64 SOCIAL SCIENTIST
remained dormant for about forty years was enlivened by the BJP and transformed into a 'national* issue, imbueing it with cultural and political significance. An important factor which made this transformation possible was the mobilising potential of religious symbols constantly brought into play by the sangh parivar.
Much before the sangh parivar had launched the Ayodhya agitation religion had intruded into the domain of Indian politics. The separation of religion and politics evisioned in the Constitution and incorporated in the People's Representation Act of 1951 was floundered in actual practice. The religious denominational parties like the Hindu Maha Sabha and the Muslim League functioned within the secular polity. They not only championed the aspirations and interests of their respective communities but also invoked religion in pursuit of their political interests particularly during the elections. Such a tendency was not confined to these parties alone. Very few could resist the temptation to take recourse to religion for electoral gains.
This departure from the secular premises of the Constitution was linked with three important factors. The increasing religiosity in Indian society, the decreasing popular base of the Indian National Congress and the ambivalent nature of secularism as practised by the state. The religious politics of the sangh parivar^ although occurred in this context, was qualitatively different from the earlier political practice in its assumptions, goals and articulation.
The post-independence Indian polity built around the principles of democracy and secularism had nurtured the notion of territorial nationalism. Political opportunism had often led to deviation from the democratic and secular ideals, particularly since the prime ministership of Indira Gslndhi. Yet, the making of the nation through the integration of various nationalities and communities was not entirely given up.
In contrast, the sangh parivar promoted the concept of cultural nationalism as the positive nationalism of India.3 The ideological inspiration for such a view was first provided by V.D. Savarkar in his attempt to define the Hindu and the Hindutva. Quoting from the Vishnu Purana, he had defined Bharat as 'the land which is to the north of the sea and to the south of the Himalaya mountain' in which the descendants of Bharata inhabited.4 The Hindus, according to him, are those who considered Bharat as their punnyabhumi (holy land) and pithrubhumi (fatherland). His conception of Hindutva was integral to this notion of Hindu, even if he held that 'Hinduism is only a derivative, a fraction, a part of Hindu tva\5 This distinction, however, did not mean that members of other religious denominations have space within Hindutva: