RSS 360: Demystifying Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh

by Ratan Sharda

Founded in 1925, banned three times by the governments of independent India but with a widespread network of thousands of local branches and millions of volunteers, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's (RSS) presence and influence is formidable. However, it has long been acknowledged that the best way to know the RSS is to join it. Perhaps, this is why there is very little literature on how it functions. As a senior member who has managed various responsibilities in the RSS over the years, Ratan Sharda reveals the supposedly secret world of this volunteer organisation. He presents a comprehensive view of the Sangh's philosophy, its workings and its humungous reach through various organisations inspired by it across India in a simple and easy-flowing manner, sprinkled with interesting anecdotes.With an insider's knowledge of the philosophy, organisational structure and working of this huge cadre-based organisation, RSS 360º is a compelling read, attempting to lift the alleged veil of secrecy that shrouds the organisation.

Genres: India, Nonfiction

394 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2007

Reviews

[H · Rating 5 out of 5]

RSS is an enigma for most of us, this book gives a fantastic overview n insight into this organisation. And lots of historical references which are needed to clarify the doubts n confusions generated by the media esp in Hindu minds. A must read for everyone esp impressionable kids n young adults.

Thnq Ratan ji.

[DR.ABHISEK MONDAL · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nice writing by Ratan Sharda..So much information... Really wanted to know about RSS and it's relation to indian culture.....Thanks to the author..it's fulfilled my expectations..

[Vedvrat Shikarpur · Rating 5 out of 5]

A rare insight into the life of RSS cadres and the organisation itself. Largely deliberately ignored and vilified by the media, intellectual and political minds in the country, the RSS has survived despite all odds as one of the last remaining groups dedicated to the survival of Hindu philosophy and society.

A must read if you, like me were largely unaware of the work of the RSS and the various organisations it is affiliated with.

[Gopal R · Rating 5 out of 5]

The fog has finally lifted for me about the workings and the innards of RSS. This book paints a vivid picture of the internal structure, functioning and the societal intent of RSS. In fact , a good corporate management structure can take a leaf or two from RSS as well. An amazing read and I would recommend this to all, keeping in mind the cultural, linguistic and communal diversities that India has.

[M R Siva · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very Enlightening........... Clears all apprehensions about in general public, fed by left narrative.

[Ashish Iyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am glad i read this book. I came to know so many things from this book. Its like all my questions have been answered. This book go through journey of history of RSS, their thinking, how they operate, promote culture, how other religion work together with them.
Everyone should read this.

[S L Babulal · Rating 4 out of 5]

My views

A panoramic view of RSS. Lacks in the details of the principles of the organization. The author believes that one has to become a member of the organization to know about its basics.

[Guruprasad · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent book to know about RSS and its works.

[Atul Sabnis · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was really looking forward to this book.

The book is really good. I would recommend it to all. Seriously. If you are willing to understand the Sangh without any bias, this is the book you should be reading. The purpose and intent of explaining what the RSS is all about - is all there.

I would easily give 5-stars to this book for its purpose and intent. I am taking away one star for the absolutely shoddy editing, and another for the misplaced and (seemingly confused) presentation.

I have no idea why this book is priced at what it is. It just seems to look to fill up pages with repetitive stuff. If there is a sentence in your book, make an assumption that the reader has read it. There is no need to repeat it -- definitely not on the same page.

I have lost all respect for Bloomsbury editors. Unless of course, if they have done this on purpose. Even at the cost of their brand. The editing is so careless, it is almost callous.

In his review of the book (which you should definitely read, especially because he talks of the content of the book) by R Jagannathan; at the end, he says: "Sharda has done us a favour by writing this book, which is an expansion of his earlier tome titled Secrets of the RSS. It could have done with some better editing and proofing, but its real value is in the message, not the occasional mistakes in English. The Sangh is not guardian of the Queen’s English."

Yes, the Sangh is not the guardian - but when you write a book in English, you play by the rules of the language. You would expect the same of a foreigner writing a book in Sanskrit or Hindi, or Marathi, or Tamizh.

Once again, if you are willing to undergo the turmoil of bad presentation and copyediting, and if you are seeking to understand the Sangh, this is the book. Read this book if you have the wisdom to separate presentation from content. Because, from a point of view of content (and intent) this is the book you should be reading if you want to understand the Sangh.

One way to remember this book: a marvellous opportunity wasted.

Here’s my review: -5* on presentation and copy; +5* on purpose, intent, and information.

[Tannistha Ganguly · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book has been an eye opener for me and I'm sure for many other readers. It gives the reader an overall idea of what is RSS and its principles and ideologies. I think this book is a much needed effort in bringing the true nature of an organization like RSS to the Indian society. Too long have we remained engulfed in major propaganda against one of our biggest assets. It is time to share many such stories, views and biographies of RSS members with the rest of India and the world so that RSS can get the respect that it deserves.

[Anwesh Satpathy · Rating 1 out of 5]

This review from my substack (https://anweshsatpathy.substack.com/p...).

I am generally averse to writing reviews that are wholly critical. If I dislike a book, as is sometimes the case, I am more likely to include my critical reflections on the subject in an article on a related, broader theme. This review, however, is borne out of social media conversations wherein I was accused of being unfair to RSS. I was asked by my interlocuter to read Ratan Sharda “ji” to know the real RSS. Dr. Sharda, a member of the RSS, regularly features in national TV media(and occasionally on print) as a defender of the organization and its ideology. Barring the cacophony that has infected TV media debates, Dr. Sharda is generally polite and never abusive. I say this to emphasize that I have no animosity towards him as a person. This review is strictly limited to the quality of his intellectual output.

“RSS 360”, as the subtitle suggests, seeks to “demystify” the Rashtriya SwayamSevak Sangh. Sharda starts by letting the readers know that he has worked “really hard on this version due to high critical standards of their[Bloomsbury’s] editorial team.” One of the first things that the reader notices about the writing is, in fact, its terrible editing. It is organized in a confusing manner. It lacks a central thesis whose various aspects are argued progressively. The sentences are not always grammatically accurate, notwithstanding basic misspellings(“Balasaheb” instead of “Babasaheb” Ambedkar, although this might have been a Freudian slip). A less discerning reader sympathetic to the cause will perhaps ignore the bad writing but I can’t. It makes the book doubly unenjoyable and bland.

The book starts in medias res , perhaps in an attempt to be evocative, narrating the emergency years. It is not surprising since the emergency was precisely what bought RSS into the mainstream after its decades long political untouchability following Gandhi’s assassination. There is little doubt that the RSS did play a major role in the protests that preceded emergency, alongside the Socialists, as well as the underground resistance that followed afterwards. Sharda writes that historians like Ram Guha “gloss over these facts of history or write disparagingly about RSS contribution rather than highlight the exemplary way they bore the brunt of atrocities in and outside jail even as their careers, family lives and businesses were damaged or ruined.” This is a rather strange argument on omission, given that Sharda cites no source to prove his case. The reader is supposed to take him at his word. Sharda never mentions the specific criticism or argument that historians like Guha make concerning RSS role in emergency. Merely a day after the declaration of emergency, the Sangh Parivar conducted an underground meeting and decided to pursue the method of “satyagraha”. It was the RSS’ turn to lay claim to a mass movement, after its embarrassing non-involvement with anti-colonial activities during British rule. The government suggests 4% of those detained came from RSS while the Sangh puts it above 30%. Even if we take the government’s data, it is still a significant number. Madhavrao Muley, who surprisingly finds no mention in Sharda’s account of the emergency, was assigned the charge of leading the underground Satyagrahas by Deoras. The RSS workers often disguised themselves, including a certain Narendra Modi, and helped dissenting socialists like George Fernandes to safe houses. The then-RSS chief Balasaheb Deoras wrote a series of letters to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Acharya Vinoba Bhave to lift the ban on RSS. Deoras praised Indira Gandhi’s speech for being “well balanced”, congratulated her when pliable judges declared her election valid while promising “selfless work” for the “national upliftment ( government as well as non-government)”. In Deoras’ words:-

“It is my prayer to you that you kindly try to remove the wrong notion of the prime minister about the Sangh, and as a result of which [sic ] the RSS volunteers will be set free, the ban on the Sangh will be lifted and such a condition will prevail as to enable the volunteers of the Sangh to participate in the planned programme of action relating to country’s progress and prosperity under the leadership of the prime minister.”


It is this duplicity that historians like Guha and respected journalists like Coomi Kapoor criticize the RSS for. Sharda could very easily claim that his organization approached this “strategy” to survive while secretly maintaining resistance. But he would be able to make this claim only after producing his detractors arguments. Sharda never quotes Deoras letters so he never has to justify it. He seems more comfortable pretending it doesn’t exist. His critics are always portrayed as bad faith left-wing ideologues even as he doesn’t so much as cite a single line from their work. This is even more problematic considering that Sharda chides the communists for supporting emergency. A faction among communists did support the emergency while another took part in protests against it even during it;s imposition. The Communists are further chided for their dubious role during the Quit India movement. Perhaps Dr. Sharda has forgotten that their ideological co-traveller Shyama Prasad Mookerjee was in government in Bengal. This is what Dr. Mookerjee wrote on the Quit India movement to the Governor:-

“The question is how to combat this movement in Bengal? The administration of the province should be carried on in such a manner that in spite of the best efforts of the Congress, this movement will fail to take root in the province. It should be possible for us, especially responsible ministers, to be able to tell the public that the freedom for which the Congress has started the movement, already belongs to the representatives of the people. In some spheres it might be limited during the emergency. Indians have to trust the British.”

I wish I could say that the rest of the book is on similar lines as the first chapter. The first chapter, in fact, is the strongest. The rest of the book is far worse. It reads like a passionate Indian uncle garrulously lecturing the “current generation”(his words). In an attempt to prove that there’s a western conspiracy to prove that India is an artificial creation, Sharda writes:-

“I would like the reader to ponder a minute over why India is called a ‘sub­continent’ but bigger, massive geographical entities like Australia and USA are called countries? You would note that your mind is conditioned subtly to accept that we are not a natural country but have been brought together by the British through legislative efforts.”

For the uninitiated, subcontinent is defined as a distinct part of a continent that has its own tectonic plates. Subcontinents can be a country and even a state (Alaska is a subcontinent). Arabia, the Russian far east, Somali plates etc. are all subcontinents. I feel embarrassed even having to explain this. It is a testament to the anti-intellectualism of RSS, or perhaps Dr. Sharda’s editors, that no one pointed out such an elementary error in reasoning.

Here is Dr. Sharda’s reason for the unity and ancient continuity of India:-

“Shri Ranga Hari, a senior RSS prachaarak and central leader, once cited an interesting example of common traditions and cultural practices we share across this vast nation. For example, all over India, the shopkeeper adds a little amount of the goods over and above what he weighs for the customer before packing. The idea is, “if there is an error, let it be corrected from my side.” This custom has different names in different languages but it is prevalent right from South to North and East to West. I know that it is called ‘runga’ in North, I am sorry that I couldn’t make note of the words for this practice in other Indian languages.”

This is a very common practice across mercantilist cultures around the world. “Lagniappe”, prevalent in Louisiana, refers essentially to the same custom of giving an extra gift to the customers. The Arab traders have had the same practice. West African traders too practice the same custom. Are we supposed to assume that they share continuity with India? Or, perhaps Dr. Sharda believes that India as “vishwaguru” taught this to the rest of the world? The most likely explanation is that Sharda simply didn’t bother to verify whether this custom was even unique to India.

Having proven the unity of India with such extraordinary leaps of logic, Sharda proceeds to remark upon the superiority of ancient Indian science thus:-

“It would surprise readers if I were to suggest that the famous shloka, ‘poorna midah, poorna midam, poornaat poorna mudachyate, poornasya poorna maadaay, poorna mevaavashishyate, which translates to: ‘That is Absolute, This is Absolute, Absolute arises out of Absolute, If Absolute is taken away from Absolute, Absolute remains, is the best possible enunciation of Einstein’s famous formulation, E=mc2 , which is “total of energy in the universe remains constant, whatever you produce, transform or destroy.”

This claim is so mind-numbingly ridiculous that one doesn’t even feel the need to refute it. Its stupidity is self-explanatory. Sharda doesn’t bother arguing either, instead producing Quantum Woo excerpts from long discredited new age bullshit like “The Tao of Physics”. The reader is supposed to be convinced by such appeals to authority. Sharda appeals to Voltaire’s praise for Indian philosophy. This reeks of Orientalism, which is, of course, not shocking at all to hear from a Hindu nationalist. Sharda entirely misses the context that Voltaire and other enlightenment figures were merely critiquing Christianity and using the ancientness of the East to prove their claims. Their claims were based on dubious forgeries like “Ezourvedam”, which Voltaire praised. It is extremely likely that Voltaire never read an authentic translation of any Indian text. Ancient India’s metaphysical insights are retrospectively cited as evidence that India had solved “basic economic and social requirements” since only those societies can aspire to spirituality. This is notwithstanding the fact that some of the greatest philosophers in the world came from a period of tumultuous upheaval and inequality. These include the enlightenment philosophers as well as early Christianity. I suspect that, in Sharda’s view, there isn’t much philosophical insights to be gained from Christianity anyway. I will nevertheless refrain from putting words in his mouth.

In many instances, the book devolves further into being a rant against the ominous liberals. I present a specimen below:-

“There has been a lot of breast beating about attack on MF Hussain’s painting by Hindu groups as being against liberal values and artistic freedom. Interestingly Hussain’s same artistic freedom becomes coy when depicting Mother Teresa, his mother or other Muslim women. The stark contrast in his artistic impressions can be seen through various presentations of Hindu gods and goddesses. You can see these images floating around on the net. Many of them are so obscene and hurt our sensibilities so deeply that I won’t describe them. Same liberals are in the forefront for banning Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasreen. They keep quiet when extremists force Taslima out of India.”

These liberals again are never quoted. I am sure they exist. Salman Rushdie was defended by many on the left. The prominent British-Pakistani Marxist Tariq Ali staged a notable play mocking the Mollah, defending Rushdie and critiquing fundamentalism in religion. Rushdie was also supported by the legendary Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish and Edward Said. Taslima Nasrin was defended by Arundhati Roy, Girish Karnad and Mahasweta Devi. These are among the most prominent leftists. Dr. Sharda’s point would have credibility had he bothered to quote a liberal. I am not such a liberal, and as I pointed out not even leftists seem to have supported the ban. Dr. Sharda, on the other hand, cannot muster a word of support for MF Hussain’s freedom of speech, whose validity is entirely irrelevant to his hurt feelings. As Hitchens said, “I’m still waiting to hear what your argument is”.

Dr. Sharda is consumed with such visceral hatred of the liberals that he can’t bring himself to wholeheartedly condemn Golwalkar’s repugnant comments. In his words:-

“Worst charge that they could put even based on his quote of 1938­-39 is that he advocated that no group should have any special privileges (which the leftists translate as the minorities being given a status of second class citizen). Even if this view is taken at its full face value, it is not in anyway, different from the stated Islamic rule (evident in all Muslim majority states) that gives status of second class citizen to ‘non­believers’, claiming it to be as per The Book. If this proposition is true, then are they accepting that Islamic rule is fundamentally a fascist rule?”

Dr. Sharda claims here that Golwalkar was merely protesting special treatment, not advocating for minorities being second class citizens. Here is what Golwalkar says:-

“the foreign races in Hindusthan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e., of the Hindu nation and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment -not even citizen's rights.”

What part of “not even citizen’s rights” does Dr. Sharda not understand? If he had still any doubts, here is Golwalkar again:-

“To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races—the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by”

Does Dr. Sharda seriously wants to defend this and accuse critics of misrepresentation? Why can’t he simply denounce it and perhaps show some humility by accepting that his idol has erred? It shouldn’t be hard. On his whataboutery concerning Islamic dictatorships, well, I denounce it as a critic of Golwalkar and I consider it an insult to my intelligence and basic morality that he even asked.

Apart from irrelevant anecdotes, the book is also full of claims for which no source is ever provided and which simply don’t pass the smell test. Sample exhibit:-

“A senior colleague of E V Ramaswami Naicker, founder of DK and referred to as EVR; quit DMK disillusioned to join RSS. He disclosed that EVR had written to Dr Ambedkar when he was thinking of forsaking the Hindu fold, but was advised against it and instead was advised to fight for dignity and rights within the religion.”

It is highly improbable to me and to anyone aware of basic history that either Dr. Ambedkar or EVR would ever discourage anyone from leaving Hinduism. Perhaps Dr. Sharda should revisit EVR’s writings and campaign of breaking idols. Maybe a reading of Dr. Ambedkar’s 22 vows will convince him? Where is the source, Sir?

I am tempted to keep going on and critique the empirical basis and ridiculous “studies” he cites on RSS workers’ temperament but this is already getting too long. I will quote one last paragraph before concluding, without which this review will remain incomplete. Here we go:-

“Gau Vigyan Sansthan, near Nagpur has been doing lot of research on utilising various products made out of cow produce. It is fashionable to laugh out and ridicule at this kind of research. It would be foolish to write off medicinal cures defined clearly in Ayurveda. When the world is accepting the Vedic wisdom, it would be tragedy to laugh it off till westerners actually copyright these cures!”

The website of this organization, predictably and lamentably, asserts the therepeutical benefits of cow urine and sells cow urine as a product.

I felt much more sympathetic to the RSS when I read “left leaning” ethnographic studies of its organization from Prof. Jaffrelot, Krzysztof Iwanek and Walter Andersen and Damle than I did reading Ratan Sharda’s book because there was a genuine attempt to understand. Page after page, this book confirmed every stereotype one holds concerning the organization, especially the critical thinking skills of its members. There’s not even an attempt to engage with the critics, forget refuting. It is horrible even by the standards of a hagiography. No person with half a brain and the critical thinking skills of a blobfish will be convinced by this. No critic with the aesthetic sense of the average Dan Brown fan will manage to get through the first couple of pages.

[Hemanth · Rating 3 out of 5]

An insider's viewpoint. Hardly anything new except details of RSS's negotiations with Patel after the first ban. The writing was more like a blogpost than a serious scholarly work on RSS which I had expected. It failed to serve the purpose with which I decided to read this book i.e. to gain a proper perspective on RSS. Anyway, I have collected a few more books like 1) RSS: A View to the Inside by Walter K. Andersen, Shridhar D. Damle 2) The RSS: Icons of the Indian Right by Nilanjan Mukherjee and 3) The RSS: A Menace To India by A.G. Noorani. Ratan Sharda's book will then have to be judged in light of these other books which are written by outsiders.

[Munish Handa · Rating 1 out of 5]

The book started with a high pace and soon became mundane and inane
Thought of putting it away many times, but continued as I am more interested to know about RSS and not how the book was written
Why one star?
1. The author needs a much better and professional proof reader... the entire book is full of syntax errors, incorrect spellings, bad sentence flows, over use of same words in the same sentence ... Traditional Wren & Martin English bred readers would have thrown it away after the second chapter
2. The entire content is mundanely written that could put a new reader to sleep ... somewhere it seems to be a poor translation of English from Hindi or Marathi

What’s good?
The content and truthful projection of the subject matter

Read it if one is really interested in RSS

[Kumar Ayush · Rating 3 out of 5]

Did not finish this 100%, could not. Full of sampling bias, strawman and slippery slope fallacies.

[Abhishek Agrawal · Rating 3 out of 5]

Its a very nice book for people who wants to know about RSS and the leaders. Some good insights into Hedgewar and Golwalkar.