Brahmanical Aggression in India: How RSS-BJP Politics Reinforce Caste Hierarchy
What does Brahmanism mean? And why do we call the BJP and RSS Brahmanical? In very simple terms, Brahmanism means varnavad (casteism); that is, the division of society into high and low castes. Thousands of years ago, Brahmins—meaning the ancient priestly class—promoted this ideology for their own benefit, to exploit the poor and downtrodden. Its first mention appears in the Purusha Sukta of the Rigveda. Many scholars argue that this Sukta was not originally part of the Rigveda; it was a later addition. Over time, however, it gained wide acceptance and was further consolidated during the time of the Manusmriti. Brahmanism originated from the rituals, practices, and codes of life propagated by the Brahmins. But today, it is no longer limited to Brahmins alone, nor are all Brahmins necessarily Brahmanical. At the same time, Brahmanical ideas have taken deep root—even among some non-Brahmins—and still exist.
Who historically opposed this caste system? At the forefront stands our own Srimanta Sankardev (1449–1568). Through his Ekasharana Namdharma, he embraced people of all castes, tribes, and even other religions, and propagated liberal ideas through the practice of Naam-Kirtan (devotional singing of the Name). After him came Jyotiba Phule (1827–1890) of Maharashtra, who spread the message of education and social equality through the Satyashodhak Samaj. Then came Sri Narayana Guru (1855–1928) of Kerala, whose famous slogan was: “One caste, one religion, and one God for all.” Following them was Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948), who campaigned against untouchability to oppose caste discrimination. On the other hand, B. R. Ambedkar (1891–1956) burned the Manusmriti and emphasised the constitutional value of equal rights for all, placing utmost importance on abolishing the varna system. Contemporaneously, Periyar E. V. Ramasamy (1879–1973) in South India identified Brahmanism as the root cause of all social injustice and immorality, fiercely opposing it. All this manifested in the modern Dalit-Bahujan movements in India.
What are the views of the RSS and BJP regarding casteism? First, the RSS did not participate in India’s freedom struggle. Right up to 2002, they did not even hoist the Indian national flag at their main headquarters. They do not accept India’s Constitution. They call it an “unnecessary Constitution”—one borrowed from foreign ideas, unrelated to Indian traditions, ignoring the Manusmriti and Hindu dharma—and have continually disrespected it. From time to time, they threaten to replace this Constitution with a new one based on the ideals of the Manusmriti.
The RSS-directed BJP’s ideals are Brahmanical ideals. They do not accept that Dalits, Bahujans, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and religious minorities have equal rights in India. We have all seen how, during the BJP’s last 11–12 years of rule, these sections have been harassed and subjected to atrocities. They seek to create a “Hindu Rashtra” centred on Hindu dharma and the Manusmriti’s ideals of Hindu-Hindi dominance. In it, Dalits, Adivasis, Muslims, Christians, and others may exist—but only as second-class citizens subservient to the varna-Hindus.
What is the RSS-BJP’s economic policy? Handing over the nation’s property and resources to a handful of wealthy industrialists like Adani, Ambani, and others. If laws need to be broken for this, they break them; if new laws are needed, they make them. Another hallmark of modern Brahmanism is the dominance of the northern Indian—and especially Gujarati—lobby. Whether in bureaucracy, business, or contracting, everything now has unchecked dominance from the north and Gujarat—that is, the Modi–Shah lobby. Someone might say: But there are also people from lower castes in the BJP. Yes, there are; but they are there only as subservient brokers for the BJP-RSS. They are not there for the equal rights and upliftment of ordinary Dalits, Adivasis, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, or minorities. They are bribed and bought for votes; we see this happening day and night right before our eyes.
Finally, one last point to conclude. Who built the foundation of a “Greater Assam” embracing all castes and communities? It was Sankardev. Sankardev’s worthy successor was Madhavdev. We know what troubles they faced from the Brahmanism that grew under royal patronage while the two Gurus were alive. After Sankardev’s death, even the Neo-Vaishnava religion developed fissures. Brahmanism’s influence lay behind those divisions. Ultimately, the main tenets of Sankardev’s teachings survived among the supporters of Kala-Samhati—the Moamorias—where true equality and unity existed among the lowest castes in society and the neighbouring hill dwellers.
Historians have mentioned other causes of the Moamoria rebellion, but one of its major causes was opposition to Brahmanism. Remember, the Moamoria rebellion was one of the key reasons for the fall of the Ahom kingdom. Do not forget the difference here between the Ahom royals (rajaghar) and the ordinary people (prajaghar). The royal house patronised Brahmanism. The Moamoria war was against this Brahmanism. Though it was a bloody rebellion, its underlying inspiration was the liberal humanism of Vaishnava dharma, kept alive by the Kala-Samhati Satras. Today, there is no question of violence and bloodshed; but to resist the aggression of high–low varna-based Hindutva, the core inspiration of the Moamoria rebellion can still inspire us to oppose Brahmanical aggression through peaceful and democratic means.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s personal.