Defending Hindu Tradition: Sanatana Dharma as a Symbol of Orthodoxy in Colonial India

✍ Scribed by John Zavos

• Publisher: Elsevier Science
• Year: 2001
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 126 KB
• Volume: 31
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0048-721X
• DOI: 10.1006/reli.2001.0322

✦ Synopsis

Accounts of social and religious reform and of Hindu revivalism in late nineteenthcentury India refer consistently to the idea of sanatana dharma as an indicator of 'orthodox' resistance to change in the context of a modernising religion. This article questions this presentation of sanatana dharma as an unmediated reactionary force. It argues that sanatana dharma as orthodoxy in fact emerged as an influential feature of the modernisation process, most particularly in the development of a doctrinally nonconfrontational, pan-Hindu identity. The article then argues that this identity was critical to the conception of the Hindu nation in the early twentieth century-an idea which has subsequently developed into a significant force in Indian political and cultural life.

Academic Press

Situating Sanatana Dharma

The Sanskrit term sanatana dharma can be translated in a variety of ways. 'Eternal religion' or 'eternal law' (Klostermaier 1989:31, 530), 'unshakeable, venerable order' (Halbfass 1990:344), and 'ancient and continuing guideline' (Lipner 1994:221) are all examples. These attempts to capture the meaning of a Hindu concept in English are most commonly accompanied by references to the textual usage of the term which give a sense of its nuanced deployment within the Hindu tradition (see, for example, Lutgendorf 1991:363). At the same time an awareness is also frequently expressed of the development of this term into a more amorphous signifier of Hinduism as a religion, distinct from other religions. I use the term 'signifier' in the sense of an evocation of particular characteristics. Sanatana dharma has been noted as evoking a rather dubious homogeneity in Hinduism, while at the same time contributing to the avoidance of any clear articulation of how that homogeneity is constituted (see Halbfass 1990:344-5; Lipner 1994:221). As Lipner proclaims, 'I have yet to discover a Hindu sanatana-dharma in the sense of some universally recognised philosophy, teaching or code of practice. Indeed there can be no such thing, for it presupposes that Hinduism is a monolithic tradition in which there is agreement about some static, universal doctrine . . . [rather than] . . . a pluriform phenomenon in which there are many dynamic centres of religious belief and practice' (Lipner 1994:221).

This articulation of sanatana dharma as a signifier of amorphous homogeneity has been associated with what Halbfass calls the 'self-representation of Hinduism which grew out of its encounter with the West' (Halbfass 1990:344). The notion of 'growth' is particularly significant here, as there is no doubt that the meaning of the term has shifted considerably over the past two centuries. 'A plethora of positions', Halbfass continues, 'have been defended and propagated under this title'. One position in particular appears as a prominent feature of modern Hinduism in accounts of political and social history. Indeed, no history of nineteenth-century India is complete without reference to the emergence of various Sabhas designed to protect or promote sanatana dharma. Sabhas, which provide the main historical material for this article, are cast as the traditionalist, orthodox force against which reformers or modernisers fought to haul Hinduism into the modern world. In contrast to its vague position in contemporary Hinduism, then, modern history locates sanatana dharma in a most particular way, as a signifier of Hindu orthodoxy.