By whipping up a storm over the comments of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader, Karunanidhi’s grandson and minister in the Tamil Nadu state cabinet, Udhayanidhi Stalin on Sanatan Dharma, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, personally, and his party, collectively, have clearly signalled their intention to stir the Hindutva pot for 2024.With the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance, or INDIA, appearing to draw popular support, the plan seems to be to try and dub opposition parties as anti-Hindu, and worse.The deliberate fudging of the lines between Hinduism, Sanatan Dharma, and Hindutva is on the cards.Foundations that envisioned a Secular IndiaThere have been continued and persistent efforts to tar Nehru on a daily basis since 2014. His sentiments that “we have to get rid of that narrowing religious outlook, that obsession with the supernatural and metaphysical speculations, that loosening of the mind’s discipline in ceremonial and mystical emotionalism, which come in the way of our understanding ourselves and the world” are being erased from public memory by trying to enforce a distorted image of India’s first prime minister.Of course, Mahatma Gandhi, in contrast, did not shy away from religion. “For me, every tiniest activity is governed by what I consider to be my religion.” But, religion to him meant something personal and way beyond the sense in which dharma has been employed in the Indian communitarian usage for a long time.Though the word secularism was not accepted for inclusion in the constitution by B.R. Ambedkar, that was because he considered that the Constitution was inherently imbued by the spirit of secularism and it did not need a separate mention. “What should be the policy of the State, how the Society should be organised in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by the people themselves according to time and circumstances. It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself, because that is destroying democracy altogether.”Most members of the constituent assembly, including Nehru, agreed with him.Both terms, ‘secularism’ and ‘socialism’ were added to the Preamble of the constitution in 1976 during the Emergency through the 42nd Amendment. Indira Gandhi’s political strategy for ‘secularism’ was to justify her Emergency-era mode as one directed against communalism and via the inclusion of the phrase ‘socialism’, force others to identify her government as pro-poor. The Syndicate, which opposed her, and the Opposition then was packed with supporters of big industry and traders, this was shorthand to distinguish herself from them.Interestingly, when the Janata Party government of 1977 brought the 44th amendment (1978) to undo the wrongs of the Emergency, the changes made to the Preamble were left untouched – despite the Bharatiya Jan Sangh (the earlier incarnation of the BJP) being an important component of Janata Party.Secularism received a setback during the Ram Janmabhoomi agitation and the demolition of the Babri Masjid. But non-BJP parties held onto the precept, and it remained the differentiator between the BJP and them. Government formations in 1996, 1997 and 2004 were defined as being that of secular parties.The discourse of dharma in politicsReligion, which is loosely translated as dharma in many Indian languages, including Hindi, has always held great significance for the majority of Indians.However, the meaning of the Sanskrit word dharma has been described as ‘duty’ and ‘principles that order the universe’.In the contemporary sense, its translation has often signified a sense of duty and conscience.Sanatan translates as eternal. For believers, therefore, Sanatan Dharma literally means eternal religion. This has been used as a synonym for Hinduism, but the phrase Hinduism itself is nomenclature not mentioned in the Vedas, according to Indo-Czech Indologist Julius Lipner and Indian mythologist Devdutt Pattanaik. They say the two words together have been used only in the Shrimad Bhagwat Gita.If we look at India’s national movement, its mainstream leaders found it useful to use religion for mobilisation.For example, Mahadev Govind Ranade severely criticised his ‘revivalist’ critics in 1897 for seeking recourse in subterfuges without answering what they want to revive:“Shall we revive the old habits of our people when the most sacred of our caste indulged in all the abominations as we now understand them of animal food and drink which exhausted every section of our country’s Zoology and Botany? The men and the Gods of those old days ate and drank forbidden things to excess in a way no revivalist will now venture to recommend.”But the national movement for freedom against the British was never a parochial one for one ethnicity, religion or language. Independent India held onto a distinct vision of Indian nationalism, sharply diverging from the dangerous idea of nationalism that ruled Europe in the 1930s and led to the destruction of a continent from which building upwards proved to be a herculean task.Indian nationalism won the day when India’s constitution was drawn up in 1950, but it is not as if there were no takers for the idea of a Hindu rashtra in India before partition.The debate on the use of religion, and the place of Hinduism and Sanatan Dharma, continued through the granting of ‘communal’ electorates in 1909, the Khilafat movement in 1919-24, and other campaigns and movements.Several interpretations of dharma were provided by those who defied tradition and sought to discover it on their own conscience or, to put it differently, in moral reason.Also read: Interview: The BJP May Defend ‘Sanatan Dharma’, but Can’t Define What It MeansThe latest controversyUdayanidhi has drawn attention to the problems within what is known as Sanatan Dharma, a term which many say, remains ambiguous in India’s religious discourse. The BJP has described it as synonymous with Hinduism and Hindutva. But this connection remains ambiguous, and those who oppose it see it as singularly upholding the varnashrama or caste system, working to the detriment of those who want to break the shackles of the old order.Whether it would lead to any substantial electoral gain in the run-up to the 2024 general election is uncertain.2024 is likely to be marked by muck-raking on the issue without much substance.Rabindranath Tagore’s advice in his poem ‘The Sunset of the Century’ written in 1899 may remain the soundest advice for Indians, as they move towards an election year:Keep watch, India…Let your crown be of humility, your freedom the freedom of the soul. Build God’s throne daily upon the ample bareness of your poverty. And know that what is huge is not great and pride Is not everlasting.The writer is a political scientist. He was Atal Bihari Vajpayee Senior Fellow at the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi, from 2019 to 2021, and principal of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Evening College, Delhi University, in 2018.