The book under review, when it first appeared in 1979 was the first major work on what is perceived to be one of the most secretive organizations in the country. In a way, it marked the return of the prodigal son- the author D.R. Goyal had been an RSS member in his younger days in Hoshiarpur. The present work is a revised edition of the book.

The RSS sees itself as a modern day 'rajguru' or as a 'meta- political' force. According to the author, unlike the pre- independence Congress this outfit "did not articulate the needs and perceptions of people but sought to teach them and administer an esoteric set of ideas which are presented as some kind of divine revelation to its founder".

The life story of Hedgewar, the founder of the RSS, is itself told in the "Puranic style where stories are narrated to present ideas and not human beings". Though the believers talk of his participation in various revolutionary secret societies like the Anushilan Samiti, there is no documentary evidence to support this. Moreover, "the life story of Hedgewar tells us of his visits to gymnasiums and akhadas but not of his visit to a library or a reading room. He is supposed to have edited a weekly and a daily newspaper but nowhere do Sangh publicists refer to any of his writings as evidence of his erudition, knowledge or analytical calibre."

The author concludes "that the founder of the RSS was an extrovert personality and had fought back the cramping effects of an unhappy childhood with a measure of success. Not a learned man but ambitious of going places on the strength of his capacity to mobilise young boys... But he did not get much recognition except as a leader of youth groups who could stand up to the goonda elements in the Muslim community. At the age of 36, he decides to plough a lonely furrow and sets up an organisation of his own to which he admits young men generally below the age of 18. However, he shows extraordinary capacity for inspiring them with a religious fervour and reverence about himself and his ideas".

The RSS has sought to underplay the influence of Hindu Mahasabha in general and that of V.D. Savarkar in particular on Hedgewar. Both later disagreed with the RSS and advocated greater political activity. Savarkar is reported to have remarked that "the epitaph for the RSS volunteer will be that he was born, he joined the RSS and he died without accomplishing anything".

Hedgewar's successor Golwalkar (nominated by him just before his death) provided the theoretical dimension to the organisation with his two major works "We, or our Nationhood Defined" (1938) and "Bunch of Thoughts" (1966). The former has been withdrawn from circulation ostensibly because of the adulation that Golwalkar expressed for Hitler and his methods of ethnic cleaning. This work itself is nothing but the translation into English of Savarkar's Marathi treatise "Rashtra Mimansa".

"The major contribution which he made to the enrichment of the RSS arsenal of ideas was to develop the anti- communist, anti- socialist dimension... In that respect he stole a march over the Hindu Mahasabha which could never develop an anti- socialist edge. With the result that all those who feared radical social change began to look upon it as a saviour and the RSS today has become the most favoured recipient of the material blessings of all vested interests whether landlords, monopolists or imperialists".

The author goes on to trace the role of the RSS from its inception to the present day. The focus of the book however is most cogent till the late seventies. The best part of the book is the chapter on "Murder of the greatest Hindu". Though Nathu Ram Godse claimed to be a member of the Hindu Mahasabha he had strong links with the RSS. He had accompanied Hedgewar on a tour in 1932, had been a member of the RSS before joining the Mahasabha in 1934 as Hedgewar refused to make the Sangh a political organisation.

Goyal raises some pertinent questions and points, for example, to the statement by Gopal Godse (the assassin's younger brother) that during the last moments Nathu Ram recited the "Namaste sada sada..." verse. This is the opening verse of the RSS prayer sung in every shakha. At the time of Godse's membership of the RSS (1934), this prayer was not sung- it came to be adopted only in 1940. If Godse had broken off his relations with the RSS by early thirties, then how come he was acquainted with this verse?

The RSS was indicted by the judicial commission investigating the Mahatma's assassination for creating an atmosphere where a group of political activists planned and carried the assassination of the most outstanding advocate of ahimsa. He points out that because of the repercussions that the Sangh faced in the immediate aftermath of the murder, it's castigation of the Mahatama became oblique. So, while Jawaharlal comes in for direct rebuke in Golwalkar's "Bunch of Thoughts", his abuse of Gandhi is implied though unmistakable.

Golwalkar says, "Those who declare 'No swaraj without Hindu- Muslim unity' have thus perpetrated the greatest treason to our society. They have committed the most heinous sin of killing the life- spirit of a great and ancient people. To preach impotency to a society which gave rise to Shivaji who, in the words of the historian Jadunath Sarkar, 'proved to the whole world that the Hindu has drunk the elixir of immortality' and to break the self- confident and proud spirit of such a great and virile society has no parallel in the history of the world for sheer magnitude of its betrayal". (page 150,151, 1966 edition of Bunch of Thoughts).

The RSS's contempt for Gandhi, despite the "ritualistic cosmetics" employed by it surfaced again. This was when the BJP government first in Gujrat and then in Maharashtra allowed the staging of a play based on Godse's explanation justifying the crime- despite the play having been banned by the previous Congress government in Maharashtra. The RSS chief, Rajju Bhaiya commented that "Godse was not wrong in opposing Gandhi, only his method was not correct".

At a time when the BJP, the RSS and the entire Sangh Parivar have been able to camouflage their real character and win over even some liberal sections, Goyal has done a great job in reminding us of what is termed in much of the press as the RSS's hidden agenda.

A lot of research has been carried out on the RSS in the years between 1979 and now. Part of the reason has been the increasing role that the organisation and its front organisations have played in the last decade. Serious academic work by Sumit Sarkar, Achin Vanaik, Christopher Jafferlot and Anderson and Damle brooks mention. But it needs to be stated that all these works, rigorous and original in their own right, owe much to Goyal's pioneering effort.

However, where Goyal still scores is the verve with which he writes. In that respect he recalls to mind the intellectual crusaders of the fifties and sixties, and who carried on till the seventies, for whom journalism, academics and activism converged and were means to a larger end. The appearance of the revised edition of the book enables one to savour the engaged style that characterised their writings, besides providing a comprehensive critique of the RSS.

Bhupinder
bhupi@bigfoot.com
October 8, 2000