[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Hinduism is surely not a nationality
In article <4af9rv$lnt@babbage.ece.uc.edu> vijaypai@rice.edu (Vijay Sadananda Pai) writes:
>For the purposes of this article, I'll assume the broadest part of
>the definition of Hindu given by the Indian Supreme Court. Of course,
>the definition they give as a whole is inconsistent (as Shrisha Rao
>pointed out on SRV; one part excludes Maadhvas and another part
>implies only Maadhvas, so therefore there are no Hindus, according to
>the SC), but we'll let that slide. I'm still looking for a good
>definition of Hindu as a religious term; until then, I'll be
>satisfied with what the Maharastra CM reportedly said -- Anyone living
>in
>Hindustan and willing to die for the country is a Hindu. All the rest
>are traitors. -- which of course makes all us Indians abroad
>traitors. Anyway....
...An interesting thought at the end (about diasporic Indians being
'traitors') -- which I read as problematizing the connection between religious
identity and uncritical loyalty to a nation-state.
What about the freedom to choose what one is designated as? Here in the
U.S. our identities are often more fluid -- we can choose to be defined as
Indian, Indian-American, American, agnostic, Hindu (but simultaneously taking
nothing of the spirituality to heart). And one can accordingly find a niche
within American society to play out these roles. Indians in India are not
afforded so much self-determination. The identities and roles are reinforced
by communal rivalvies & appeals to conformity (here I could cites
socio-political phenomena in Hindu, Christian, Muslim, Sikh communities). To
the extent that individuals in these groups free themselves of the constraints
of this samsara and its contingencies, they become more liberated, able to
create a positive destiny without control from larger more impersonal
currents. i know i'm rambling...
But really, conflating religion with national identity is really wrong.
It is bound to repress freedom of thought & lifestyle. Would people agree
that few Indian immigrants to the U.S. are willing to die for this country?
Does that make this constituency of Americans inherently traitors, or bad
citizens. If a person like Martin Luther King resisted a draft for the
'defense' (as the central government defines it) of the country because of his
principles & alternative propositions for conflict resolution, is he then a
traitor? i hope i'm doing justice to the implications of such statements
about what it means to be Hindu.
Overall, national identity is so complicated. It would be wise to resist
any attempt (by the CM's or otherwise) to reduce nationality into simple
(perhaps self-serving) formulas.
What are your thoughts?
Peace,
sunil
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Moderator: Ajay Shah Submissions: srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu
Administrivia: srh-request@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu
Archives: http://rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu:8080/soc_hindu_home.html
References:
