Hedgewar and Toynbee in historical perspective

Famous Historian Arnold Tyonbee

Attempt has been made to elucidate the theory of ‘Challenge and Response’ as proposed by Arnold Toynbee to explain the rise and fall of civilizations in the world. He has suggested that 10% of the population of creative minority is required to take along the remaining 90% majority to meet the challenges before any civilization to survive against any decimating forces. In other words a strong organized response is needed to survive or re-establish any culture and civilization. Long before him Dr. K. B. Hedgewar, the founder of the RSS had proposed the same theory for the rejuvenation of Hindu nation with some quantitative difference. He suggested that 3% of urban and 1% of rural population in India will have to be trained and organized as a solid force of Hindus such that they will take along the remaining 97% and 99% respectively to meet any challenges to establish Hindu nation. The RSS-Pariwar is doing exactly the same. The fact that the RSS-Pariwar has come to the centre-stage of Indian polity more than proves his theorem for the rejuvenation of Hindu society as correct, even though quantitatively the strength of RSS is far from as envisaged by Hedgewar. Hence the two great people, one purely a historian and the other essentially a social reformer need to be compared by the research scholars to understand the RSS in its correct perspective, particularly at the universities. In reality adequate response has been given by Guruji-Golwalkar, Hedgewra’s heir, with far too meagre strength of creative minority. On the whole it has been suggested that it is not necessary to achieve the quantitative strength as proposed by Toynbee to respond the decimating challenges before any culture and civilization.

Historical facts

It has been estimated that, so far in the world, some twenty five civilizations flourished at some time or the other and in varied regions but, out of which twenty three have been decimated once and for all time. Only two civilizations, namely the Hindu and the Chinese, survived all kinds of efforts at their decimations. Out of these two the Chinese civilization underwent metamorphosis to a great extent under the influence of the Buddhist civilization that originated in India. Hence the real survivor in the true sense is only the Hindu civilization and culture against the decimating effects of number of onslaughts from outside and inside India. The chief characteristic of the Hindu civilization and culture is the Vedanta philosophy, and thereby the outlook of life, individual as well as social, of Hindus originated in the Ved-Upanishadic era at least some six thousand years ago. It has come down uninterruptedly and in an unadulterated form until the present times. In very recent times the same was propounded by Swami Vivekananda. It thus still remains essentially the same and is manifested in terms of Hindu ethos even in the present.

Culture and civilization

The terms culture and civilization are often used broadly, even sometimes somewhat loosely, to denote life-styles of societies in the present or in the past. It is a group phenomenon. In contrast what an individual exhibits is behaviour. It must be understood that what Europeans often refer to as culture is generally denoted by the Americans as civilization. The same is denoted in India as dharma (not religion). Hence there is no strict definition of these two terms as acceptable universally. Even there is no distinct definition of dharma either. But it may be broadly distinguished from one another as follows. Civilization broadly denotes tangible constructions like buildings, idols, artefacts, etc. related to the living style (present or earlier) of the groups of people whereas culture that is evolved over a time denotes the intangible principles, philosophies and consequent perception of life of a group of people, individually and collectively. The dharma of Hindus also means the same in the form of duties to everything else, including people and nature, in reality the entire animate and the inanimate existence, individually and severally. The commonly referred culture is often understood in two broad ways. One is abstract and intangible philosophical outlook of life and the way of living that is broadly accepted by the people and the other as more vivid in the form of fine arts, performing arts, music, sculpture, way of outwardly behaviour, broad outlook of life, etc. That is the reason why presently such performances are known as cultural programmes. But these two are not discreet; they are integrally associated, one reflecting the other in the form of two sides of the same coin. It together means the ethos, the mental and the psychological state of the society. In Indian parlance it is known as Chiti. That is why it is often described as culture and civilization (hereinafter referred to as CandC) of a society to include the material achievements as well as their ethos.

Challenges

Human life is not without challenges at the individual or collective levels. These are to be faced always by every individual, every family or group of people and every society to live happily to the extent possible. No individual or any group in the form of society or nation, neigh even entire humanity, is ever free of challenges towards its existence. Presently even the entire globe has to face challenges like environmental degradation which is so integrally related to human existence. Sometimes the challenges are surmounted and thereby happiness is achieved and progress is seen. Some other times these are not surmounted, partially or fully, and to that extent miseries have to be faced. That is what life is. When this process continues for sufficiently long, with overall success, it gives rise to evolution of culture and common ethos of the people. But if the challenges are insurmountable, over a long time, it results in decimation of that culture. That is how the twenty three civilizations in the world in the past were decimated totally because they could not respond the challenges that were posed before them as has been shown by great Oxford historian of the previous century Arnold Toynbee. His findings have been published in ten large volumes as “A Study of History’. We know the historical existence of these twenty three civilizations from their remains in the form of dilapidated structures, artefacts, records, philosophies and such other information.

Toynbee’s theory

Toynbee’s findings reveal how and why the twenty three CandC were wiped out of existence in due course of time, except the Hindu and the Chinese CandCs. The typical names of decimated civilizations are Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Babylonian, Mesopotemium, Inca, Maya, Sumerian and such others. It does not mean that people were not born there thereafter. It only means that their living style was totally changed, for whatever reasons, from the previous one. For example today’s Iran, earlier Persia, which had culture more akin to Hindu culture was totally replaced by Muslim culture after 8th century CE to the extent that no trace of the prior culture is now observable there. The Parsi community in India is that whose forefathers fled from there and settled in India to retain their culture. Same is the case of Pakistan which was part of India until 1947 and had Hindu culture of Hindu community there but it was wiped out and almost entirely replaced by the Islamic culture. Out of the two survived civilizations the Chinese civilization is again asserting to resurrect itself by relegating the Buddhist influence. It is possible so. In other words only the Hindu CandC survived all challenges at its decimation, throughout their very long history, because on the whole Hindus responded the challenges fairly adequately from time to time and thereby resurrected themselves time and again. It is the oldest survived CandC in the world that has come down uninterruptedly until the present in the land now known by various names as Bharat, Hindusthan or India. These three names mean the same land, broadly south of Himalayas and north of the Indian Ocean and the same race by their descent. It may be asked if it responded positively the decimating challenges that stood before it. If yes, then why a large chunk of its people discarded their old CandC to prefer Muslim CandC and equally large number have been westernized to become partly or fully enemy of the Hindu CandC? For whatever part that has survived, what is the reason of its immortality? Is it a fluke or there is some inherent strength because of which it survived that long against varied decimating onslaughts? Let us examine the issue from the challenges posed and the responses Hindu society gave in their entire history.

Challenge and response theory

Arnold Toynbee out of his study of world history has propounded what is now known as the ‘Challenge and Response’ theory to explain the decimation of twenty three civilizations and survival of two civilizations in the world. According to him whenever there are decimating challenges faced by any CandC it is the creative minority in the society that first realizes these challenges but it does not respond the challenges on its own. It takes along with them the remaining majority in the society, forms organization with them, and designs the response and then try to face the challenges collectively using the physical efforts of the majority class and the intellectual guidance of the creative minority. If the response is adequate the CandC survives, fully or partially. If the response is not adequate then there are every chances of its decimation, depending upon the response. But even if the response is not adequate the decimation often does not occur in one go. It may need several attempts, one after the other, for its decimation. It also happens that the CandC on its downward path may resurrect itself if it responds the challenges adequately. Some CandC took several such challenges before their total decimation whereas the Persian and several others in the west and Central Asian region were wiped out almost in one stroke of decimating Islamic civilization. The Hindu CandC responded the challenges, not just by fighting but in many different ways.

Quantitative response

According to Toynbee to respond the decimating challenges some 10% of the population in the form of creative minority is required to take along the remaining ninety percent majority, form effective organization of the two to respond the challenges adequately. It is known in modern management that for one manager, at whatever level in the organization, there are usually 8-10 helpers to carry out the job effectively. Hence there is some logic in Toynbee’s quantification. Toynbee from out of his study of world history worked out this proportion of creative minority to majority to effectively meet the decimating challenges before the societies. It does not mean that such a combination shall be victorious. The victory depends upon many different parameters. The joining of the two groups, according to Toynbee, is purely mechanical and he compares it with the military wherein the sergeant blows whistle and the rest carry out the drill, without question. The importance of this parameter can be readily verified against the Hindu CandC. In the Hindu society the drill was not carried out all that mechanically as needed on pan India and pan-Hindu basis. The creative minority was never here ten percent of the population as needed. That is why its response against the decimating challenges was not adequate but only partial. It is the reason why a large chunk of Hindu population changed their CandC under the influence of first Muslim and thereafter the English (more as western) Cand C.

Chiti

Every society out of its natural and imperative integrative mechanism during its evolution, acquires some kind of collective aim for its own existence. It takes time to evolve such a common aim since it is a slow process. Hindu society got plenty of time, under the prolonged and undisturbed agricultural era, of thousands of years, to evolve its aim with no ambiguity. In the Hindu parlance, the realization of such an aim in any society is known, as evolution of ‘Chiti’ of that society. That is how the Vedant philosophy was evolved and was accepted by vast majority of Hindus. It got the name Hindu much later. Earlier it was known as of humans only. The Chiti is first realized by the creative minority and then slowly transmitted to the majority. It was challenged many times even from within but finally it prevailed against all such odds. The Hindu rishis behaved as the creative minority to guide the society. The intensity of Chiti varies from society to society depending upon the time it got to evolve the same. It is something that unifies, strengthens and reinforces group behaviour. It gives support from within for collective existence with a broad aim as is perceived by the group and as directed by the creative minority. It is the common abstract psychological state of the group that consolidates its collective existence. The Chiti was well developed amongst Hindus right in the Vedic period itself. The Hindu Chiti was consolidated over a long undisturbed period under the agricultural era into a set of strong cultural values in the form of its core culture and ethos manifested by the outlook of life, individual as well as social. Perhaps no such long duration was available for the development of Chiti in the decimated twenty three CandC, barring the Chinese. It is Chiti that results in developing philosophical outlook of life of individuals and of the society integrally. It is like the infra-structural foundation on which sound and tightly bonded formidable socio-economical, socio-political, legal, ethical and esthetical social structures are built. It finally gives rise to a unified but broad vision in the form of a broadly agreed outlook of life and mission in the form of how one should behave in the society. Hindu ethos provides very broad vision to accommodate each and every one as ones natural and nurtured personality. That is why it established unity in diversity as the main guiding principle of everyone’s life. It also thereby established the principle of live and let live others, with all diversities. It thus behaved and believed in vasudhaiva kutumbkam. It thus cultivated empathy or compassion for the entire existence. The bond Chiti stabilized the Hindu society into a cohesive unit with motivation for all to swim or sink together against any odd. The principle of rebirth, typical characteristic of only Hindus, helped them to sacrifice everything including own life for safeguarding their common ethos. Hence the Chiti helped the Hindus society to behave as a formidable force to reckon with by any earthly conquering and decimating force, be it tangible or intangible

Dr. K B Hedegewar is well known as the founder of the great NGO that is spread all over the world and in multifarious ways, known as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), and its Pariwar organizations, RSS-Pariwar for short. But not many have read his biography to understand his personality, his vision and mission for rejuvenation of Hindu society and of India in particular and of the human race in general. Much less about him is understood by the academicians. Most students and research scholars, particularly of history, know invariably the great historian Arnold Toynbee of Oxford for his deep study about world history and his theory of ‘Challenge and Response’ to decipher the rise and fall of civilizations in the world. All the historians, without exception, consider Toynbee as the originator of the famous theorem in the form of this theory. But how many know that this theorem was propounded by Dr. K B Hedgewar, long before Toynbee realized it, to start the RSS in 1925 CE, at Nagpur, in India, for the rejuvenation of Hindu society and its culture that was partially decimated by several invasions. The narrative below shall make it clear.

Hedgewar, no scholar

Dr. Hedgewar was not a scholar in the true sense of the term, although he had studied modern medicine and had become a physician. But he never practiced medicine in his life. He was very active in all kinds of activities going on in the society for its liberation and emancipation against the onslaughts of Muslims and English in the last more than a thousand years. He was more a keen observer and a creative thinker par excellence. Where he studied Indian history in such a depth to arrive at the model of RSS for national rejuvenation is again not known? Some glaringly successful events in Hindu history, like that of Swami Vidyaranya of Vijayanagaram and Chhatrapati Shivaji in Maharashtra, might have been his motivating historical forces, since he often invoked these examples in his discourses in the RSS. He deduced correct meaning from the history of India as was later confirmed by none less than Toynbee. But not many scholars of history know this fact.

Hedgewar worked out the same theory, in principle, well before Toynbee, in 1925 CE itself, regarding how to rejuvenate the Hindu society and thereby the nation to meet the challenges of the time. He expressed it before the common swayamsevaks (volunteers) in explicit terms much later and yet well before Toynbee proposed his theory. Is it of no significance to study it in depth at the university at least by the sociologists and the historians? The RSS as a Hindu organization, under the alleged pretext of murder of Mahatma Gandhi in 1948 CE, was defamed by the then Congress governments and its leaders in independent India to such an extent that even the study of RSS and its founder became taboo even at the university in India. The same taboo more or less still continues. But the research scholars would know what it is like in correct perspective. The present attempt is to throw light on one aspect of the RSS related to the realization of the historical truth that was later proposed by Toynbee in the form of his challenge and response theory.

Hedgewar’s challenge and response theory

Hedgewar was very worried about the dilapidated status of Hindu society. As a statesman he wanted to respond this challenge to rejuvenate the Hindu society by re-establishing the age-old Hindu nation when all his contemporaries were prepared to allow it to die and construct a new nation-state in India. After deep thought and meditation he perceived the challenge and realized how to respond the situation before 1925 CE, and therefore started the RSS organization, to organize 3% of the urban population and about 1% of the rural population, with sterling national character and zeal to re-build the Hindu nation of his imagination. In other words he wanted to first regenerate the creative minority in the Hindu society but in the above proportion to rejuvenate the Hindu society later. According to him these three and one percent populations, trained as RSS workers of his imagination, would be able to lead the rest of the 97% and 99% populations respectively, in whatever field and in whatever form needed to respond any challenge before the society to resurrect itself, including attaining independence from the British. His vision was not limited to attaining independence only, it was far more. It was to resurrect the Hindu society, the natural owner of the land now known as India and thereby re-establish the traditional Hindu nation. It was the basis of starting the RSS. It was all in his perception in totality before starting the RSS. In fact that was the very reason d’eter of starting the RSS. No historian worth the name in India has ever looked into his proposition seriously because of the taboo about the RSS that was generated by the Congress leaders after independence. But equally true is that the RSS stalwarts have never put forward their proposition in the light of overall historical perspective at the intellectual level. They failed to study the RSS in the broad perspective of world history. It was done by Toynbee and therefore the credit of proposing the theory went to him. Hedgewar formally placed his sociological theorem of history before the swayamsevaks in 1937 CE when the RSS had already been established as an all India organization of Hindus. Let us weigh his proposition both, qualitatively and quantitatively, against the universally accepted proposition of Toynbee. Toynbee out of his deep study of world history had suggested that 10% of ‘creative minority’ is required to take along with them the remaining 90% of the ‘majority’, in the form of an organized effort, to successfully meet the challenges before any society to resurrect itself, after its downfall, for whatever reasons.

According to Hedgewar the so trained three and one percent RSS workers were to be the creative minority in the form of the leaders in various social sectors taking together with the remaining 97% and 99% of the population in urban and rural areas respectively in an organized way to meet the challenges, whatever that be. “This is how the organized effort of 3% and 1% would take along with them the rest of the population in an organized form”, said Hedgewar for rejuvenation of the Hindu society.

Proportion of creative minority and timing

Toynbee proposed his theorem after the World War II. But Hedgewar had already proposed his perception, though verbally, of rejuvenation of Hindu society in the early nineteen twenties and formally in 1937 CE. It is still well before the time Toynbee proposed his theorem. Hedgewar was no historian but his conclusions about the fate of societies and broad Indian history were extremely accurate by any world standard of historical prophesies.

Hedgewar evaluated much lower number than suggested by Toynbee later for the rejuvenation of Hindu nation. How he arrived at these statistical numbers is not known. But there is every reason to believe that it must be more than the equivalent of total proportion of English men, to the total local population, in various capacities, that were managing the vast land and population in India, residing any time while ruling India successfully as per their designs and guiding its destination. It must be the result of his deep analysis of how a small minority of English ruled India successfully for over two hundred years. He was equally puzzled how a small minority of Muslims, coming from outside, could establish their empire in India. He started RSS shakha to generate the required number for national reconstruction meaning thereby giving right response to the challenges before Hindu society. In reality the response was given later by creating the RSS-Pariwar by Guruji-Golwalkar, Hedgewar’s heir. It is the aim of the RSS that once the above stated number of activist are achieved, freedom will automatically be achieved and maintained perpetually through perpetual regeneration of required creative minority through proper education and enculturation.

The ways Hedgewar and Toynbee arrived at their conclusions for responding the challenges before the society are quite different. Yet the conclusions in the form of their theories are almost identical except in actual quantitative terms. Hedgewar thought that three and one percent would be enough whereas Toynbee thought that uniformly ten percent of the population in the form of creative minority would be needed for rejuvenation of any CandC. Hegewar did not use the term creative minority but used the term ‘leaders’, with creative vision and mission, to lead the society. Both mean the same thing. Both agree that the creative minority or the leaders will have to evolve organization of these with the remaining majority to give effective response to the challenges whatever those be.

The aim of RSS was and is to achieve the right number of nationalists in the form of the leaders who would carry with them the rest of the population. Hedgewar’s perception is difficult to understand for those who have not studied world history in general and that of Hindus in particular, in proper perspective. Hedgewar thought that the expected strength would be achieved in a generation or so, in fact in his lifetime and that RSS work thereafter shall not be necessary. The creative minority shall get generated automatically through the educational system evolved accordingly in national interests. Does it not need study at the university?

Difficulties

Before starting the RSS-shakha work as such, Hedgewar worked out the qualities an ideal Hindu leader should possess, in the deteriorated Hindu society. The qualities that came at the top were sterling social and national character to make one ready for any sacrifice for the progress of the Hindu society and establishment of Hindu nation. They should also be prepared to sink or swim together. For common Hindu it meant arousing intensely the national spirit or nationalism. Additionally, as that was not enough, he wanted that Hindus must organize themselves into a solid social force. To achieve that, he wanted to create solid organization of Hindus, in the form of the RSS, with the above number, to later take along the rest of the population in attempting national rejuvenation.

Unfortunately Hindus, as a whole, did not and do not have institutional mind, to work together to achieve any set forth aim. The reason being that salvation had traditionally been supreme goal in any Hindu’s life, barring exceptions. This path is to be traversed by every Hindu alone and not in a group. Also, that on this path they expect not be disturbed by anybody or any group. Therefore and in view of lack of transportation and communication in those remote times, no need was ever felt to organize society at a higher level than the level of family, town or smaller kingdoms in the earlier Hindu society. He also understood that proper social environment, surcharged with nationalism, will have to be created, first in the form of an all India organization, to finally translate it at the national level into an environment in the form of nation first, individual and sectarian interests later. These qualities were far superior in English society and that made them rule unchallenged over major part of the world, including India. Similarly the Muslim invaders also proved to be superior and therefore ruled in small or large part of India. Hedgewar decided to inculcate all those qualities and thereby change the environment into one surcharged with nationalism, in the youth, to build a strong organization of creative Hindus.

Confidence and foresight

Toynbee only states the conditions, of any society, to respond the challenges before it, to survive and progress. But he does not indicate how such creative minority will be generated if it is not present in any society. Is the society without the required creative minority then destined to doom, sooner or later? Being a scholar he only puts the facts, does not indicate how it will be achieved. It is the job of the socio-political leaders with bright vision only. Hedgewar was not a scholar but had right vision of future of Hindu society. He was true nationalist. He had realized the vision of great India out of his observations of the society and activities going on in it. The fact that Hindu society degraded and became slave of the foreign power, for fairly long, is a sure proof of absence of adequate creative minority in the Hindu society. Hence Hedgewar realized the way out to recreate the creative minority required for resurrection of the Hindu society. The unique greatness of Hedgewar is that he visualized that the required creative minority could be generated in the Hindu society because of its great history of human welfare. Toynbee was happy to propose the theory of resurrection of societies. But Hedgewar found the way out and implemented it successfully. This is what distinguishes Hedgewar from social scientist Toynbee. Was Hedgewar not a great social scientist? Does he not require deeper study at the universities?

It is alright to propose a theoretical way to respond the challenges and resurrect the society/nation but quite another to actualize the proposition and resurrect the nation. Hence Hedgewar decided that the creative minority with required leadership qualities will have to be first generated since it was absent in the contemporary Hindu society. That is how the RSS was started to generate the same. What should be the activities to generate the creative minority? How they will organize and stay together in trying times to respond the challenges as an organized lot? Such things will have to be ingrained in the group to sink or swim together. That is how the English society then was and hence ruled the world. The feeling of togetherness under any trying times for nation building will have to be ingrained by sustained efforts and sanskars through some physical and mental training and for which people will have to spend some time together every day. It will not be possible to achieve it by only occasional meetings, as is the practice in almost every other organization. The participants will have to feel the ethos of togetherness more often and regularly. That way the emotional environment of supreme national interests shall be created in the participants. That alone shall be the inspiration to work together for some lofty cause like nation building against all odds. There was no such need in English society as it was well organized to meet all possible challenges as was obvious during the two world wars. It could meet the challenges at its decimation very well. This is the difference between Toynbee, a mere scholar and Hedgewar a true nation builder. The latter’s efforts are tangible construction whereas the former’s a mere theory. Who can deny that it needs study in depth at the university?

Hedgewar went a step ahead. He created the system to perpetually remain organized to meet any challenges so that the Hindu CandC remain intact and grow as per the demand of time through the RSS shakhas.

Law of identity

Here again there is unimaginable similarity between Hedgewar and Toynbee in deducing correct meaning from the history. It was alright for Toynbee because he was a history scholar and his entire life was devoted to only study of history. But where did Hedgewar study history so deeply, particularly when he was very busy in contemporary socio-political activities? Toynbee clearly states that there is no Law of Identity that makes the aim (vision) and the activities (mission) carried out to achieve it, as congruent. In fact the two are always apparently disconnected. Only the creative ones understand their inter-connection. Toynbee gives an example of automobile to illustrate his perception. In the automobile the wheels rotate around their axis but there is a mechanism in between that makes the automobile to move linearly. The creative automobile engineer only understands the inter-connection. The majority class normally does not recognize it. There are innumerable instances in history to prove it. Mahatma Gandhi used charakha to organize people for getting independence. The two had nothing to do with each other. Similarly Hedgewar’s shakha and his aim of rejuvenating Hindu nation are apparently non-congruent yet intimately interconnected, for those who can understand it.

Socialist’s dilema

The Indian socialists were no doubt an intelligent lot, much better than many others. But they did not understand the truth propounded by Toynbee, perhaps because of lack of understanding of history. They were all merely theoreticians to suggest what should be done but did not know how it could be achieved; what toil was needed to organize the Hindu society to respond the challenges of hunger, health-care, education and so on, for the vast masses, including getting independence. They never organized the majority class properly along with them. They only sermonised the masses about virtues of socialism; they proved to be only theoreticians. Whether they properly studied the history and understood Toynbee is not known. On the contrary Hedgewar did understand it properly long before Toynbee understood it.

Against the back-drop of murder of Gandhi and banning of RSS work by the then government, Golwalkar understood that the required strength of creative minority in the form of three and one percent of the population had not been reached to put the Hindu society on auto-mode for its resurrection towards Vaibhavasampanna Bharat. It has not yet been achieved is beside the point. How would the creative minority in the form of active swayamsevaks would take along with the majority was not spelt out by Hedgewar. He had only imagined that once the 3% and 1 % creative minority of his imagination is achieved the response shall be as if, it is on auto-mode. The contribution of Golwalkar is unique in this respect. He perhaps per force visualized the creative minority in the form of active swayamsevaks of the RSS, of the imagination of Hedgewar, would take along the majority with them to respond the challenges before the Hindu society in its multifarious activities. In retrospect it can be seen that he responded the decimating challenges of Congress with governmental powers with much less creative minority than what even Hedgewar had imagined to resurrect the nation. It was Guruji-Golwalkar who spelt out it clearly later, per force, by developing the RSS-Pariwar which has now grown into a mighty organized pan-Indian and pan-Hindu force. There was very small creative minority in the RSS but that had the vision how the challenges would be responded. The result is that it has been able to put first Pracharak of RSS as Atal Bihari Vajpeyee, albeit with coalition of twenty parties and now another Pracharak in the form of Narendra Modi, with absolute majority as prime ministers towards nation’s destiny. It itself is still restricted to carry out the unfinished task of Hedgewar to produce the creative minority. Toynbee has not elucidated how the creative minority would be generated if it is not present to respond the challenges. Who can deny that the RSS leadership understood history and its lessons very well than anyone else in India?

The RSS-Pariwar system wherein any one, whether belonging to the class of creative minority or majority would be able to contribute his/her might in responding the grave challenges of nation building. That is why Hedgewar and Golwalkar both are revered as pujaneeya (worth worshipping) by his followers in trying to emulate them in every possible way in dedicating themselves for any problem before the nation.

 

In fact the RSS is a new experiment wherein much less than the proposed proportion of creative minority of Toynbee has been able to organize response to challenges before the Hindu society and that fairly successfully. The strength of creative minority is not even as much as that proposed by Hedgewar himself, that is, it far less than even 3% and 1% of urban and rural population respectively. Yet the challenges are being responded rather successfully. It is because the less than 3% and 1% quality is far superior to organize the rest in an organized way to respond the challenges.

RSS – the historical continuity

During the entire long history of Hindu society it did degrade and efforts were made by the then social reformers to rejuvenate it. It did not happen just once but several times. Right from Lord Rama including the major attempts that included Lord Krishna, Lord Buddha, Lord Mahavira, Chandra Gupta-Chanakya, Adi Shankaracharya, Saint Dynaneshwar and several such others in different parts of Hindu society, Guru Nanak, Vidyaranya Swami, Shivaji, many Peshwas, Tatya Tope, Swami Vivekanand, Dayanand and so on responded the challenges of their times in their own ways. These were attempts in right direction but not commensurate with the challenges trying to decimate the Hindu CandC. That is why some proportion of Hindu society gave way and left it once and for all time. All such attempts finally culminated in independence movement with Mahatma Gandhi as the chief organizer that met the challenges of independence successfully. The attempt of RSS is all encompassing, pan-Hindu and pan-Indian in nature and that is the reason why it has succeeded beyond any other earlier attempt. It understood the challenges properly and accordingly responded and is responding them in its own ways. But the attempts are all encompassing.

According to Toynbee once any society marches downwards it is not necessary that it will finally result in its decimation, for whatever reasons. It can be resurrected and rejuvenated again provided the creative minority realizes the challenges and gives adequate response to the downward trend. The history of Hindu society more than proves his theorem. There have been number of such cycles in the entire history of Hindus, as enumerated above, when the society started degrading and the creative minority having realized the decay worked the way to respond the then challenges successfully, at least to some extent. The surprising fact is, that is how Hindu society survived so many decimating challenges and survived itself with new vigour every time to take forward the Vedanta philosophy and outlook of life. Hence the RSS is just only the latest link in this overall chain of rejuvenations over the long history of Hindu CandC. If one wants to study the RSS it will have to understand all these previous attempts at rejuvenation of Hindu society and how it deteriorated every time to need rejuvenation again. But one thing is certain that every time the creative minority in the form of kings, rishis, thinkers, philosophers and so on responded the challenges well and that is how the only CandC in the form of Hindus have come down to the present in its original perception. It proves its immortality well.

Many mocked at Hedgewar for his perception of India being Hindu-nation and his attempts at congregating some youths to achieve the lofty aim of his imagination. But history has proved that he was more than just right. He understood the theory of challenge and response much better.