'It is something like traditional Indian families.'
'The family might be run by younger people, but if the patriarch says that you should consider someone for some task, it is very difficult for the others to ignore it.'
Earlier in July, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat attended the launch of a book on senior RSS leader Moropant Pingle.
Addressing the event, Bhagwat recalled an anecdote in which Pingle reacted to his felicitation on completing 75 years of age by saying that 'it was a signal for him to move aside.'
Given the precedent of Bharatiya Janata Party leaders older than 75 being sent to the Margdarshak Mandal, Opposition parties and political commentators were quick to draw meaning from Bhagwat's remark.
Media reports were abuzz with speculation that it was an indirect signal to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who will turn 75 on September 17, 2025, to make way for younger leadership.
After Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar's surprise resignation, suggestions of a possible rift between the BJP and the RSS grew louder.
However, Dinesh Narayanan, author of The RSS and the Making of the Deep Nation, "doesn't see any ideological differences between the government and the RSS."
"Whatever I've seen of the RSS, usually, things work differently. Their internal discussions are often very different from what is said in public," Narayanan tells Rediff's Utkarsh Mishra in a telephone interview.
RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat's remark, in which he said 'when you are 75, move aside', has created quite a buzz. Many in the media are seeing it as a signal to Modi, who will turn 75 in September. What is your take on this?
As I understand, he was retelling an incident when Moropant Pingle, the late RSS leader who was the architect of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, said -- at an event where the latter was being felicitated on turning 75 -- that the felicitation seems like a signal to him to move aside.
And since Prime Minister Modi is also turning 75 (this September), many interpreted it as a signal, or a message, and has led to much speculation.
But whatever I've seen of the RSS, usually, things work differently. Their internal discussions are often very different from what is said in public, and what is said in public may not have anything to do with what is being discussed internally. I'm not privy to what is being discussed within the organisation.
Now, not only the prime minister, but Mohan Bhagwat himself is turning 75 -- in fact, six days before the PM turns 75.
If there is a rule -- even if it is an informal one that 75 is a retirement or semi-retirement age in the Parivar, he (Bhagwat) himself is turning 75. But there is no indication that he's going to retire or anything like that, right?
Sarsanghchalaks (RSS chiefs) are chosen for life while the prime minister is elected by the people to Parliament for a five year term.
The BJP parliamentary party preferred him to be PM and the NDA (National Democratic Alliance) partners supported the decision.
The parliamentary party can ask him to step down if it wills. So, the prime minister is in the middle of his term, and Mohan Bhagwat is chief for life anyway unless he chooses otherwise.
There is speculation that this is a kind of pressure tactic by which the RSS wants the BJP to elect a president favourable to them.
I have no idea about that and as you said, it is speculation.
I'm not privy to the discussions going on within the party or the RSS about the BJP's presidential election.
Having said that, we also should keep in mind BJP President J P Nadda's interview to the Indian Express on the eve of the Lok Sabha elections last year in which he said that the BJP does not need the RSS any more.
And we know that the BJP presidential election is long overdue. That is not normal for the BJP and the Parivar which claim to be highly disciplined, democratic and process-oriented. What we don't know is exactly what or who is the hurdle.
As you said, what the RSS says in public is very different from what is discussed privately. We have also seen that the BJP always consults the RSS leadership before any big appointment.
So, I don't think the RSS needs to exert pressure on the BJP in such a public way, if at all they want to do it.
My understanding is that usually there is much consultation between the RSS and the BJP leaderships, especially when key appointments are made.
The RSS usually prefers people who have risen through the Sangh system and are steeped in its ideology. I've heard from leaders within the Sangh Parivar that the BJP is under no obligation to accept the recommendations or suggestions from the RSS.
It is the prerogative of the RSS to give suggestions and recommendations as the BJP's ideological parent and mentor.
As an independent organisation within the Parivar, the BJP is at liberty to accept them or not.
Having said that, I would expect that as a political party, it is the BJP's aim to acquire power and stay in power.
Given that there is no other party except the BJP that is an ideological follower of the RSS, I would expect it to do everything in its power to make sure the BJP stays in power.
It is also necessary for it to implement its agenda of building a Hindu nation.
And so it has a vested interest in who runs the organisation and the government. But then, the relationship has its unique dynamics too.
It is something like traditional Indian families, for instance. The family might be run by younger people, but if the patriarch says that you should consider someone for some task, it is very difficult for the others to ignore it.
So, you could say that there is some sort of pressure there. But this pressure is not visible outside the organisation.
They are very good at keeping things secret and confidential.
The RSS always maintains that it is not a political organisation...
Their constitution says that and its leaders insist so...
... but if they are seen exerting pressure on the government like this, then it's perhaps not good for their own standing.
I really won't be able to answer that. For one, I don't know if the RSS is putting pressure in the first place.
Second, I don't know if the current BJP leadership will buckle under pressure, irrespective of who it is from.
As I mentioned earlier, Nadda has made it clear that the BJP does not need the RSS.
In your book, you have explained how Modi's relationship with the RSS was strained from the beginning. But why would there be a difference between him and the RSS now? Isn't he fulfilling all its ideological agenda?
I don't know if there are differences between Modi and the RSS now.
The distance between the RSS and Modi mentioned in my book was when he was the chief minister of Gujarat. This is before 2008.
At that point in time, there was strain between a section of the RSS and Modi.
In fact, many in the RSS leadership were initially opposed to Modi as the prime ministerial candidate.
Sanjay Joshi's strained relationship with Modi and Joshi's removal from the BJP leadership was widely reported.
The late RSS ideologue M G Vaidya had often written articles criticising Modi.
But since 2013, you've seen that the RSS, which was earlier a passive participant in elections, began actively engaging in the BJP's election campaigns.
In fact, media reporting showed that in the recent Maharashtra and Haryana assembly elections, although the Opposition had an upper hand early on, intense work by RSS volunteers was one of the factors that helped the BJP turn the tide.
So, it is clear that the RSS will continue to support the BJP and is willing to put its cadres to election work.
Recently, RSS Sarkaryavah Dattatreya Hosabale said we should think about removing 'socialist' and 'secular' from the Preamble of the Constitution.
But, when asked in Parliament, the government said that they have no such plans. This is again seen as an ideological flashpoint between the two.
I don't think it's an ideological flashpoint, really. Because one is an answer in Parliament, and one is the opinion of an organisation.
The RSS has opposed 'socialist' and 'secular' right from 1976 when it was inserted in the Preamble. It's not only these words, the RSS wants the Constitution reviewed.
Mohan Bhagwat had once indicated that the Constitution and jurisprudence should be aligned with Indian value systems.
He had recalled a conversation with then President Pranab Mukherjee, where he suggested to Mukherjee that the Constitution may be legal but not necessarily moral.
When the government says in Parliament that there is no intention of removing 'socialist' and 'secular', we'll have to take the government at face value. That does not necessarily mean that the government cannot change its stance at a later date. It is possible.
If there is no ideological confrontation between the BJP and the RSS, and Modi has created a larger-than-life image of himself, and pushing him aside would not be possible at all, especially during the midterm, why do such speculative reports keep appearing in the media?
Well, it is difficult for me to say why someone is speculating.
I don't see any ideological differences between the government and the RSS.
But there is certainly discomfort in the RSS about the government's economic policies. You can see that the Swadeshi Jagaran Manch, you can see the BMS (Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh), you can see other Parivar organisations, are not really aligned with the government's economic policies.
They have been opposing them publicly as well as in private.
The Sangh, which is an ardent advocate of Swadeshi, is uncomfortable with the government's closeness with the West, especially the United States.
A large section of the RSS believes that multinational corporations enjoy a free run in India.
So, there is a certain discomfort with the economic policies of this government.
But I don't think there is any ideological divergence.