Kurukshetra—the great battleground that witnessed the Mahabharata—lies in Haryana. And probably for good reason. There is a reason that this region is called “Hari-ayana”—or the abode of Vishnu. It is the land where Krishna preached the Bhagavad Gita to Arjuna. It was an integral part of Brahmavarta, the cradle of Vedic civilization, and a key part of the Sarasvati basin. It was home to numerous rishis including Vyasa. The fearsome battle between the Pandavas and the Kauravas had far-reaching implications for the whole of Bharatvarsha. Not much has changed since then, it seems—including the centrality of faith.

After the recent state elections, several experts have weighed in on the reasons for the unexpected result. After all, pollsters are experts who will explain tomorrow why the predictions they made yesterday didn’t come true today. Among the many factors cited are the INC’s overconfidence, infighting, lack of alliances, and poor organization. Other reasons mentioned are the Jat vs Non-Jat dynamics, the renewed BJP-RSS relationship, and the formidable last mile machinery of the BJP. There is probably some truth in all these factors.

But one factor is conspicuous by its absence in mainstream discussion. Very few are willing to examine Hindu consolidation as a possible reason for this unexpected electoral outcome. Is this absence intentional or inadvertent? Or is it simply too close to an uncomfortable truth—that the first signs of Hindu consolidation are emerging from Haryana?

Why is it difficult to accept that counter-polarization was only to be expected? Wouldn’t the INC’s effort to woo Muslims—in parallel with accentuating Hindu caste divisions—eventually elicit the proverbial Newtonian reaction? The failure of the BJP’s “sabkaa vishwaas” plank to garner Muslim votes in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls and the stark contrast between their Kashmir valley and Jammu vote shares only reinforces this view. Why are we ignoring the fact that the PM, the UP-CM, and the RSS chief have all reiterated the “katoge to batoge” theme in recent weeks, albeit in different words?

India has been home to different faiths down the ages. They have flourished due to Sanatana Dharma’s intrinsic spirit of accommodation and acceptance. But they also sprouted within the fractures of Hindu camps. Divide and rule has worked stunningly well in India.

But there are many factors that are uniting Hindus like never before. These include the recent spate of anti-Hindu activities in Bangladesh, the property disputes thrown up by Waqf boards, the continued harvesting of souls in regions that are demographically on-the-cusp, the never-ending government control over Hindu temples, the abandon with which some politicians abuse Sanatana, the sanctimonious preaching of the USCIRF to India, and the perceived lack of a common civil code. The increased availability of information on social media regarding all such issues has amplified the process.

It is essential to recognize the significant shift that has been occurring not just in Haryana, but across India. The idea of Hindu consolidation is not just a political maneuver; it reflects a broader cultural resurgence. Religion and politics have always been intertwined in this land where issues of faith transcend mere electoral calculations. For decades, caste dynamics dominated the political discourse and will probably continue to do so in years to come. But I believe that we are now witnessing a greater alignment under the banner of a shared dharmic heritage.

It is easy to dismiss this trend as Hindutva politics. For a moment though, let’s suppose it is. A cursory exploration of Veer Savarkar’s writings makes it clear that Hindutva is a common identity for those who are descendants of Bharat and who revere Bharat as their Punyabhumi and Matrubhumi. Savarkar’s Hindutva was not confined to spiritual or religious beliefs, as it sought to unite people based on ethnic and cultural commonalities. This definition allowed even those who may not strictly adhere to Hindu religious practices—but share the same cultural roots—to be considered part of the Hindu fold. Ideologically, Hindutva is also a negation of caste. And that’s precisely why Hindutva terrifies established political hierarchies.

What irks traditional vote bank parties even more is the fact that their opponents are carrying the battle into their turf. For the first time societal hierarchies within Islam and Christianity—faiths that were supposed to usher the newly converted flock towards an egalitarian realm—are being discussed. How many were familiar with the divisions between Ashraf, Ajlaf and Arzal until recently? Or the differences between Bamonns, Chardos, Gauddos and Sudirs?

It is undeniable that the all-encompassing nature of Sanatana Dharma is the glue that holds diverse faiths, languages, cuisines, traditions, and practices together. Remove the glue and they come unstuck. India’s plurality endures owing to a civilizational ethos of plurality, not an ill-defined or misunderstood notion of secularism. But history bears witness to the fact that flourishing civilizations around the world crumbled when their original culture was lost.

The coming years will be pivotal in deciding whether this trend evolves into a lasting political force or is overshadowed by emerging strategies. What remains evident, though, is that Haryana’s recent elections serve as a harbinger of the broader ideological struggle unfolding nationwide. The battle that once took place on the plains of Kurukshetra is now being waged in the hearts and minds of millions of Indians. The big question is this: will dharma prevail?

--- The writer is an author of several works of fiction.