The recent visit of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the RSS headquarters in Nagpur—where he paid homage to RSS founder Dr. K.B. Hedgewar and its second Sarsanghchalak, Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar—elicited significant public interest. The widely publicized trip was interpreted by many as a move to reinforce his standing within the RSS fold. Another speculation was that, as Modi turns 75 this September; he may be expected to retire in accordance with BJP norms.

Several other developments also suggested that relations between the “father” (RSS) and “son” (BJP) had become strained. Ahead of the 2024 General Elections, BJP President J.P. Nadda declared that the BJP was now capable of operating independently and no longer needed RSS support. In its earlier days, the BJP had relied on the RSS for electoral mobilization.

Another point of contention was Modi’s self-aggrandizing statement that he is “non-biological,” directly sent by God to serve this land. RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat reportedly viewed this as a sign of inflated ego. Bhagwat remarked that some people begin to believe they are divine (devas), and eventually start declaring themselves to be gods.

The 2024 Lok Sabha elections saw a decline in BJP’s strength. There’s a perception that the RSS did not fully involve itself in these elections, though it swiftly returned to active campaigning for the Maharashtra and Haryana assembly elections. Except for in 1984—when the Khalistani movement was seen as a threat to national unity—the RSS has consistently backed the BJP and played a key role in its electoral growth.

Promoting misconceptions about minorities

The RSS functions as the core strategist. Its numerous affiliate organizations, coordinated through the Rashtriya Pratinidhi Sabha (National Representatives Committee), carry out its broader ideological agenda. These groups promote RSS ideology—glorifying past values (such as those in the Manusmriti) and spreading hostility toward Muslims and Christians, as they are seen as followers of “foreign” religions. While each group pursues its specific focus, during elections they unite to ensure BJP’s victory. From the formation of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh with help from Hindu Mahasabha leader Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, to the gradual takeover of the party by the RSS after Mukherjee’s death, the RSS has had a dedicated political arm. The division of labor between the RSS, BJP, and other affiliates is quite clear.

A prime example of this coordination was the Ram Temple movement in the 1980s. Initiated by the VHP, the BJP later adopted it as a national political agenda and reaped substantial electoral benefits. The issues raised by the RSS often revolve around glorified versions of history, promoting misconceptions against minorities and the marginalized—particularly Dalits, Adivasis, and women. The RSS’s strength lies in its grassroots reach through shakhas (branches) and community-based programs.

Although India transitioned from a feudal and colonial system to a democratic political structure, the RSS has continued to propagate caste and gender hierarchies reminiscent of the feudal era through its preachings. These efforts are supplemented by various initiatives such as Ekal Vidyalayas, Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram, Seva Bharati, and Rashtra Sevika Samiti, to name a few.

The RSS’s infiltration into civil society and political institutions has long been underway, but this influence has intensified since the BJP came to power in several states and at the Centre. Beyond shakhas, the RSS now organizes community groups for women, children, and the elderly to keep them ideologically aligned. Recently, a picnic was organized in my area; when a Muslim woman expressed interest in joining, she was bluntly told she would feel uncomfortable due to the nature of the discussions and activities. One can easily spot women attending Rashtra Sevika Samiti’s early morning shakhas (fraternal gatherings), walking with lathis (batons).

Implementation of core RSS agenda

During the last decade, BJP governments have implemented core elements of the RSS’s Hindu nationalist agenda—such as the construction of the Ram Temple, the abrogation of Article 370, criminalization of triple talaq, and the initiation of the National Register of Citizens and the amendment of Waqf Act.  While occasional strategic differences may arise, there is no fundamental discord between the RSS and BJP in their goal of establishing a Hindu Rashtra (nation)..

Modi paid tribute to Hedgewar and Golwalkar for the “path” they laid. But what is this path? First, it involves distancing from the inclusive nationalism of the Indian freedom movement, which was based on liberty, equality, and fraternity. Second, while trying to publicly distance themselves from Golwalkar’s infamous book Bunch of Thoughts—which identified Muslims, Christians, and Communists as threats to Hindu nationalism—in practice, their policies adhere closely to that line.

A blatant example is this year’s (2025) Eid celebration. One state changed Eid from a gazetted holiday to an optional one. Offering namaz on public roads is being opposed, and those praying are frequently harassed by police. In some cases, people are even barred from offering prayers on their own rooftops. Golwalkar’s vision appears to have been implemented during Modi’s tenure.

As for Christians, there are reports from Odisha that burial rights are being denied. In Balasore district, the tribal outfit Sarna Majhi has reportedly threatened to boycott Adivasi Christians, falsely claiming—based on Article 13(3)(a) of the Constitution—that they have no burial rights in their villages (from a fact-finding report in Balasore).

Modi often claims that India’s development (vikas) is inspired by RSS ideology. However, India has seen sharp declines in international indices related to happiness, religious freedom, press freedom, democracy, and hunger. For Modi and his ideological backers, “development” seems to mean the enrichment of a favored few—who either break the law with impunity or flee the country after looting public funds.

So how aligned are Modi’s words and actions? His Nagpur visit clearly had political undertones, and his statements were crafted more for electoral consumption than ideological reflection.

(The writer, a former IIT Bombay professor, is Chairman of the Centre for the Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai. Views expressed are the author's own and not necessarily shared by editors of South Asia Monitor. He can be reached at ram.puniyani@gmail.com)