Between delivering eloquent speeches, working to reform a country's major political party and bowling the country over with his suave vocabulary and alluring smile, Dr Shashi Tharoor writes wonderful books. And when he does, he makes sure the entire country's attention arrests on his new project. Dr Tharoor's forthright remarks on nationality and his liberal ideas on Hinduism has garnered some negative publicity recently from the ruling government and its followers, but he refuses to flinch an inch. His latest book Why I am A Hindu hinges on the very premise that Hinduism is a great faith that has taught men over centuries to love and accept all for what they are and to denounce violence. Dr Tharoor urges every common man through his book to "take back" that benign Hinduism from its militant variations.

In an exclusive interview with TOI Books , Shashi Tharoor speaks on Hinduism and the urgency to evoke its true sentiments in the current socio-political scenario.

What is the ultimate thing that set you off to write the book? Was it a conscious political decision or did you feel like there was a social urgency?

These ideas have been in my mind for quite some time. In fact, I have even pre-figured them in some of my early books. In The Great Indian Novel , published 30 years ago had an emphasis on Dharma ; the novel Riot about Hindu-Muslim violence leading up to the Babri Masjid issue, and 20 years ago, the bookFrom Midnight To the Millennium talked about some of these things. What I want to see myself doing in this particular context is also responding to the way in which the Hindutva forces have taken Hinduism as a faith and have made it front and centre in their political discourse and attacked everyone as anti-Hindu. Now for me, how could I accept a label like that? I am a devout Hindu, my father was a devout Hindu. How can I not be me ? The moral urgency came from the fact that we can't afford to let our religion be hijacked by forces that are fundamentally inimical to its basic tenets.
You identify with Swami Vivekananda's view of Hinduism -- a sort of benign, all-inclusive liberal Hinduism. What do you think needs to be done to propagate his doctrine and "take back Hinduism" from its distorted variations?

All I can do is in the political front. I can influence political ideas, and work in the political space. I would ask some of these Hindu religious leaders, including some of these modern gurus who are very progressive and have open ideas of faith. They should take on the task of imparting liberal values to the Indian public. Within religion, you need a religious leader. I'm not a religious leader.

Your book basically propounds that because we are Hindus, we were able to accept other religions, as opposed how Hinduism has been misinterpreted today. What went wrong? How did we all of a sudden become so filled with hate?

I'm not sure we are filled with hate, to be quite honest. What's happened is that politicians have stoked certain hatred for political purposes. We know that for some people a certain amount of political polarization is the means to winning an election. We've seen this before. This is part of the political technique for some. As long as they feel that people can vote on the basis of identity rather than the basis of economics or performance, they'll be tempted to do this. My answer lies in trying to take the discourse into a direction where we're judging on the basis of politics of performance and not politics of identity.

Can Hindutva ever sustain? Or do you believe that is just a romantic fantasy of some bigoted humans?

The Hindutva ideas are in many ways the ideas of 1920s when fascist movements were on the rise. I'm not saying that the RSS is necessarily fascist, though they have some elements of it. But I am saying that there was a certain time in ideas of race and religion were conflicted and people did wear khaki shorts and march about in a militaristic fashion and the ideas go back to that period. But it's also a profoundly insecure faith because it essentially argues that the Hindu people was subjugated, conquered and suppressed for 1200 years and that now the time has come to reassert themselves. The political ideology of the reassertion of the people defined by a religious affiliation is born from inferiority complex. Whereas a self-confident Hindu doesn't have a chip on his shoulder about people of other faith. My father embraced very happily friends of other religion without feeling in any way that his friendship vitiated any elements of his personal faith.

It is surprising that a book like this has an endearing and compassionate diction, where your voice acts more like a guide than a preacher. Was this deliberately done to show how Hinduism, too, should be diffused?

I hope so. I'm very touched by what you said, because I believe when you're dealing with issues that matter to people in a deep level, you can neither be flippant nor can you be strident. But equally, you shouldn't be boring either. I tried to put a conversational tone and make it interesting to people and in many ways, I'm happy that it had that effect.

Caste division is also a part of our Hindu cultural past. Did you think that the title of your book would be off-putting to the Dalits for whom the term "Hindu" is probably the source of all their plight?

I've addressed this in the book, not in the kind of length some would have wanted, but it’s there. One of the arguments I make is that the ancient Hindu texts offer alternative approaches to the issue of caste. After all, Ved Vyasa was born to a fisherwoman, Valmiki to a hunter. There is evidence on both sides of the debate. Some say Hinduism is a misogynistic faith and I would examples were women are revered amongst the rishikas . There is evidence on both sides of the argument and that's part of the charm of Hinduism. The Hindu may choose to anchor himself or herself in either side of the debate. But don't blame Hinduism. Hinduism has given you the choice and you made the choice. So, if you choose to be a casteist, that's because you have chosen to reject other interpretations in which caste has been rejected. It is important to recognise that the option is yours.

Your book urges us to look into the spiritual awakening of great spiritual leaders and philosophers as a start to understanding true Hinduism. Why are we not inspired by modern spiritual/religious gurus? Where do they lag?

Some are. I have mentioned in particular Mata Amritanandamayi, Sadhguru, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar. They are popular and relatively young people. They still have a while to go where they can influence modern thinking. But they all have steered clear, unfortunately, of the political arguments for Hindutva. And they have confined themselves to self-improvement and social service. I believe they should also preach acceptance and liberalism and I hope that they might yet be prompted to think along the lines of this book and generate enough debates and discussions in public circles.

Give us four reasons to reinstate our faith in Hinduism.

1) As an Indian I find it fits in very well with the heritage of my own people. Many Indian Hindus can take the comfort of the sacred geography of this land, the pilgrimage sites, the great saints, etc., which tie us to the ancient beliefs of our ancestors.

2) We can talk about the extraordinarily eclectic texts and choices of philosophy that are available to us. There is so much to read and choose from. Even a great sage like Adi Shankara just confined himself to three things: theUpanishads , the Rama Sutras and the Bhagwat Gita .

3) The amazing capacity of Hinduism to allow the individual to find his own truth is profound. We all seek the truth within ourselves. We don't get it from one book, one text, one guru, one way of doing things. Everything is possible.

4) The fourth reason is that Hinduism is a perfect religion for this late 21st century, this period of doubt and uncertainty in the world where one needs a faith that doesn't answer all the complexities of the world by giving you a rigid doctrinaire dogma, but rather a faith that responds to complexity by accommodating to it by being flexible, by being open, by meeting of difference and by accepting of difference.