Hinduism is not a monolithic religion. It is formed over
many ages, under various religious influences from
countries around the world, forming several syncretic
layers.
Like any other religion, there is a spectrum of
theologies – in this case ranging from atheistic to
monotheistic. Some define it to include all religions as
part of Hinduism. This is therefore a continuation of the
Gnostic religions of old with its immense ability to
syncretize.
There is an asymptotic discontinuity between Vedic and
Upanishadic religions. Vedic religion is ritualistic with
33 nature gods.
As opposed to the Vedic religion,
Modern Hinduism is defined as a Theistic religion with
Monotheistic Trinitarian content allowing for an infinite
number of lesser gods. In this chapter, we look at some of
the definitions of Hinduism to identify the core beliefs.
One of the basic problems in discussing Hinduism is that no body knows
what it is. It is different for each person. It is not a unified system but a
collection of systems, which are so different that one contradicts the
other at some point.
All systems of Hindu philosophy are based on the experiences of sages
of ancient India. Since each one of them had their own unique
experience, each developed a different system. Because of this, it is
difficult to discuss Hinduism coherently, until we define what we mean
by the term. It is easy for the Hindu to slip away from the evil that is
hidden within by saying that it is not part of Hinduism as he practices.
By dissociating anything that is opposed by the critic, one can distill the
religion and isolate an idealistic part. At the same time, it can permit and
assist errors and evil when it profits the person. Everything can be
explained away. Anything can be justified under Hinduism. It is
anything and everything one wants it to be.
Hence, we are going to look at Hinduism at varying levels.
At the intellectual level, it is only a philosophy. It is entirely based on
intellectual enquiry and not based on God experience.
On the mystic level - on the other hand - it is based only on subjective
spiritual and mystical experience of people.
On the practical level, Hinduism is very different. It is not based on any
historically verifiable revelation of God. Thus, objective verification of
claims is out of place. On the practical level, it can be anything from
black magic, witchcraft to erotic orgy on one side, to bhakthi and
submission and asceticism on the other.
All systems of Indian philosophy have for their ultimate goal, the
spiritual freedom or Moksha, which terminates all sorrows and sufferings
and endows a state of enduring bliss. Nevertheless, this is only on the
ultimate level, which is not always discussed at the mundane level. At
this level, Hinduism reduces to a means of attaining temporal ends. For
this purpose, temporal lower gods are created and worshipped. These
temporal gains cover up and hide away the ultimate mukthi.
The ultimate bliss is defined differently by different system. To some it
is ceasing to exist - equivalent to total annihilation. Then we will not
have sorrow or sickness, but we will not have joy or happiness also. For
others it is not really annihilation, but being one with God (if God is a
distinct reality - dualism), or being really who you really is (if you are
really the only reality and God – monism) or never to fall into the
trappings of life. For others it is a conscious inactivity.
If you talk to a common Hindu, his visions are different. He is still
thinking of life where there are no problems i.e. a continuation of life
with joy and happiness. There are six Darsanas viz. Nyaya, Vaiseshika,
Sankhya, Yoga, Purva Mimamsa and Vedanta. We do not hear much
about any other today than Vedanta. This is because this is currently the
hot export item. The Hindu Maharishies extensively export this with
various flavors. If one reads their brands, we will never recognize any
similarity. This is not accidental because that is the very essence of
Hinduism - whether it is good or bad.
What is Hinduism Really?
Hinduism is often said to be one of the oldest religions of the world. It is
definitely the oldest among the living religions. How old is it? How old
is that religion which is any religion?
Is Hinduism a Religion?
Truly speaking, when we talk of Hinduism, we do not know whether we
are talking about a religion, or a group of religions, or a group of beliefs
and traditions (some of which are diametrically opposed to each other.)
This some times give rise to the argument that Hinduism cannot be
considered as a religion in the strictest sense of the word. It is only a
corporation that incorporates into itself many religious thoughts and
worldviews.
What do we mean by the word "Hindu" and "Hinduism"?
Various origins for the word "Hinduism" have been suggested:
It may be derived from an ancient inscription translated as: "The country
lying between the Himalayan mountain and Bindu Sarovara is known as
Hindustan by combination of the first letter 'hi' of 'Himalaya' and the last
compound letter 'ndu' of the word `Bindu.'" (Bindu Sarovara is called the
Cape Comorin Sea in modern times.)
It may be a Persian corruption of the word Sindhu (the river Indus)
In all these cases, it referred to a geographical region and not to a
religion. This is simply because there never had been a single unified
religion in India. In spite of all the claims of Sanadhana Dharma and
eternal religion, there never existed such a religion. Look what major
Hindu scholars state. These are collected from well-known Hindu
Religious sites.
“Hinduism differs from other organized religions in the following
aspects:
•
•
•
•
•
•
It is not based upon a particular founder.
It is not based upon a particular book.
It is not controlled by a central institution or authority such as a
church or a sangha or association.
It is not averse to examine and assimilate fundamentally diverse
thoughts and beliefs into its system.
It accepts other religions as various paths to salvation and does
not favor organized attempts to proselytize people.
It has been evolving continuously, through internal reforms and
as a reaction to the threats and challenges from within and
without.”
http://dharma.hindujagran.com/dharma.htm
Since it has no authority in any form of person, documentation, or
institution it simply means that anything can form part of this religion. In
fact, this has been what was going on in history. Yet persons have been
brought in as authority and Vedas and other forms of documentations are
always quoted as proof. Like any other religion each group of
interpretation form their own niche of institutions and as time goes on,
they are being multiplied. They quote documents such as Vedas and
Upanishads and Puranas as though they are scriptures. A scripture has
validity only in so far it has the backing of an absolute authority, which
Hinduism on the outset refutes. Therefore, it will not be surprising that
various proponents give various definitions of Hinduism to suite their
thinking pattern.
If Hinduism is a religion of no scripture, no authority, and no
institution, what then is it?
It has even been suggested that the word Hinduism was invented by the
British administration in India during colonial times. However, the
description of Hindava Samskara (Indian Civilization) had been in
existence long before the British. Then it did not refer to a religion. It
referred to the Civilization or mode of living. Hinduism as a name of the
religion was actually invented by the British to refer to all Indian
religions with all its diversities. In their ignorance or for convenience
they simply dumped all Indian religions together as Hinduism. As you
will notice from what we discuss below, there is no such religion called
Hinduism. However because the British treated all Indian religions as
Hinduism, it created a common front in spite of their opposing
theologies. To the British, even Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism were
part of Hinduism. They were in fact the result of intense opposition to
the Brahminic and Aryan Religions. It was the 250 years of British rule
that produce the amorphous religion of Hinduism. The resultant
education even brainwashed the Indians. 250 years saw eight generations
go by, who were totally brainwashed into thinking they were part of a
religion called Hinduism (which really meant ‘of India’). This was given
acceleration under theosophy, which was an attempt to form a syncretic
universal religious form. Theosophy transplanted itself from New York,
America (1875) to Adyar, Madras (1878). In the Indian Independence
Movement, this unification of religion became very important. Annie
Beasant and Gandhi used this as a powerful tool to integrate all India
under a pseudo-religion. Gandhi even tried to incorporate Islam and
Christianity into it. (This is what embittered the rest of the Aryan
religions and eventually ended in his assassination.) The assimilation of
Dravidian (Some people do think that Dravidians are Semitic in origin)
and other religions into Aryan Religion was a worthwhile move.
However, Islam and Christianity posed a threat to the conquest. Thus,
what is known today, as Hinduism is a product of the twentieth century.
(Christianity is Semitic in origin. However, it was totally uprooted from
its native atmosphere into the Aryan atmosphere. This took place in a
different country in a different cultural context. This is what produced
the anti-Semitic branches in Christianity. I am told that there is a group
who hold that Christ himself was an Aryan - white man!)
"Hinduism as a faith is vague,
amorphous, many sided, all things to
all men. It is hardly possible to
define it, or indeed to say definitely
whether it is a religion or not, in the
usual sense of the word, in its
present form, and even in the past, it
embraces
many
beliefs
and
practices, from the highest to the
lowest, often opposed to or
contradicting each other."
Jawaharlal Nehru, `The Discovery of India', John Day, 1946, p.66.
"Hinduism as defined in contemporary parlance is a collation of beliefs,
rites and practices consciously selected from those of the past,
interpreted in contemporary idiom in last couple of centuries and the
selection conditioned by historical circumstances ... in a strict sense, a
reference to `Hinduism' would require a more precise definition of the
particular variety referred to Brahmanism, Brahmo-Samaj, Arya Samaj,
Saiva Siddhanta, Bhakti, Tantricism or whatever."
Today’s Hinduism is continuation of contradicting traditions:
“May noble thoughts come to us from every direction.” Rg Veda
Ability to absorb noble thoughts as well as ignoble thoughts - ideas that
make sense and some that do not make sense - and produce a web of
intricacy was one of the greatest strengths of Hinduism of this century.
Syncretism is its strength. Ability to use these to the benefit of the few in
the dominant class was its curse. This is inevitable in a fallen society
where an eternal class war is ever present. Where "Self" is all there is,
and where "I am God”, there cannot be another way. This embedded
class war is expressed in their concrete form in war between families,
tribes and nations. It has a double edge that cuts both ways. So Bhagawat
Gita with its sublime teachings of ways of salvation is placed in a
context which essentially teaches that "Killing is OK, if the opponent is
usurping what you think is yours" While Ahimsa is the catchword of
modern Hinduism, killing ones own brothers is made sacred in Bhagawat
Gita. Only the most exquisite religion like Hinduism alone can achieve
that. How one can be blinded by the lofty philosophy to hoodwink at this
abject fallacy I still cannot fathom. Even if the whole Mahabharata is an
Aryan tale, its teaching cannot be read otherwise.
We cannot therefore define Hinduism in any structured way. It is not one
monolithic tree whose roots branches and spread throughout below. It is
rather a forest filled with a million trees each having its own branches
and roots and is still growing - both in number of trees and in their
branches! The branches are the various new schools of thought and
practices that were incorporated into it during the subsequent periods in
history. It would be presumptuous to define that the trunk is belief in the
eternal nature of soul and of supreme God because there are other trees
in that forest, which are atheistic and deny even the existence of any
God. Nevertheless, in defining Hinduism, most theistic Hindus assume
God or gods in some way, but none agreeing with each other. It is
important to understand that the great ninth avatar of the Hindu God -
Buddha (or was he?) - himself denied the existence of God. Was this
avatar ignorant of what he really was? Hinduism became more or less
like an ocean that would absorb every thing that flowed into it from all
directions. These numerous streams brought in a rich variety of minerals.
Thus, the modern Hinduism is never static. It evolved continuously from
stage to stage; society to society; and went on transforming itself
continuously. This was due to the contribution by many scholars, seers,
sages, institutions, kings and emperors, priests, prophets, rebels,
interpreters, and commoners over a vast period of time. Evidently,
reason or sanctity did not always lead it (because sanctity cannot be
defined independent of an unchanging God). Mostly it was evolved by
the dominant class of each period. By interpreting, deviating, changing,
correcting, molding, manipulating, modifying, and integrating various
aspects of religion and even god, to suit the social, political, material,
intellectual context of the time, these men - great, some saintly, but often
scheming and cunning Chanakyas - built up a formidable system. This
conclusion is unavoidable. History bears witness to this conclusion.
Very ordinary people living in remote villages, the working classes, the
illiterate peasants and laborers also contributed to the development of
Hinduism as much as elite and intellectual upper castes. They developed
elaborate myths demi-gods, spirits, plants, snakes, lakes, rivers,
introduced rituals, and festivals. They too formed part of the society and
heritage and they slowly became integrated into Hinduism. In fact, even
today in every village they have their own village gods, which are
unfamiliar to those outside. Hindu elite used these myths and legends to
their advantage and built over it an elegant imposing structure.
In all these evolutionary process there is no doubt about who triggers and
guide the process. It has always been guided by the dominant class in
order to subjugate the others. It is the Aryans - the Noble Ones - who
always win. Now they can even claim the ancient Indus valley
civilizations even as their own! The British ignorance suited the
dominant class and they evolved a religion out of it.
Please. Let us not forget that in a forest there are lots more beautiful trees
than the tallest ones.
