-203.
Beal, Samuel
1969 [1884] (tr.) Si-Yu-Ki:Buddhist Records of the Western World. Delhi:
OrientalReprintCorporation.
Bevan, E.R.
1922 "India in Early Greek and Latin Literature."In Ancient India, ed. E.J.
Rapson.Cambridge,U.K.: CambridgeUniversityPress, 391-426.
Bidwai, Praful,HarbansMukhia,and Achin Vanaik
1996 (eds.) Religion, Religiosityand Communalism.Delhi: Manohar.
Chattopadhyaya,Brajadulal
1998 Representingthe Other?SanskritSources and the Muslims.Delhi: Oxford
UniversityPress.
Davis, Richard S.
1995 "Introduction."In Religions of India in Practice, ed. David S. Lopez, Jr.
Princeton,New Jersey:PrincetonUniversityPress, 3-52.
Derrett,J. DuncanM.
1968 Religion, Law and State in India. New York:The Free Press.
Devalle, SusanaB.C.
1995 "Social Identities,HinduFundamentalism,and Politics in India."In Bhakti
Religion in NorthernIndia: CommunityIdentityand Political Action, ed.
David N. Lorenzen.Albany,N.Y.:StateUniversityof New YorkPress, 306-
322.
EncyclopediaBritannica
1967 Chicago:WilliamBenton. Vol. 11.
Everett,WilliamJohnson
1997 Religion, Federalism,and the Strugglefor Public Life: Cases from Ger-
many,India, and America.New York:OxfordUniversityPress.
Frykenberg,R.E.
1989 "The Emergenceof Modem 'Hinduism' as a Concept and as an Institu-
tion: A Reappraisalwith Special Reference to South India."In Hinduism
Reconsidered,ed. Ginther D. Sontheimerand HermannKulke.New Delhi:
Manohar,29-49.
Graham,Bruce
1990 Hindu Nationalism and Indian Politics: The Origins and Developmentof
the BharatiyaJana Sangh. Cambridge,U.K.: CambridgeUniversityPress.
32 ArvindSharma
Gupta,Narayani
1999 "Stereotypes Versus History." India International Centre Quarterly
(Summer):102-105.
Hansen,Thomas Blom
1999 The Saffron Wave:Democracy and Hindu Nationalism in ModernIndia.
Princeton,New Jersey:PrincetonUniversityPress.
Hein, Norvin J.
1977 "Hinduism."In A Reader's Guide to the Great Religions, ed. Charles J.
Adams. New York:The Free Press, 106-155.
Hinnells,John R. and Eric J. Sharpe
1972 Hinduism.Newcastle Upon Tyne:Oriel Press.
Ikram,S.M.
1964 MuslimCivilizationin India. Ed. Ainslie T. Embree.New York:Columbia
UniversityPress.
Jackson,A.V. Williams
1922 "The PersianDominions in NorthernIndia Down to the Time of Alexan-
der's Invasion."In Ancient India, ed. E.J. Rapson.Cambridge,U.K.: Cam-
bridgeUniversityPress, 319-344.
Jaffrelot,Christophe
1996 TheHinduNationalistMovementin India. New York:ColumbiaUniversity
Press.
Jain,Girilal
1996 TheHinduPhenomenon.New Delhi: UBSPD.
Jones, KennethW.
1981 "ReligiousIdentityand the IndianCensus."In The Censulsin BritishIndia,
ed. N.G. Barrier.New Delhi: Manohar,73-101.
Joshi, Sashi and BhagavanJosh
1994 Struggle for Hegemony in India 1920-47. 3 vols. New Delhi: Sage
Publications.
Kane, P.V.
1977 Historyof Dharmasistra. Poona:BhandarkarOrientalResearchInstitute.
Keer,D.
1988 VeerSavarkar Bombay:PopularPrakashan.
Khilnani,Sunil
1997 The Idea of India. New York:Farrar,Strausand Giroux.
King, Richard
1999 "Orientalismand the Modem Myth of 'Hinduism."'Numen26:166-172.
On Hindu, Hindustan, Hinduism and Hindutva 33
Klostermaier,Klaus K.
1994 A Surveyof Hinduism.2nd ed. Albany,N.Y.: State Universityof New York
Press.
Kohli, Ritu
1993 Political Ideas of M.S. Golwalker.New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications.
Kolff, Dirk H.A.
1990 Naukar,Rajputand Sepoy. London:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Lele, JayantK.
1995 Hindutva:TheEmergenceof the Right.Madras:EarthwormBooks.
Lipner,JuliusJ.
1996 "AncientBanyan:An InquiryInto the Meaningof 'Hinduness."'Religious
Studies32:109-126.
Lorenzen,David N.
1995 "The Historical Vicissitudes of Bhakti Religion." In Bhakti Religion in
Northern India: CommunityIdentity and Political Action, ed. David N.
Lorenzen.Albany:State Universityof New YorkPress, 1-32.
1999 "Who InventedHinduism?"ComparativeStudies in Society and History
41:630-659.
Madhok,Balraj
1958 HinduRastra (in Hindi). New Delhi: BharatiSanityaSadan.
1969a Balraj Madhok on India's Foreign Policy. New Delhi: Bharati Sahitya
Sadan.
1969b Indianization?What,Whyand How. New Delhi: BharatiSahityaSadan.
1969c Portrait of a Martyr: Biography of Dr. Shyama Prasad Mookherji.
Bombay:Jaico PublishingHouse.
1970 Indianization?What,Whyand How. Delhi: S. Chand& Co.
1972 A Storyof Bungling in Kashmir New Delhi: YoungAsia Publications.
1973 Murderof Democracy.New Delhi: S. Chand& Co.
1978 Reflectionsof a Detenu. New Delhi: NewmanGroupof Publishers.
1980 StormyDecade: Indian Politics 1970-1980. Delhi: IndiaBook Gallery.
1982 Rationalefor a HinduState. Delhi: IndianBook Gallery.
1985 Punjab Problem: The Muslim Connection. New Delhi: Hindu World
Publications.
1986 R.S.S.and Politics. New Delhi: HinduWorldPublications.
1987 Jammu,Kashmir,and Ladakh:Problemand Solution.New Delhi: Reliance
PublishingHouse.
Mahmoud,CynthiaKeppley
1994 "Ayodhyaand the HinduResurgence."Religion 24:73-76.
34 Arvind Sharma
Majumdar,R.C.
1970 (ed.) The Classical Age. Bombay:BharatiyaVidya Bhavan.
Marshall,P.J.
1970 (ed.) The BritishDiscovery of Hinduismin the EighteenthCentury.Cam-
bridge,U.K.: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Marty,MartinE., and R.S. Appleby
1991 (eds.) FundamentalismsObserved.Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press.
Minault,G.
1982 TheKhilafatMovement:ReligiousSymbolismand PoliticalMobilizationin
India. New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
Monier-Williams,Monier
1960 A Sanskrit-EnglishDictionary.Oxford:ClarendonPress.
Mujeeb,M.
1967 TheIndianMuslims.London:George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
Mukherji,RadhaKumud
1951 "ForeignInvasions."In The Age of Imperial Unity, ed. R.C. Majumdar,
Bombay:BharatiyaVidya Bhavan,39-53.
1961 Glimpsesof AncientIndia. Bombay:BharatiyaVidya Bhavan.
Nag, Kalidasand DebajyotiBurman
1947 (eds.) The English Worksof Raja RammohunRoy. Calcutta: Sadharan
BrahmoSamaj.
Nalapat,M.D.
1999 Indutva.Delhi: Har-Anand.
Narayanan,Vasudha
1996 "TheHinduTradition."In WorldReligions: EasternTraditions,ed. Willard
G. Oxtoby.Toronto:OxfordUniversityPress.
Nehru,J.L.
1946 TheDiscovery of India. New York:The John Day Company.
Oberoi,HarjotS.
1988 "From Ritual to Counter-Ritual:Rethinking the Hindu-Sikh Question,
1884-1915." In Sikh History and Religion in the TwentiethCentury,ed.
JosephT. O'Connoll,Milton Israel,andWillardG. Oxtoby.Toronto:Centre
of South Asian Studies, Universityof Toronto,136-158.
1994 The Constructionof Religious Boundaries:Culture,Identityand Diversity
in the Sikh Tradition.Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress.
O'Connell, J.T.
1973 "GaudiyaVaisnavaSymbolism of DeliveranceFrom Evil."Journal of the
AmericanOrientalSociety 93:340-343.
On Hindu, Hindustan, Hinduism and Hindutva 35
Page, D.
1982 Prelude to Partition: The Indian Muslims and the Imperial System of
Control.New Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress.
Pande, G.C.
1984 Dimensionsof AncientIndianSocial History. New Delhi: Books & Books.
Panikkar,K.M.
1963 The Foundationsof New India. London:George Allen & Unwin.
Radhakrishnan,S.
1939 EasternReligions and WesternThought.Oxford:ClarendonPress.
Radhakrishnan,S. and J.H. Muirhead
1936 (eds.) ContemporaryIndian Philosophy.London:George Allen & Unwin.
Rawlinson,H.G.
1980 [1913] Buddha,Ashoka,Akbar,Shivaji& RanjitSingh. New Delhi: Ess Ess
Publications.
Rawlinson,H.W.
1954 India:A Short CulturalHistory.London:The CressetPress.
Raychaudhuri,Hemchandra
1996 Political History of Ancient India. (With a commentaryby B.N. Mukher-
jee.) Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress.
Renou, Louis
1953 Religions of AncientIndia. London:The Athlone Press.
Rudolph,SuzanneHoeber
1987 "PresidentialAddress:State Formationin Asia-Prolegomenon to a Com-
parativeStudy."TheJournalof Asian Studies46:731-746.
Sachau,EdwardC.
1914 (tr. ed.) Alberuni'sIndia. 2 vols. London:KeganPaul, Trench,Triibner&
Co.
Sardesai,G.S.
1974 "Shivaji."In TheMoghul Empire,ed. R.C. Majumdar.Bombay:Bharatiya
Vidya Bhavan,73-101.
Sarkar,Sumit
1996 "Indian Nationalism and the Politics of Hindutva."In Contesting the
Nation: Religion, Communityand the Politics of Democracy in India, ed.
David Ludden.Philadelphia:Universityof PennsylvaniaPress, 270-293.
1999 "Conversionand Politics of HinduRight."Economicand Political Weekly
(June26): 1693-1696.
Savarkar,V.D.
1969 [1923] Hindutva:Whois a Hindu?Bombay:SavarkarSadan.
36 Arvind Sharma
Scharfe,Hartmut
1989 The State in Indian Tradition.(Handbuchder Orientalistik,2. Abt., 3:2.)
Leiden:E.J. Brill.
Sharma,BrijendraNath
1972 Social and CulturalHistory of Northern India c. 1000-1200 A.D. New
Delhi: AbhinavPublications.
Sharma,Sri Ram
1962 The Religious Policy of the Mughal Emperors.Bombay: Asia Publishing
House.
Shrivastava,Ashok Kumar
1981 HinduSociety in the SixteenthCentury(withSpecial Referenceto Northern
India). New Delhi: Milind PublicationsPrivateLtd.
Smith, Donald Eugene
1963 Indiaas a SecularState. Princeton,New Jersey:PrincetonUniversityPress.
Smith, WilfredCantwell
1962 TheMeaningand End of Religion. New York:The MacmillanCompany.
Spear,Percival
1972 India:A ModernHistory. Ann Arbor:The Universityof MichiganPress.
1994 (ed.) The OxfordHistory of India by the Late VincentA. Smith,C.I.E. 4th
ed. Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress.
Sreenivasan,K.
1989 Sree NarayanaGuru.Trivandrum:JayasreePublications.
Stietencron,Heinrichvon
1989 "Hinduism:On the Proper Use of a Deceptive Term." In Hinduism
Reconsidered,ed. Ginther D. Sontheimerand HermannKulke.New Delhi:
Manohar,11-27.
Takakusu,J.
1966 (tr.) A Record of BuddhistReligion as Practised in India and the Malay
Archipelago(A.D. 671-695) by I-tsing. Delhi: MunshiramManoharlal.
Thompson,George
1999 "Onthe Languageof the Daeuvas."Paperdeliveredon March21, 1999 at
the 209th annualmeeting of the AmericanOrientalSociety at Baltimore.
Wagoner,Phillip B.
1996 "'SultanAmong Hindu Kings': Dresses, Titles and the Islamicizationof
HinduCultureat Vijayanagar." TheJournalof Asian Studies55:851-880.
Wink, Andre
1990 Al Hind: TheMakingof the Indo-lslamic World.2 vols. Leiden:E.J. Brill.