By
Clinton Bennett, PhD
Tolerance built into Hindu worldview. Many deities (330 million) , margas (ways)
Deities have multiple manifestations
Tends to assimilate/accommodate.
Hindus with little in common recognize others as Hindu (although some rivalry existed between Shaivite and Vaisnavite traditions).
'It is possible to find groups of Hindus whose respective faiths has almost nothing in common one with another, and it is also impossible to any universal belief or practice that is common to all Hindus. Confronted with such diversity, what is it that makes Hinduism a single religious tradition, and not a loose confederation of many traditions? The common Indian origin, the historical continuity, the sense of a shared heritage and a family relationship between the different parts, all these are certainly Important factors. &? Crucial, however, is that fact that Hindus affirm it is one single religion' (Weightman, p 192 I Hinnells, A New Handbook of Living Religion, Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1998)
Hinduism has beeb described as a sponge.
Buddhism is often regarded by Hindus as an alternative within Hinduism (Buddha is an
Avatara of Vishnu.Buddhists may not appreciate this!
Similarly, Sikhism and Jainism are regarded by some Hindus as forms of Hinduism.
This "inclusivism" may seem to deny the authenticity of Jain/Buddhist identity.
Christian missionaries find that Hindus respect/ revere Jesus but as one of many expressions of God/as an avatar of Vishnu.
Swaminarayam Temple, London: first section of Exhibition says:
"Hinduism is the most tolerant, resilient and peace loving of all religions"
Positive: history of co-existence; Guru Nanak, Buddha, Jesus Christ, are respected. Many Gurus have had Muslim disciples; likewise Sufi (Muslim) Pirs attract Hindus and their shrines are visited by people of all faiths.
Many examples of peaceful co-existence. Yet in 1947, Indian was sub-divided into Hindu majority and Muslim majority areas because of conflict and rivalry between these two communities. Was this inevitable, or a result of the British divide and rule policy that created separate constituencies, encouraged communitarian identities so that Britian could be seen to protect minorities? Were we not here, they said, Muslim and Hindus will murder each other! The British also argued that India had never been a single nation anyway!
Two nineteenth century "schools"
One. UNIVERSALIST. Ramakrishna (1836 - 1886) and Vivekananda (1863 - 1902). Saw Hinduism as one of many paths - alongside others/though West is spiritually inferior, India needs West's technology not its religion. Active in the West. Vedanta
Scientific, based on eternal ‘principles’, not a person. Religions equal but Vedanta the best ‘interpreter’. Vikenananda was in USA 1893 - 1895, founding the Vedanta Society in NY then the Ramakrishna Mission in India which runs humanitarian programs. Revered the Mother (Kali) as the highest expression of the Ultimate but also respected Christ.
Two: nationalist/exclusive
Dayananda Sawaswati (1824 - 1883)
Founder of Arya Samaj
- Vedas only true scriptures
Launched program of re-conversion.
Sikh’s responded: Singh Sabha (1873)
MAHATMA GANDHI, while respecting Islam and Christ, hated conversion as a betrayal of identity; "it is the deadliest poison which ever sapped the fountain of truth. If I had power and could legislate, I should certainly stop all proselytizing".
Post 1947, some States tried to outlaw "conversion".
Hindu Fundamentalism (need to critique the use of this term)
India as HINDUTVA (Hindu homeland)
Vehemently anti-Christian and Muslim - regarded as foreign and politically suspect.
RSS (Rastriya SvayamSevak Sangh - cultural Organization (almost para-military).
Attack on Babri Masjid at Ayodhia (1992).
BJP (present govt) Bharatiya Janata Party (1980)
Plus some regional parties eg Shiv Sena (1966) (Mumbai) under Bal Thakkeray (see character of Ramon Fielding in Rushdie The Moors Last Sigh (London, Vintage, 1996)
The right tends to depict Ram as the "hero"/ Ramayana as the national epic.
Rushdie writes: For a nation of seven hundred millions to make any kind of sense, it must base itself firmly on the concept of multiplicity, of pluralityand tolerance, of devolution and decentralization wherever possible. There can only be oneway - religious, cultural, or linguistic - of being an Indian; let difference reign (Imaginary Homeland, Granta, 1991 p 44).
And
Point one: in a religion with a thousand and one Gods they suddenly decide only one chap matters. Then what about Calcutta, where they don go for Ram? And Shiva Temples are no longer suitable places of worship? … Point two: Hinduism has many holy books, not one, but suddenly it is all Ramayana. Then what is theGita? Where are all the Puranas? How dare they twist everything in this way … for Hindus there is no requirement for … mass puja … suddenly … that is … the only way to show true, class A devotion (The Moor's Last Sigh, 1996 p 338)
As Richard King argues in Orientalism and Religion ( click here for review of King's book) both modern expressions of Hinduism have, in different ways, reacted to/borrowed from, India's encounter with the West. King argues that the concept of a 'world religion' is a Western one and that scholars, to some extent, 'created' Hinduism in the nineteenth century.
© 2000 Clinton Bennett