lOMoARcPSD|19494288

Introduction to Indian Political Thought

Structure

Introduction
What is ‘Modern’ in Modern Political Thought
Context of Emergence of Modern Indian Political Thought
Major Themes of Modern Indian Political Thougt
Suggested Readings

Introduction
Few decades ago, the word philosophy was considered synonymous with Western
Philosophy. It reflected philosophical writings having a very structured and argumentative
form which emerged in the west, beginning from Ancient Greece. Overtime it was claimed
that this understanding reflected ‘Eurocentrism’ and hence only partial understanding of
human intellectual evolution. On the contrary, it was argued that wherever human beings
have lived, they have reflected and interacted on the questions related to the existence of
human life and goal of human life, questions like what is ideal nature of the society, what is
ideal way to govern a society, what is to be considered as just and unjust etc. Thus, it was
held that philosophical thinking began centuries ago and that it did was not a monopoly of
any particular region or way of thinking. However, it was equally true that the mode of
expression evolved overtime and it was not the same as in ancient times.
In India, we can easily find the roots of political philosophy in the works like
Mahabharata, Manusmriti, Kautilya’s Arthasastra. This trend of philosophy continued for
many centuries, but with the arrival of British as colonial power it took a new turn. Indian
thinker of that time came in touch with the western ideas and philosophy, which impacted
their ideas, their thinking and thought process. Due to significant impact of Western political
tradition, a new and modern trend emerged in Indian political philosophy during 19th and 20th
century. This new trend went in two directions, some thinkers of that time accepted the logic
and validity of the western ideas and we can easily see western essence in their writings and
speeches. On the other hand, many other modern Indian thinkers traced the roots of these new
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

introduced western ideas like liberty, equality, social harmony and created the map of India’s
future on basis of traditional knowledge that was embedded in ancient Indian Granth and
Upanishadas.
Indian thinkers of the period like Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Vivekananda, Mahatma
Gandhi, M.N. Roy, Rabindranath Tagore, Aurobindo Ghosh, Babasaheb Ambedkar, Pt.
Nehru, either through their writings or speech or both, tried to bring reforms in traditions and
related customs and beliefs those were considered inhumane and threat to the project of
creating modern India. Simultaneously, they also tried to give an Indian face to western ideas
and proposed ideals and framework of India’s future political system, like Nehru did in
Discovery of India and Gandhi in India of My Dreams. There were many aspects in this
approach that was different from both Ancient philosophy as well as Modern Western
Philosophy.
What is ‘Modern’ in Modern Political Thought
The word ‘Modern’ in Modern Indian Political Thought does not reflect an epistemological
meaning as it generally does. In western lexicon, ‘Modern’ knowledge corresponds to a
particular meaning, where modernity was seen as a gift of scientific and enlightenment-based
movements. Knowledge in this framework was considered to be meaningful only if it
conformed to the epistemology of science, that is if you want to claim something as
knowledge it should be have emerged from the process of observation, experimentation and
confirmation. This Modern epistemic frame of knowledge became the base of differentiation
between Classical and Modern Western political thought, which also reflected a rejection and
replacement of the classical. However, the same might not be true about Indian Political
Thought.
Actually, the word ‘Modern’ in Modern Indian Political Thought represents the time, the
time of India’s struggle for its independence. During this period of time certain set of ideas
were produced by our leaders those were leading the struggle. These leaders crossed the
constructed boundaries of thought and produced new ideas about many political subjects like
state, freedom, equality, social justice, ideal system of governance suitable for India and
many more. On one hand, these leaders challenged the dominant perspective of the west by
constructing or producing such new ideas and on the other hand they, by using their
capability of leadership, made these new ideas like social justice, freedom, equality, fraternity
popular among masses. These new perspectives which challenged the western ideas, together,
constitutes what we call Modern Indian Political Thought. Thus, it can be said that the origin
of modern Indian political thought lies in the responses of Indian intellectuals to the processes
of colonization and modernization of their society under British rule, which can be
understood as a response to colonial modernity.
Indian and Western Political Thought Compared
To have a clear understanding of modern Indian political thought, we need to have
knowledge about the differences between Indian and Western political thought. However,
before entering this discourse we also need to understand what is ‘western’? Generally, the
word is used in India to denote anything that belongs to Europe or America. But the problem
with such generalized use is that it assumes that there is some homogeneity in the socio-
cultural patterns of these societies. But it is not so. If we take the example of advent of
modernity and the rise of enlightenment movement in these societies, we find that even
within Europe, different societies were responding to it differently. For example, the English
Enlightenment was very different from Scottish Enlightenment or French Enlightenment
movements and had differing repercussions on these societies. Also, the social values
celebrated in American society is much different than in England. So, there is no
homogeneity in the socio-cultural pattern exhibited by these societies. Yet, for a long time in
India the use of ‘west’ as a homogenous category has not only become a common parlance
but also gained popularity. During colonialism, the use of this category also helped in the
process of ‘self-identification’. By treating west as a homogenous category, the nationalists
tried to project it in binary terms to what was Eastern or Indian in particular. As most of the
colonizing forces belonged to west (Europe in particular like France, Portugal, Spain and
Britain etc.), this categorization easily found buyers in different colonized societies. The
categorization helped the nationalists to claim a self-identity for nation in socio-cultural way
by claiming that it represented what was right and good against the ‘west’ that represented all
that was negative and often against the values celebrated by East. West therefore became the
obvious ‘other’ which was used to assert the self-identity and difference of Indian nation and
its culture. Now let us see in what broad ways is the Modern Indian Political Thought
different from Western Political thought.
1. As we have discussed earlier, the word ‘modern’ in west was used to show
epistemological difference between new and previous knowledges. On the basis of this
new modern framework of knowledge, western thinkers and intellectuals, established
the hegemony of the knowledge system developed primarily in the post enlightenment
period with an emphasis on scientific methodology. The dominance of this
methodology was so regressive that it branded any idea developed at other places as
outdated and worthy of rejection if it did not conform to their standards. Under
colonialism, the intellectuals from west, including many Indologists, did the same with
Indian knowledge systems. On the contrary, modern Indian intellectual system
unapologetically used the resources which were primarily indigenous to develop their
philosophy. So, the idea of rejection or refutation was not the focus, rather they
focussed on revisiting the ancient tradition and rebuilding it to suit the changed context.
A great of example of this is philosophy of Advaita Vedanta, which formed the basis of
political philosophy of many modern Indian thinkers like Raja Rammohan Roy, Swami
Vivekananda, Mahatma Gandhi, Aurobindo Gosh, and Tagore. Similarly, Samakhya
philosophy had deep influence on the political philosophy of Bankimchandra.
2. Second difference between Indian and western political thought lies in their evolution
process, which had impacted the nature of both. Evolution process of western
philosophy is linear, which started with Reformation (movement in which established
 western doctrines were rediscovered during the age 16th century in west) followed by
Renaissance (the transitional era in Western history during which medieval times
metamorphosed into the modern era), Industrial Revolution and Enlightenment. The
Indian tradition of thought, the evolution happened by dialogue and interaction among
many different traditions and cultures. In modern Indian political ideas, we can easily
find impacts of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc. at the same time, traces of western
modernity were carried by its colonizers and the process of colonialism itself became an
important site of contestations and reformulations within Indian philosophy.
3. Another difference between Indian and western Tradition of political thought is based
on how they see individual as a being. In western tradition, there is Mind-Body Duality,
where mind denotes thinking or rational capacity of individual and body denotes the
physical being and its material experiences. This duality is reflected most prominently
in the Cartesian system of Descartes, which forms the framework of dominant form of
thinking in the west. In Indian tradition of philosophy, the understanding of this relation
was quite different. Indian thinker believed that there are three aspects of individual:
mind (thinking faculty of individual), body (physical being of individual) and soul
(Atman) and the relation between all the three aspects of individual was believed to be
based on autonomous interaction. Also, the emphasis on atman as the true self was
unique to Indian form of thinking.
4. In modern western thought, the idea of rights is central, whereas in Indian modern
political thought we see the paradox of rights vs duty as central to the discourse. The
centrality of rights in western discourse was based on an atomistic or at least an
autonomous understanding of individual derived from an understanding the individuals
are rational and the best judges of their good and bad and hence should be free in their
choices. In India, since the ancient times idea of dharma has been an essential part of
social system. Here the word dharma is not equivalent to the word religion. Dharma
denotes the meaning of duty, a duty which one have to full fill toward other being and
society. This idea of dharma emanates from a communitarian or at least a collective
vision of individual, where individual is seen as integrally attached to others in society
and its existence is never atomistic in nature. The idea of samaj and samudaya among
many others, constantly reflect such understanding. Gandhi’s vision of oceanic circle is
an explicit example in this regard.
Context of Emergence of Modern Indian Political Thought
Earlier we discussed that it is the context which distinguishes modern Indian political thought
from ancient politico-social ideas, thus the need arises to understand the context in which it
emerged. In this reference, we need to understand: (a) impact of colonialism on Indian minds;
(b) the response of Indians towards orientalist construction of idea of India and (c) debate
regarding continuing tradition or breaking ties from the past.
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

Colonialism and its impact on Indian minds: Almost all the thinkers, those are categorised
as modern Indian thinker, synthesised and produced their ideas during the colonial period of
India. It is well known fact that British rule used education as means to achieve its end of
creating a class (of Indian people) which physically appeared to be Indian but mentally which
was in sync with colonial powers. Britisher tried to colonize the Indian minds, by
implementing the western English education model based on western ideals and thought. A
popular example of it is Macaulay minutes 1835 which sought to establish the need to impart
English education system to Indian natives. The cultural dominance asserted by the
colonizers was largely successful in creating self-doubt in the minds of Indians many of
whom became sceptic about the relevance of their cultural and social aspects. The constant
criticism and name calling of the cultural practices, branding them as barbaric had a deep
influence on Indian psyche.
However, it is equally true that the same process of colonialism that became the reason for
humiliation became the source for preparing a counter attack. The education which was
aimed to cement colonial cultural dominance, became the weapon to challenge and threaten
the dominance of the colonizers in their own turf. Indians became more aware of concepts
like liberty, rights, equality and used it as trope to expose the dubiousness of British rule in
India. They realized how, on one hand, the western ideas talk about liberty and right of
individual but on other hand, they are abstaining native Indians from exercising these rights.
One way of understanding this dilemma and the native response has been theorized by Partha
Chatterjee who uses the binary of ‘outer’ and ‘inner’ conflict among the nationalist
visualization. Chatterjee argues that in response to colonial modernity, the nationalists on the
one hand were ready to accept and negotiate on subjects that concerned public/outer/political
sphere, as in the case of rights and political representation. But at the same time on subjects
concerning inner sphere like spiritual or cultural aspects they were not ready to compromise
with the values and principles that were central to their identity. This is reflected in the
protests against the reform bills like Age of Consent Bill among others.
Response against colonial efforts to colonize Indian minds had several dimensions. Indians
were not static or passive beings waiting to be moulded according to the British wish.
Colonial modernity had the most pressing influence and as the attack on Indian identity
continued the natives responded in different ways. Their response can be broadly categorized
as one of the following: submission, reform, or revivalism.
Submission: Submission in relation to the impact of colonial modernity meant that many
Indians of that time accepted the appeal of western modern ideas. They became cynical about
the social values and cultural practices of India and believed that the only way to change
things was through adoption of what the west had on offer. They believed that ideas of west
(like separation of power, constitutionalism, etc.) and western scientific education can be of
more importance in building new India. Thinkers of this category favoured imitative
reproduction of knowledge and worked aggressively for its adoption and replacement of
socio-cultural practices that were contrary to this ideation.
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

Reform: The difference between submission and reform was that, under submission claims
of western supremacy was accepted uncritically, but in contrary to this, reformist Indian
thinker opted to do Indianization of the western ideas, by combining them with native ideas.
Thinkers of this category, avoided narrow approach of studying ideas by creating binaries
like indigenous and foreign, modern and tradition, and opted for method of dialogue between
tradition and modern, indigenous and western. Thinkers like Rajaram Mohan Roy,
Vivekananda, Gandhi and many others had accepted the importance of wester ideas, but they
defined these ideas from a new lens. This new perspective can be seen if we see how our
leaders defined secularism, nationalism, and the role of state. Western criticism was used as a
mirror to root out elements within our culture and society that were considered negative and
thereby introducing incremental changes to root it out.
Revival: Against oriental construction of idea of India, some Indian intellectuals responded
by focusing on revival of Indian native ideas and knowledge. Such a take was taken by K C
Bhattacharya, when he argued about establishing Swaraj in Ideas, a cognitive independence
from western ideas. Thinkers of this category were focused on redefining the knowledge and
ideas presented in Upnishadas and Ancient texts. Another explicit example of this was the
approach of Arya Samaj founded by Swami Dayanand Saraswati whereby he gave the call of
going back to Vedas. They tried to show how these ideas, which are tagged as tradition by
West, are relevant in modern times and needed to be revived in its pure form. It also included
an uncritical and unapologetic glorification of India’s past.
One other thing that we need to understand is the debate about question of continuity of
tradition or break from past. In ideas of many thinkers like Ambedkar, Nehru, Lohia we
can see a kind of substantial break from the tradition or Indian past. In modern new context
these thinkers produced such ideas in which we can see a departure from medieval and
ancient tradition of Indian political thought. Whereas in the works of thinkers like Aurobindo
Ghosh, Rabindranath Tagore and also Gandhi, we can explicitly see the continuity of
tradition. Some political thought experts have argued that neither the conception of continuity
nor the conception of break from tradition is completely true about Indian political thought,
rather the evolution of modern Indian political thought follows pattern of continuity with
change.
Major Themes of Modern Indian Political Thought
As we all know, Britishers with them brought a system of colonialism, under which there
only goal was to have political control over India and to uses its resources for the growth and
prosperity of Britain. Many years after, as time passed, many of our people came to realize
this harsh truth. They started struggle for their right to have a dignified life. Initially, during
the period of colonization of India, Britishers limited themselves to economic and political
sphere, but later on they also started bringing western culture in Indian society, through
education and other means. To achieve this objective, they started producing knowledge
about India, which could be understood in terms of Edward Said’s theory of ‘Orientalism’.
Due to this step of Britishers and Indian response to this orientalist construction of
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

knowledge, many ideas like swaraj, swadeshi, nationalism, revolution, democracy, nation
building, liberalism, socialism, constitutionalism, secularism, satyagraha, relation of politics
with ethics and religion, power and its decentralisation, social transformation and
emancipation of individual, and social justice, gender justice etc. emerged in the discourse of
Indian struggle of independence. These ideas become the basis of writings and speech of
various of our leader and intellectuals of modern India and so thus, these ideas are regarded
as themes of modern Indian political thought. Let’s try to understand these themes, with little
discussion on them.
‘Preservation by Reconstruction’: One of the crucial aspects reflected in the ideas of
Modern Indian Political Thinkers was what Dennis Dalton has called preservation by
reconstruction’. These Indian thinkers primarily used indigenous sources to develop
their ideas. However, they did not conform to the same interpretation as in Ancient or
Medieval times. Conscious of the changed context, particularly of colonialism these
thinkers interpreted classical philosophy according to the need of the time to regenerate
Indian minds and inspire them to contribute in the nationalist movement. For example,
the philosophy of Bhagawad Gita was reinterpreted by Vivekanand, Tilak, Aurobindo,
Savarkar and Gandhi in different ways to act as inspiration for Indian masses to oust the
British and establish swaraj. Similarly, Adwaita Vedanta of Adi Sankara was reinvented
by Rammohan Roy, Vivekanand, Tagore and Aurobindo among others to shed its
emphasis on sanyasa and rather use it creatively as a philosophy for spiritual equality of
all beings and hence to form basis for unity and fraternity.
Relationship between Individual and Society: Most thinkers of modern India
believed that the idea of liberty, harmony and equality were interconnected. When we,
enjoy our liberty, at par with other, it itself creates a harmonious interconnection among
all individuals of the society. In ancient times, in India, the ideal social system was that
which followed the principles of Varna and Ashram system. It was commonly believed
that by fulfilling one's personal and social obligations on the basis of these system one
could achieve the goals of life, whether it is the goals are spiritual or materialistic. The
system based on varna and ashram was believed as ideal system because it only not
contributed to the personal spiritual upliftment of human being but it also contributed in
maintaining social harmony.
Modern Indian intellectuals like Vivekananda, Gandhi and Aurobindo and Tagore
etc.opined that individual and society were harmoniously connected. Therefore they
forwarded ideas like sarvamukti or Sarvodaya that emphasized on a collective
experience of freedom and progress. The inspiration from Adwaita philosophy was
explicit in their ideas where they advocated spiritual connectedness and oneness of all
beings. What was common in their view is that they all believed, it is not the state but
the society or samaj which created such an environment in which all the individual gets
opportunity of social harmony and can attain spiritual independence. All of them
recognized that when a person discharges his/her social responsibilities, without any
compromise, it promotes social cooperation and harmony rather than competition.
Considering liberty and harmony as the basis of the relationship between the individual
and society, Aurobindo Ghosh held the belief that one person is the seeker of his
spiritual freedom and on the other hand seeks to maintain his group by understanding
and relation in society. Vivekananda tried to establish a link between the western
concept of political and social independence with the concept of traditional Indian
concept of individual and society. The philosophy of Advaita Vedanta was the basis of
Vivekananda’s several ideas. According to this philosophy each and every person is
Divyansh (part of the divine) and because we all have part of divine within us, we all
are equal. On basis of the Advaita Vedanta, Vivekananda advocated that there must be a
social and political equality among each of. Likewise, the basis of Gandhi’s objections
regarding custom of Untouchability was the presence the divine within us. Even on the
basis of this idea, Gandhi called the untouchable people Harijana. Gandhi did not agree
to the claims that the Indian social system based on the Varna is the reason of social
inequality and dominance of one over other. He believed that the Varna system was just
a framework of social division of labour.
Relationship between Human and Nature: Modern Indian political thinker did not
only advocate a harmonious relationship between all individuals in society, but also
emphasized on the harmonious relation between human beings and nature. This is
explicated most cogently in Deendayal Upadhyaya’s idea of Integral Humanism. The
relationship between man and nature is also emphasized by thinkers like Tagore and
Gandhi who promote rejection of materialist culture and its replacement with spiritual
unity of human with nature and environment.
State: In the West, the state signified a unit which had a control over a defined territory
and it enjoyed absolute sovereignty over this territory. By the time, role of state and
nation was properly established in the daily life of west, in India religion was more
decisive, which was related to humanism and the spiritual system, not to the state. In
this respect Dalton argues that Indian thought has not been anti-political, but it depicts
government as an unfortunate necessity. All modern Indian thinkers, whether their
views regarding state are different, accepted government and state both as a part of
society. Many of modern thinker accepted state as necessity for the proper functioning
of the society. For example, Babasaheb Ambedkar stressed on the role of state in
protecting of weaker section of the society. Contrary to this, there were many thinkers
like Aurobindo and Gandhi those did not have complete trust in the political unit like
state and are often claimed to be ‘philosophical anarchists’. Gandhi firmly believed that
the Atman (soul) exists in every individual and connection between soul is the basis of
harmony, but contrary to this the state is a soulless machine. In his view the state
represents violence in a centralized and organized form. That’s why he was sceptical of
the role of state. For them state was at best a necessary evil and such thinkers stressed
on the need to tame the role of state for larger social transformation and to create an
ethical and moral social order based on conscious and enlightened citizenry. Therefore
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

they laid emphasis on making state more responsible and accountable to society through
devolution and decentralization of powers.
Secularism: As we discussed above, religion was an important part of discourse during
the India’s independence struggle. At this time, many thinkers used the word
Secularism to defines their understanding of relation between the religion and the state.
The word secularism, in west, was used to signify complete separate relation between
state and religion. In modern western politics, it is a common belief that the religion is a
private matter of individual and thus state has no business in sphere of religion and vice
versa. Even in context of the British rule in India, this western idea of secularism was
not able to transcend in the modern India. Although this western definition had impact
on some of Indian leaders, but many Indian leaders like Gandhi, Aurobindo did not
believe that Dharma has no role in politics and state has no role in religion. Rather they
stressed on an imminent relation between politics and religion. Dharma as the guiding
principle for statecraft symbolized the perception that rulership is meant for and ethical
and moral upliftment of society by creating conditions where all individuals can
perform their duties and enjoy their liberties without intervention. Thus, in India, we see
a new trend of secularism. In India, the public nature of religion was more commonly
accepted. In this context Gandhi, in his autobiography said that ‘without religion the
idea of polity is quite unimaginable’. He said that “religion should remain method and
medium of our work but one should be very careful about the word 'religion'. It doesn't
refer to the extremist ideologies; it means faith in a particular moral system”. Later this
nature of secularism got reflected in the Indian constitution, which have provision to
protect the rights of religious minorities and establishes the role of state in religion.
Social Reform and Social Justice: It is well known fact that Britisher succeeded in
colonising India because it was politically divided, but at that time, we Indians were not
merely politically divided. There were many bases like caste, religion, gender on the
basis which one felt oneself superior than other, and he tries to assert this superiority by
curtailing basic human rights of the other person. Earlier Britishers did not interfere in
the social system of India, but with the rising demand of many Indian intellectuals and
leaders like Raja Rammohan Roy, later they interfered. On the other hand, many Indian
thinkers of the 19th and 20th centuries established many social, religious, political
institutions and started many movements to address this issue of social divide and
injustice. In this discourse of social reform there was divide among our leaders on the
questions related to role of Britishers in the reform movement and What should be our
reference – we should go back to vedas or we should look toward west. Leaders like
Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Jyotiba Phule considered the help of British rule in this
movement important as they believed that state, by making law and implementing it,
can correct injustice like Sati and caste discrimination. Whereas there were leaders like
Bal Gangadhar Tilak who did not welcome the interference of foreign government in
the social system of India, rather they argued that if any reform was necessary, it should
have its genesis from the demands emanating from society and the people should
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

initiate the reforms who were ultimately going to be affected by it. Similarly, some of
modern political thinker like Dayanand Saraswati chose the path of revival of ancient
Indian past in modern time. He believed that guidance of Vedas and Vedic value can be
used to eliminate the superstitions and unethical practices prevail in Hinduism and to
pave the way for social reform.
Model of India’s Economic development: In respect to statecraft, political and
economic development go hand in hand. During 19th and 20th century, there were two
major model of politico-economic development, Capitalism and Communism.
Capitalist model is based on principles like privatization, preference to individual
freedom over society, free and competitive market and in a capitalist system every
individual had to work for himself to create wealth. Communism, on other hand, was
the system where wealth was distributed as per needs of the individual, factors of
production are state-owned and where the need of society (common good) supersede
individual freedom. Which model of politico-economic development should India
adopt, was one of the important questions in front of leaders at that time? Many
thinkers, chose the path of socialism which was inclined toward communism, but this
path was different in many ways from the Communism model of USSR. Pt Nehru
supported a mixed economic model which contains feature of both communism model
of USSR and capitalist model of Europe. Ram Manohar Lohia and Jayaprakash
Narayan are major name in the Indian Socialist Dialogue. Lohia, in opposition of
Nehru’s mixed socialism, favoured active civil society and autonomous popular
movement and spoke of mass organizations for socialist reorganization. He strongly
believed that in economic sector small scale industry (like Gandhi) and in political
sphere Chaukhamba state is the ideal combination for politico-economic development
of India. Jayaprakash Narayan was ideologically influenced by Gandhian Sarvodaya
and Vinoba Bhave's Sarvodaya Samaj in addition to Marxism, thus his idea of socialism
reflects all these three. J P Narayan adopted the path of mass struggle to build a new
society, which should be based on the system of people's democracy. Mahatma Gandhi
in India of My Dreams laid down his plan and expectations regarding India’s future. It
is common understanding that Gandhi was against the Mechanization and western
model of development. For politico-economic development of country, Gandhi
presented the Swaraj model, which was based on the principles like Trusteeship,
Sarvodaya (Development of all), Gram Swaraj (democracy in which epicentre of power
is village).
From Nationalism to Internationalism, Humanism and Cosmopolitanism: One of
the major features of Indian political thinkers was that they often transgressed the
boundaries set by their context. Although their ideas were produced in the context of
colonialism and the development of nationalist movement against it, many of these
thinkers were also equally concerned with the plight of world at large and the issues
concerning humanity in general. Whether it was the promotion of Practical Vedanta as
the idealized form of universal religion in Vivekananda, the concern for world-unity in
 Aurobindo, the concerns about cosmopolitanism in Tagore and Gandhi, or the stress on
need for creative exchange between sciences of west and spirituality of India in
thoughts of Bankim, Vivekananda and Gandhi among others, these thinkers went
beyond their immediate concerns to imagine a world order that could redefine humanity
and look for panacea of all human sufferings to create an ideal society. This aspect was
significant as it indicated that the Indian thinkers, although concerned with the problems
facing their own nation, did not limit their contemplation to emancipate the lifeworld of
their own people, rather saw the role of India in guiding the world to a more inclusive
and sensitive understanding of human welfare in general.
Significance of Studying Modern Indian Thinker

It provides a new lens for understanding political ideas. The ideas of modern political
thought emerged in the context of colonialism, in response to orientalist thinking and
the metaphysical and epistemological assumptions of modern Indian thinkers differ
sharply from those of the west. Western approach is based on binaries like binary
between modern and pre-modern/traditional, rational and irrational, material and
spiritual. In Indian approach we see a kind of synthesis or evolution of one stage to the
other rather than the binaries or dichotomies.
What is different about Indian thinkers is that their ideas are future oriented but at the
same time, these ideas are deeply embedded in their context. Modern Indian thinker like
Ambedkar, Gandhi and Nehru were deeply engaged in the politics and in dealing the
challenges of their time, but at the same time they were reflecting about the society,
state and politics. Because of this deep and active engagement of these thinkers with
their context, Indian modern political thought not only tells us about the concerns of the
that time but it also presents solutions to our current problems and concerns, which
were dealt by those thinkers in their vision for the future of India.
In spectrum of modern Indian political thought, we can see and learn how to make
balance between various dichotomies. Modern Indian thinkers, in their works and
speeches, have tried to balance individual freedom with social equality; urban
development with rural development; national unity with religious-cultural diversity,
nationalism with internationalism/global approach of ideas; material prosperity with
spiritual prosperity of individual.
Conclusion
On the basis of discussion, we have so far, it can be said that modern Indian political thought
is rich archive of philosophy, ideas and concepts which emerged in response to colonialism.
If we have a look on western ideas through the lens of ideas provided by modern Indian
thinker than we can understand political concepts and ideas from a new and enriched
perspective, a perspective which get across the binaries of tradition and modern and
simultaneously tries to bring together east and west. To have an enriched understanding of
modern Indian thought we need to study it with a broad and thematic perspective.
Practise Questions
1) What do you understand by ‘Modern Indian Political Thought’? Discuss the context in
which modern Indian political thought emerged.
2) Critically analyse the main features of modern Indian political thought.
3) Dennis Dalton calls strategy of modern Indian political thinkers as ‘Preservation by
Reconstruction’. Elaborate.
4) Compare the characteristics features of modern Indian political thought with that of
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

Vivekananda

Structure

1.0 Objectives
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Influences on Vivekananda
1.3 Socio-Religious and Political Ideas
1.4 Social Reforms
1.5 Vivekananda on Nationalism
1.6 Perception on Society and Social
Institutions 1.7 Varna System and Social
Stratification
1.8 Ideal Society
1.8.1 Analysis of ‘Ideal Society’
1.8.2 Importance of Caste
1.8.3 Social Westernization
1.9 Summary

1.0 Objectives
One of the primary objectives of this unit is to provide an overview of Vivekananda’s
philosophical ideas. Swami Vivekananda, a great patriotic, dynamic philosopher, and a
fervent religious preacher, is remembered in history as the one who awoke the people of India
from their age-old slumber and instilled in them a new life and energy. With his profound
vision, he dedicated his life to the spiritual unity and upliftment of humanity. Vivekananda’s
ideas are organised in an academic and systematic manner. The unit gives students a rough
concept of their train of thinking.
1.1 Introduction
Swami Vivekananda was a great person, a teacher, a reformer, a social activist, a thinker, a
saint, and a tremendous world changer. All of these characteristics were present in one
person, who had created them on his own. He was a prominent social reformer and activist
who was born in Kolkata on January 12th, 1863. Vishwanath Dutt was his father, and
Bhuvaneshwari Devi was his mother. Narendranath Dutt was his childhood name. His father
was a Bengali lawyer who was also a novelist and philanthropist.
His education was accomplished at Kolkata’s Scottish Church College. He had a
bachelor’s degree in arts and was an average student. He was, nonetheless, a unique child
with spiritual thoughts and a wealth of knowledge. He had a deep understanding of Hindu
scriptures (Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Bhagwat geeta etc.) His statements were powerful
and thought-provoking. He is a Karma, Bhakti, Raj, and Jnana yoga practitioner. He excelled
in music, gymnastics, and philosophy as well. He is well-versed in western philosophy and
history. “Have you seen god?” he questioned Shri Ramakrishna Paramhans when they met in
1881. “Yes, I have seen Him, just as I see you here,” Shri Ramakrishna answered. Finally,
someone who could reassure him that God exists based on his own personal experience. He
prepared him for the future by training him.
Shri Ramakrishna gave Narendra his own strength before he died, telling him, “By the
might of the power transferred by me, great things will be done by you; only then will you
return to where you came.” Following Shri Ramakrishna’s death in 1886, Narendra
established the Ramakrishna Brotherhood. Narendra journeyed across the country beginning
in 1890. In July 1890, he set out for the Himalayas in search of solitude. He continued to
roam across the countryside, where the ancient glory of India flashed before his eyes, and he
witnessed poverty and youth’s weakness. He prostrated himself with tremendous emotion
before the image of Mother Kumari at a temple in Kanyakumari at the end of his voyage.
Then he swam across the sea to a rock off the coast of South, where he sat for the entire night
in deep meditation.
During the last decade of the nineteenth century and the first decade of the twentieth,
Swami Vivekananda’s inspiring personality was well-known in both India and America. At
the 1893 Parliament of Religions in Chicago, where he represented Hinduism, an unknown
Indian monk rose to prominence. His enormous understanding of Eastern and Western
culture, as well as his deep spiritual insight, fervent eloquence, intelligent discussion, broad
human sympathy, colourful personality, and attractive figure, made him alluring to a wide
range of Americans. After more than half a century, people who saw or heard Vivekananda
even once cherish his memory.
Vivekananda’s aim in America was to interpret India’s spiritual culture, particularly
in its Vedantic context. He also attempted to deepen the religious consciousness of
Americans through the Vedanta philosophy’s rational and humanistic principles. He became
India’s spiritual representative in America, pleading passionately for greater understanding
between India and the New World so that a healthy synthesis of East and West, religion and
science might be achieved.
Vivekananda is recognized as the modern India’s patriot saint and an arouser of the
country’s dormant national consciousness in his own motherland. To Hindus, he advocated
the notion of a religion that gives strength. The specific type of devotion he advocated for the
Indians, who were devoted to the rites and myths of their old faith, was service to man as the
visible embodiment of the Godhead. Many Indian politicians have publicly expressed their
gratitude to Swami Vivekananda.
The Swami had a national and international mission. He worked to promote peace and
universal fraternity on the spiritual foundation of the Vedantic Oneness of existence, as a
lover of humanity. Vivekananda was a high-ranking yogi who had a direct and intuitive
experience of Reality. He got his ideas from that unfailing well of insight, and he often
expressed them in poetry’s soul-stirring language.
Vivekananda’s mind, like Ramakrishna’s, had a natural desire to rise beyond the
world and lose itself in contemplation of the Absolute. However, another part of his
personality bled when he saw human misery in both the East and the West. It appears that his
thought was constantly oscillating between God’s contemplation and man’s duty, with little
respite. Whatever the case may be, God has chosen service to man as his duty on earth in
response to a greater call, and this choice has endeared him to many in the West, particularly
Americans.
In the course of his thirty-nine-year life (1863-1902), of which only ten were devoted
to public activities-and those, too, in the midst of acute physical suffering-he left for posterity
his four classics: Jnana-Yoga, Bhakti-Yoga, Karma-Yoga, and Raja-Yoga, all of which are
exceptional treatises on Indian philosophy. He also delivered countless lectures, wrote
inspired letters in his own hand to his many friends and disciples, authored several poetry,
and served as a spiritual mentor to the many seekers who sought his guidance. He also
founded the Ramakrishna Order of Monks, which is India’s most distinguished religious
order today. It is dedicated to spreading Hindu spiritual culture not only in the Swami’s home
country of India, but also in America and other areas of the world.
Swami Vivekananda referred to himself as a “condensed India” at one point. His life
and ideas have enormous worth for comprehending Asia’s thinking in the West. The Swami
was dubbed the “paragon of Vedantists” by Harvard philosopher William James. The
prominent Orientalists of the nineteenth century, Max Müller and Paul Deussen, regarded
him with true affection and respect.
1.2 Influences on Vivekananda
Vivekananda’s worldview arose from his acute knowledge of the social, religious, and
economic situations of the Indian masses. He saw that orthodoxy, superstitions, a lack of
confidence in spiritual values, and other societal ills are caused, at least in part, by orthodoxy,
superstitions, and a loss of faith in spiritual values. Vivekananda was greatly influenced by
Hindu philosophy, particularly Vedanta, which earned him the title of Vedantist, as well as
Buddhist philosophy. Along with his Indian inspirations, he also carried the influence of
Christianity in his mind. Other factors played a role as well. For a period, he was influenced
by the Brahmo Samaj. He also appears to have been affected by Dayananda Saraswati’s
personality. Vivekananda drew inspiration from the Gita on a regular basis. However, it must
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

be acknowledged that his master Swami Ramakrisha Paramahamsa had the greatest
influence. Swami Ramakrishna revealed the spiritual path to Vivekananda, unravelled and
opened his soul, inundated his soul with spiritual consciousness, and eliminated the ignorance
that impeded and veiled the wave and tide of the boundless spirit inside him. David Hume,
Kant, Hegel, Comte, J.S. Mill, Charles Darwin, and Herbert Spencer’s evolutionism
fascinated him.
1.3 Socio-Religious and Political Ideas
Vivekananda was Vedanta’s global spokesman. Swami Vivekananda’s idea of Vedanta is his
abiding spiritual legacy. Swami Vivekananda’s beliefs on nation-building in India are
preserved in his notions of “Practical Vedanta” and “Man-Making.” Men are taught in
Vedanta to have faith in themselves initially. The purpose, according to him, is to manifest
this Divinity within by managing both external and internal nature. He advocated yoga as a
practical application of Vedanta philosophy. It raises religion to the level of spiritualism, at
which point all faiths, texts, and idolatry appear to be various faces of the same truth.
Swamiji believed that religious connections hold Indians together, and that only a spiritual
elevation of religion could bring people together transcending faiths, castes, communities,
and sub-national and ethnic identities. Then, and only then, will all Indians be united by a
single sense of patriotism. Swami Vivekananda’s Neo-Vedantism refers to the new Vedanta
as opposed to the old traditional Vedanta produced by Shankaracharya. Swamiji firmly
believed in Vedantic socialism. Without a question, Vivekananda was proud of the country’s
historical legacy, but he was not an illogical revivalist who appreciated everything that had
come down from the history. To him, India was equated with the people, and the people were
equated with the masses. Poverty alleviation, illiteracy eradication, restoration of human
dignity, freedom from fear, access to spiritual and secular knowledge for all, regardless of
caste or class, and the abolition of all monopolies, religious, economic, intellectual, social,
and cultural – all of these were derived from his practical Vedanta or Vedantic socialism.
Vivekananda’s Vedantic socialism is based on his progressive educational views, which are
more modern than those of the professional educationists who shaped modern Indian
education. He has emphasised the significance of universal literacy as a prerequisite for mass
uplift and development since the outset of his mission.
Despite emphasising the traditional virtues of chastity and family life for women,
Vivekananda was adamantly opposed to their subjugation. Vivekananda’s Vedantic socialism
is apparent in his efforts to instil a new social service focus in India’s traditional religions.
1.4 Social Reforms
Swami Vivekananda was a prominent social reformer who lived in the nineteenth century. He
preached the abolition of all forms of exploitation as a social reformer. He has participated in
numerous social initiatives in order to address societal issues. He believes that three issues
are impeding our progress: education, poverty, and castism. Swami is revered as the messiah
of the oppressed. Swamiji was the first modern Indian leader to speak up for the
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

underprivileged and oppressed. He travelled extensively throughout the country to gain a

better understanding of their situation. He was convinced that the neglect and exploitation of
the poor was the primary reason of the Indians’ downfall. Religion, according to Swami
Vivekananda, will be equally intellectual, emotionally charged, mystic, and conducive to
action. Worship is a social activity, and faith is a social force. Religion is a social institution,
worship is a social activity, and faith is a social force. Swamiji shifted religion’s focus from
God to Man, or rather, God in Man. Sri Ramkrishna had taught him that serving others was
the same as serving God. Swamiji built his social service programme around this principle.
The best form of worship, he preached, was to see God in the poor, the oppressed, the sick,
and the ignorant, and to serve them.
In the world parliament, he was the first Indian to represent India and Hinduism.
Swamiji’s lectures at the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1893, as well as his
following work in America and England, raised Indian status around the world. Swamiji
demonstrated the universal applicability and significance of Indian philosophy and spiritual
culture in resolving many of the issues that plague modern life. Thousands of people in the
west were able to appreciate Indian philosophy and culture because to him. He believed that
education may help to bring about socioeconomic transformation. He desired that the
common man in this country get both moral and secular education. Vivekananda created the
Ramakrishna Mission—the organ for social service—on May 1, 1897 in Calcutta. The
Ramakrishna Mission’s values are founded on Karma Yoga. Swamiji established the
groundwork for religious concord as well as religious and scientific unity. “Religion is not for
empty stomachs,” he often emphasised with his Guru, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa.
On January 12, Swami Vivekananda’s birth anniversary, also known as Swami
Vivekananda Jayanti, is commemorated. National Youth Day is also observed on this day.
Vivekananda was convinced that for the youth, life is more important than money. Their goal
is to break free from the shackles of established society and revolt against anything that
promotes inequity, injustice, mental slavery, and other forms of backwardness. Vivekananda
encouraged young people to come up and join the struggle for political, economic, and
spiritual freedom. The clamorous exhortation of Swami Vivekananda to the Indian young,
“Awake, arise, and stop not till the objective is accomplished,” is resonating throughout
India, reawakening social consciousness and rekindling damp spirits. Because the youth
lacked possessions, he believed they may be true and dedicated souls. They are willing to
give up everything for a worthy cause.
1.5 Vivekananda on Nationalism
Swami Vivekananda was a real patriot in both heart and mind. He felt that each nation’s life
is governed by a single all-encompassing principle. “Each nation, like music, has a core note,
a central theme, around which all others revolve,” he remarked. Everything else is
subordinate to the concept of each country. Religion is the central theme in India.
Vivekananda believed that Indian nationalism needed to be founded on a solid foundation of
post-historical history. In the past, India’s innovation was primarily and dominantly
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

manifested in the realm of religion. In India, religion has served as a creative force for unity
and stability. When India’s governmental authority became sloppy and weak, it gave birth to
a force of rehabilitation. As a result, he declared that national life should be organised around
religious ideas. He restored the timeless things of the Vedas and Upanishads to promote the
nation’s progress and faith in its individuality as a follower of this notion.
Though Western influence is credited with the rise of nationalism, Swami
Vivekananda’s nationalism is firmly based in Indian spirituality and morality. He made
significant contributions to the concept of nationalism in colonial India and was instrumental
in guiding India into the twentieth century. Swami Vivekananda’s spiritualism is linked to his
nationalism. He attributed India’s rebirth to the country’s long-standing spiritual culture.
“Each nation has a destiny to fulfil, each nation has a message to send, and each nation has a
purpose to complete,” he stated. As a result, we must comprehend our own race’s mission,
the destiny it must fulfil, the place it must occupy in the march of nations, and the role it must
play in promoting race harmony.” His nationalism is based on the two basic elements of
Indian spiritual culture, Humanism and Universalism. He advised individuals to get rid of
self-inflicted bonds and the misery that come with them first. Vivekananda was a devoted
patriot with a deep affection for his motherland. He was the epitome of patriotic enthusiasm.
A country is made up of individuals. As a result, Vivekananda emphasised the importance of
cultivating noble values such as manliness, a sense of human dignity, and honour in all
people. Individualistic attributes have to be balanced with a strong feeling of neighbourly
affection. It was nonsense to talk about national togetherness and fraternity without a deep
feeling of selfless devotion.
His nationalism is not materialistic, but completely spiritual, according to him, and he
considers it to be the source of all strength in Indian life. Swami Vivekananda’s nationalism,
unlike western nationalism, is built on religion, which is the lifeblood of the Indian people.
His nationalism is built on a foundation of deep concern for the masses, freedom and equality
through which one expresses self, spiritual integration of the world on the basis of universal
brotherhood, and “Karmyoga,” a system of ethics for achieving political and spiritual
freedom through selfless service. “I am an Indian, and every Indian is my brother,” he
declared. “My brother is the ignorant Indian, the poor and penniless Indian, the Brahmin
Indian, the outcast Indian.” “The Indian is my brother, the Indian is my life, the gods and
goddesses of India are my God, India’s society is the cradle of my childhood, the pleasure
garden of my youth, the sacred heaven, the Varanasi of my old age,” says the author. “India’s
land is my highest heaven; India’s good is my good.”
Vivekananda was a history lover. After examining the historical evidence, he arrives
to the conclusion that society is ruled by four major social forces in succession: knowledge,
military power, wealth, and physical labour. Four classes control these forces: Brahmins,
Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras. He emphasised the significance of each varna in social
history and predicted that they would govern one after the other. After examining the merits
and disadvantages of the three types of norms, Vivekananda predicted that Sudra rule would
be implemented in the near future, and that no one would be able to fight it. At the same time,
he predicted that general education would spread during the Sudra period, but that the
number of geniuses and talented people would be limited. Sudras have been condemned in
society at various times throughout history. They were robbed of all educational chances. If a
Sudra is absorbed into a higher social class, he will lose touch with his native society and
may not feel the need to contribute to its uplift.
Swamiji was a strong proponent of women’s liberation. There are two major evils in
India. Women are being trampled on, and the impoverished are being ground down by caste
rules. Manu has stated yet again that God has rewarded those families whose women are
happy and well cared for. Western countries treat these women admirably, which explains
why they are so rich, well-educated, free, and enthusiastic. However, in our country, we have
observed the absolute opposite, namely, that our country is the weakest and most backward of
all countries. Women have always been treated with respect in any country that has achieved
greatness. That country and that nation have never been great because they do not respect
women. Their education must be eye-opening in every way.
This feeling of national integration derives from the fact that India is a country and
Indian is a nation. The main qualities of Indian culture, according to Swami Vivekananda, are
unity in diversity. A nation is defined by its race, religion, language, and government. In
India, racial, linguistic, social, and national barriers all dissolve in the face of religion’s
unifying influence. Nothing is more important to the Indian mind than religion, and bargains
are the lifeblood of the country. The message of nationalism and universality preached by
Swami Vivekananda is still very important in today’s globe. People of all castes, religions,
races, genders, and nationalities are welcome. Human society will have to wait generations
for a leader like Swami Vivekananda to emerge.
1.6 Perception on Society and Social Institutions
The institution of society is divine. Though drawn from Vedantik philosophy, Vivekananda’s
idea of society aims to incorporate both spiritualistic and materialistic conceptions of man
and society; it is both individualistic and socialistic. Vivekananda, who believes in man’s
divine essence, aims to establish a continuity between society, culture, and civilization, much
like the wick, oil, and flame. This is a close approximation to a holistic perspective of man
and society. “The three great manifestations of spirituality are love, sacrifice, and
selflessness.
In India, love and sacrifice are considered to be the foundations of society. According
to him, there is an organic connection between the individual and society in Indian
philosophy, and hence the good of one is dependent on the good of the other. The whole of
several individuals is referred to as samashti (the entire), whereas each individual is referred
to as Vyashti (a part). Vyashti is human beings, while samashti is society. It is a collection of
many people whose self-sacrifice is essential for its survival. His happiness is derived from
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

the enjoyment of others. This structure’s backbone is religion. The core theme of social unity
is dharma, or religion.
”The Western man is born individualistic,” Vivekananda said, “but the Hindu is born
socialistic–entirely socialistic.” The Hindu religion requires that the individual submit to the
necessities of society and that these needs govern his personal behaviour. As a result of these
two perspectives, the West has given society more freedom, allowing it to flourish and
become more dynamic, whereas Hindu civilization has become increasingly restricted in
every manner. Because the aims are different in the East and the West, life differs. “The
objective of the West is individual independence, the language of money-making education,
the means of politics; the goal of India is Mukti, the language of the Veda, the means of
renunciation,” he asserts. The emphasis on spirituality in India, strengthened by renunciation,
has resulted in a culture distinct from that of the West.
According to Indian belief, society is a holy institution rather than a human
construction. According to the Indian Monotheistic Doctrine of Creation, the universe of
souls and matter is a cosmos, not a chaos, and it is also totally teleological or purposeful.
Society, like nature, is a flawless mechanism. It’s a complete organic whole, a loving, living
union. Its foundation is religion, its goal is spiritualism, and its tools are biblical injunctions.
“It is neither a political organisation, an economic entity, or a prudential concern at all,” he
argues. His understanding of society is consistent with the ideals put out in the Rig Vedic
‘Purusa-Sukta,’ in which the entire community is conceived as a universal or social Man.
Society is merely a reflex in His eyes, and the many occupational groups are His varied
limbs. This Great Man, or Purusa, is shown as a ‘thousand headed, thousand-eyed, and
thousand-legged’ being who reigns over all living beings and expands across the entire
planet. The four sorts of people can be found in any community, yet in Hindu civilization, the
classification grew cemented through time as some varnas claimed exclusive privileges and
superiority over others. It should be mentioned, however, that the varna categorization was
formed on the basis of people’s agreeable vocational temperaments and aptitudes, not to
maintain the supremacy or advantages of some individuals due to their birth and genetics. An
ideal kind of society, according to Vivekananda, is one in which everyone can hold, practise,
and live the greatest truth.
1.7 Varna System and Social Stratification
“The goal of societal harmony and synthesis represented in the philosophy of Varna (caste)
system of ancient India” inspires Swami Vivekananda. “Caste is a very good thing,” he says.
We want to stick to the caste system. There is no such thing as a country without caste. In
India, we have progressed from caste to the point where there are no castes.” To him, caste is
a tool for assisting everyone in achieving the status of real Brahmin. A Brahmin is someone
who has conquered their own ego. Being a Brahmin entails spiritual enlightenment.
Vivekananda was opposed to the ancient caste system being abolished. He proposed that the
caste system, in its current stage of degeneration, be eliminated. “From the time of the
Upanisads to now, practically all of our great teachers have wanted to break through the
barriers of caste, i.e. caste in its deteriorated state, not the original structure,” he said. He
believed that the caste system’s basic concept had provided a valuable service to society. It
was the most illustrious social establishment. Caste should not be eliminated, but rather
adjusted.
The new approach, according to Vivekananda, is a development of the old. “Within
the existing structure is life enough for the re-building of two hundred thousand new ones,”
he believes. The traditional orthodox Brahmanical teaching of adhikaravada was criticised by
Vivekananda. This philosophy advocates for the Sudras to be denied access to Vedantic
knowledge. This undemocratic dogma was also followed by Samkara. Vivekananda, on the
other hand, was a staunch supporter of spiritual equality. He was a harsh opponent of India’s
current socioeconomic system, which is founded on unequal privileges. To him, society is a
hierarchical structure. Man lives in groups and fulfils his own role based on his abilities.
Swami Vivekananda’s place in India’s Renaissance, and specifically Bengal’s
Renaissance, is self-evident. His biography and the elements that influenced the creation of
his philosophy are fascinating and worth revisiting.
1.8 Ideal Society
The ‘Ideal Society’ must first and foremost be understood in terms of Practical Vedanta.
Practical Vedanta, as taught by Swami Vivekananda, is a two-dimensional theory. His
Practical Vedanta can be rendered and understood in both abstract and concrete forms,
spiritual and sociological at the same time. In fact, according to Rustau, Vivekananda was
“the first among Indian thinkers who made social philosophy an important element of his
philosophical theory.” He goes on to suggest that Vivekananda was the first person in the
history of Indian philosophy to sketch out a picture of the “Ideal Society,” at least in broad
strokes. According to Rustau, he was also the first Indian to construct a social utopia.
Vivekananda’s vision of the “Ideal Society” is examined. In order to grasp
Vivekananda’s vision of ‘Ideal Society,’ there are two significant obstacles to overcome.
One, Vivekananda’s opinions and ideas about his vision of the “Ideal Society” were literally
strewn over his publications. Two, many of Swami Vivekananda’s biographers and followers
did not devote much attention to his concept of ‘Ideal Society.’ Nonetheless, several
biographers have established that Vivekananda imagined such a society, as evidenced by the
limited exposition of Vivekananda’s views on society. Among Vivekananda’s biographers,
Abraham Stephen, Hiltrud Rustau, and V. Brodov have dealt extensively with this ideal, in
contrast to the other biographers. In addition to these writers, an attempt will be made to
examine the presentation of this concept by other biographers who, if not directly,
acknowledged it.
It is logical to think that attempting to define and interpret the notion of ‘ideal’ will
aid our understanding and analysis of Vivekananda’s ‘Ideal Society.’ ‘Ideas’ and ‘ideals’ are
two significant words that are intertwined, and both meanings have a similar meaning
inevitably. An idea might simply refer to the substance of cognition or an intention. On the
other hand, ideal can refer to a mental image or conception of something desired, such as a
goal. An ideal, on the other hand, is typically given in abstract terms, whereas ideas can
become ideal and are typically conveyed as a notion or shape. As a result, an ideal could be a
concept that one aspires to achieve or realise.
After grasping the meaning of the term ideal, the next step would be to research
Vivekananda’s perspective on society. V. K. Arora succinctly describes Swami
Vivekananda’s concept of society and its characteristics as follows: Religion is the backbone
of society, which is a Divine creation made up of various individuals. Its characteristics
include the importance of self-sacrifice for happiness, the gradual shift to becoming “one”
with society, and the eventual result of human relations, cooperatively shared satisfaction.
We can deduce an important part of Vivekananda’s individualistic and socialistic perspective
of society from this quotation. Furthermore, religion, or, to put it another way, spirituality,
plays a significant role in it. According to Vivekananda, societies should be moulded around
Truth, not the other way around. Human society’s evolution, according to Vivekananda, must
be informed and guided by spiritual principles. He also believes that each society experiences
its own ups and downs. He explains, “The history of nations is like this: they rise and fall;
after the rise, they fall; after the fall, they rise again, with more power.” This motion
continues indefinitely. A similar movement exists in the religious sector. There is a rise and a
decline in every nation’s spiritual life.
1.8.1 Analysis of ‘Ideal Society’
This offers one an idea of Vivekananda’s perspective on society in general and nationalism in
particular. With this viewpoint in mind, we will proceed to examine the ‘Ideal Society.’
Understanding caste, as stated by Swami Vivekananda, is a good place to start. To make
things easier, Vivekananda split society into two castes: the upper caste (Brahmin, Kshatriya,
and Vaishya) and the lower caste (Shudra). He defends his position by claiming that the three
superior castes have dominated the planet in succession throughout history. To paraphrase
Vivekananda, “Human society is in turn dominated by the four castes—priests, soldiers,
traders, and labourers.” Priests (Brahmins) develop the mind since it is through the mind that
they rule. The military (Kshatriya) rule is dictatorial and ruthless, yet it is not exclusive, and
arts and social culture reach its pinnacle during this time. Following that is the commercial
(Vaishya) rule. Its silent crushing and blood-sucking force is terrifying. Its advantage is that,
because the merchant visits everywhere, he is an excellent transmitter of ideas, but culture
tends to disintegrate. Last but not least, the Shudra (labourer) rule. The distribution of
physical comforts will be one of its benefits; one of its drawbacks (perhaps) will be the
diminishing of culture. Ordinary education will be widely distributed, but outstanding minds
will become increasingly rare.
He believes that all three top castes have had their turn. And now it was the Shudras’
turn to rule over society. He believes that the other rules had been tried but found
unsatisfactory, and that it was time for the Shudras to have their turn, if for no other reason
than novelty. Thus, Vivekananda conceptualized the ‘Ideal Society’ in this perspective.
However, in his vision, the ‘Ideal Society’ would not be a choice between any of the four
periods, but rather a summation of all four. As Vivekananda puts it, “if it is feasible to build a
state in which the priestly knowledge, military culture, commercial distributive, and ideal
equality of the previous can all be retained intact, without their evils, it will be an ideal state.”
1.8.2 Importance of Caste
This demonstrates that Vivekananda was aware of the existence of caste, as well as its
significance. Caste was the foundation of his ‘Ideal Society.’ However, for him, caste is a
social habit, an offshoot of political institutions, and a hereditary trade guild, which is in
opposition to Vedanta philosophy. In Vivekananda’s ‘Ideal Society,’ there will be just one
caste, because the lower will be elevated to the level of the higher. That is, all castes will be
promoted to the Brahmin’s highest degree. It also creates the notion that society should strive
to overcome the flaws of the four previous periods while maintaining the benefits of each.
The Brahmin is on one extreme end, and the Chandàla is on the other, with the goal of
elevating the Chandàla to Brahmin status. Knowledge of Sanskrit, according to Vivekananda,
is the finest way to eliminate caste inequalities. He goes on to say that in India,
‘Brahminhood’ is the ideal of mankind. He goes on to clarify that this ideal refers to the
Brahmin of spiritual culture and renunciation, the Brahmin-ness in which worldliness is
absent and pure wisdom prevails. Vivekananda claims in his ‘Ideal Society’ that privileges of
power, wealth, knowledge, birth, or spirituality will have no place.
Within this concept of a “Ideal Society,” Vivekananda also saw the presence of ideal
men and women as essential. Ràma, the heroic era’s ancient god, the epitome of truth and
morality, the ideal son, husband, parent, and, above all, the ideal king, he says. Sità is one-of-
a-kind; she epitomises the ideal Indian woman, as all Indian notions of a flawless woman
have evolved from Sità’s single life. All patience and suffering are purer than purity itself.
She, the ever-chaste and ever-pure wife, she the ideal of the people, the ideal of the gods, the
magnificent Sità, who experienced that life of misery without murmuring. The only option
for Indian women to grow and flourish is to follow in Sità’s footsteps. Here is an indication
that Vivekananda’s notion of the “Ideal Community” calls for the creation of a society in the
old Indian tradition, with attributes equivalent to those exhibited by Ràma and Sità, his
models. Thus, utilising religion as a driving force, the Swami attempted to build a foundation
for Indian society based on Hindu morality. Furthermore, the ‘Ideal Society’ must achieve the
ideal of unity.
However, Vivekananda also claims that combining the Greek mind, as represented by
external European energy, with Hindu spirituality would aid in the formation of an ideal
Indian civilization. Although religion is the only preoccupation of the Indian people,
Vivekananda believes that India must learn the conquest of exterior nature from Europe,
while Europe must learn the conquest of inner nature from India. There will be no Hindus or
Europeans when that happens; instead, there will be an ideal humanity. Vivekananda goes on
to say that the ideal society is one in which the Indian concept of spiritual integrity and the
Western concept of social advancement are combined. He appears to have understood social
 lOMoARcPSD|19494288

liberty, democracy, and a dash of materialism by the Western concept of social development.
What we should have is what we don’t have, perhaps even what our forefathers didn’t have—
that which the Yavanas had; that which, propelled by the life-vibration of which, is erupting
in rapid succession from Europe’s great dynamo, the electric flow of that tremendous power
vivifying the entire world. We want that eagerness for independence, that spirit of self-
reliance, that unwavering fortitude, dexterity in action, unity of purpose, and a desire to
improve.
1.8.3 Social Westernization
These were the characteristics Vivekananda desired for his ‘Ideal Society.’ However, we
must remember that he was opposed to societal westernization. He stated that India should
develop in accordance with its traditions. In his efforts to achieve his ‘Ideal Society,’ he
makes valuable ideas that he believed would be sufficient to accomplish what he envisioned.
He required the practical realization of oneness via self-belief, self-assurance, compassion for
one’s fellow beings, and tolerance. Vivekananda desired this oneness, the primary goal of
Neo-Vedanta, as the first step. Second, he believed that raising the masses was another
necessary step in realising the ‘Ideal Society.’ He also remarked that the spirit of equality,
freedom, effort, and energy should be maintained while not compromising the religious
beliefs of the majority. Individuality will be restored to the masses. They will be educated.
Vivekananda believes that if they are educated, they will be able to detect the causes of social
oppression and see the hollowness of the so-called superiority of birth asserted by the upper
castes. As previously said, Vivekananda did not believe that the caste system was a
component of religion; rather, he wanted people to understand that it was a social institution
that was important to maintain stability. The third step advised by Vivekananda is the
incorporation of religious principles into society. He did not, however, neglect to add that
religion must be kept within its right boundaries and that society must be given freedom in
order to flourish.
1.9 Summary
Many social reformers in India work to transform people’s views. They had a difficult time
dealing with India’s revolution. Among them, Vivekananda continually demonstrated
solidarity with the socially vulnerable and oppressed. It was he, even before Gandhi, who
reworked and effectively used the earlier theological idiom of God abiding in the lowly and
poor (daridranarayan). Societal philosophy is concerned with social ills. It is the
responsibility of social philosophy to provide principles for eradicating these social ills so
that every individual in society can live respectfully and peacefully. Vivekananda’s ideology
arose primarily in response to the ills of Indian society at that time. The socioeconomic
situation in India at the time of Swami Vivekananda was grave. Poverty, superstition, sati,
and other issues were prevalent during the period. Furthermore, the British ruled the country
at the time. The British control had some positive characteristics, such as the development of
the telegraph and railway, but also wrecked the economy of the country.
 With a life span of fewer than forty years, Swami Vivekananda was indeed an epoch
maker, encouraging his brothers to combat poverty, illiteracy, superstition, untouchability,
priestcraft, and tyranny of the wise. In his travels from the Himalayas to Kanyakumari, he
interacted with people of all social groups, eating and sleeping with them, and sharing their
joys and sorrows. His heart throbbed with the masses, and he found himself embarrassed as a
result of their humiliation. He was a harsh critic of the conventional brahmanical caste
structure, and he saw ‘untouchability’ as a sort of upper-class mental illness.
Swami Vivekananda is widely regarded as the greatest patriot-monk of all time. He is simply
credited with displaying India’s soul to the rest of the world. He is primarily known as a
Hindu spokesman. The spiritual aspect of his personality appears to have clearly triumphed
over the social. The “Vivekananda” appears to have drowned under the weight of the
“Swami.” The universality and harmony of world religions was a recurring theme in
Vivekananda’s talks. Swami Vivekananda instilled a sense of national pride in all Indians.
Swamiji explained the importance of old Indian culture in today’s world.
1.10 Exercise