The Sage Who Reimagined Hinduism is Shashi Tharoor’s account of one of the most intriguing spiritual leaders and social reformers of modern India, Sree Narayana Guru.

However, he is not very well-known outside of his home state, Keralam, and this book is, among other things, an attempt to remedy that neglect.

Born in 1855 into a modest, middle-class family in Travancore, Narayana belonged to the Ezhava caste, which was considered untouchable at the time.

The story of how a boy from a socially disadvantaged caste rose to become a charismatic sage with millions of followers is a remarkable one.

Yet, the Guru was not just an inspiring spiritual leader.

He was also a social reformer who was determined to reshape the oppressive caste system that held millions in its grip.

He fought to make the society he was part of more equal, establishing and consecrating temples that were open to all castes, founding schools and other educational institutions, and doing everything he could to empower the lower castes and break the malign influence of the upper castes.

In a conversation with Scroll, Tharoor spoke about how he discovered the Guru, his own understanding of faith, and why the Guru continues to intrigue us.

Excerpts from the conversation: How did you decide to write a biography of the sage and social reformer, Sree Narayana Guru?To begin with, two or three things intersected.

One was the fact that I had written two short biographies.

One on Nehru more than 23 years ago, in 2003, which did very well and then got a reprint in 2017.

It’s still doing well as one of the best short biographies of Nehru because there are very good biographies, but they are very long.

That is something that worked.

Then I tried the same formula with Ambedkar.

It has done modestly well and has a steady continued readership across the country.

So, the format of a short biography was definitely appealing.

And when it came to Sree Narayana Guru, he was somebody who I thought deserved to be better known outside Keralam.

When I came to Keralam, even though I was aware of the gentleman, it was still astonishing for me to realise how deeply revered he is in every corner.

In my part of Keralam, where I’m the representative for Thiruvananthapuram, literally every neighbourhood has a bust, a shrine, something dedicated to him, the way in which you might see Mahatma Gandhi or Ambedkar in some places.

He is highly revered.

But what is equally shocking is that, unlike Mahatma Gandhi or Ambedkar, no one outside Keralam seems to know him.

I happened to mention him in conversation to a few friends in North India, and of about 20 people I mentioned Sree Narayana Guru to, 19 had no idea who he was.

The 20th thought he knew him, but he was actually mixing him up with Ramana Maharshi or somebody else.

So, I realised there was a genuine need.

If you found this gentleman interesting and original, which I did, then it was important to get him better known outside Keralam.

That was the purpose.

All these things came together, and I decided that the time to do it was right then.

I also felt that we were seeing a sort of political takeover of Sree Narayana Guru by certain quarters who were trying to appropriate him.

I felt it was important to set the record straight about what he achieved, how he achieved it, why he did it, and what he actually did.

But what would be the reason that he is not very well known in other parts of the country?One reason certainly was that, unlike many others, he didn’t travel outside Keralam very much, other than to Sri Lanka three times.

Otherwise, he remained essentially within Keralam and the adjoining regions of what used to be the Mysore State and the Madras State.

Tagore invited him to Santiniketan, but he never went.

So, when people haven’t had any personal exposure to someone, whether through direct contact, legend, photographs, or anecdotes, that also becomes a factor.

Partly, perhaps, it was because of the languages he spoke – Sanskrit, Tamil, and Malayalam.

Nobody in the north knew any of those languages.

When Gandhiji came to see him, Gandhiji didn’t speak any of those three languages, and Sree Narayana Guru didn’t speak any of Gandhiji's languages.

So, they had an interpreter for part of the conversation, but much of their discussion passed in silence.

These are all contributing factors.

But at the end of the day, why does one person capture the imagination of a people while another does not? It is very difficult to say.The book says that he had the stature of Swami Vivekananda but he could not find similar national recognition.He deserved to be as well known as Vivekananda, but he was not.

His message was as universal as Vivekananda’s.

However, Vivekananda travelled the length and breadth of the country.

You can read his speeches delivered in Lahore and in what is today Bangladesh.

You can read his speeches in Chicago.

That kind of impact Sree Narayana Guru never sought to have.

I myself began as a Vivekananda bhakta.

I discovered his speeches in English when I was a college student, and from there I read everything by Vivekananda, again in English, because most of his preaching was in English.

So I had a complete immersion.

But with Sree Narayana Guru, I had to make a real effort to find good translations and learn more.

Whatever is available is either extremely spiritual or extremely esoteric.

As you say, you are not an authority on spirituality or religion.

But, of course, you are a politician.

A politician is writing a biography of a sage.

I wanted to know what kind of relationship you find, in the Indian context, between spirituality, religion, and politics.It is extensive.

But in my case, I didn’t quite approach this as a politician.

Let me explain why.

Sree Narayana Guru preached, first of all, a universalism against caste.

Caste is something my father, who came of age during the peak of the freedom movement under Gandhiji, was also against, though from a totally different perspective.

I had friends of every religion without even realising it.

That was how that generation was.

Secondly, Sree Narayana Guru did more than just preach against and destroy the edifices of caste.

He linked his teachings to some very practical things.

He wanted, for example, to emphasise education as a means of transformation and upliftment for society.

Similarly, he had a very strong message about free enterprise and handicrafts.

The first-ever handicraft exhibition in India, a trade and craft exhibition, was held under his auspices.

He also believed in interfaith harmony.

He held the very first All Religions Conference in India in the 1920s in Keralam.

So, you are looking at somebody who was not just a spiritual or religious reformer but somebody who had practical solutions for society and the economy.

These are solutions which, frankly, to this day remain valid.

I am also a believer in education, in free enterprise, and in hard work.

So, for me, these messages and lessons had to be taught and imparted once again.

At the same time, in Keralam, what has unfortunately happened is that he has become identified overwhelmingly with a particular caste.

This is a caste which, during his lifetime, was deemed untouchable and is now treated largely as an OBC caste because, thanks to his teachings, they became well educated, more prosperous, and more active in trade.

They are no longer treated the way they were in his lifetime.

He said, “Officially, I have no religion.” In fact, when the census officials came to him during the 1921 Census and asked him to state his religion and caste, he replied, “Write human.” They said, “Sorry, sir, these are the options we have been given.

Please tell us your caste.” He simply repeated, “Human.” To this day, he remains the only person in the Indian Census listed as “Human.” As you said, he declared that he had no religion because he was simply human.

But on the other hand, he is known for his famous declaration: “One caste, one religion, one God for humanity.” What is your take on this?Some people might interpret it in a very parochial manner.

What he was really trying to say was that we are all the same.

In fact, he goes back to the Advaitic Vedantic tradition, which basically says all of us are fragments of the same Atman, the same soul.

That is the idea – that we are all the same.

It doesn’t matter what your caste....