[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: ARTICLE : Becoming Hindu

GDurgadas <gdurgadas@aol.com> wrote in article
<ghenDyzxz0.DDG@netcom.com>...

> As a convert to the Sanatana Dharma, I've heard and read so many
> conflicting opinions as to what constitutes a Hindu, or one can or can
not
> become one that I take them all with a grain of salt.  

There will never any agreement as to what constitutes a Hindu as Hinduism
itself doesn't exist except in the most abstract of senses.  When I for
instance use the word it is purely as a matter of convenience.  I do not
identify myself as a Hindu in any sense.

>I honestly think
> that the world religion which is Hinduism is coming to an important fork
> in its exspansion westward.  That is, it's becoming a truly world
> religion, expanding to include non South Asians in its embrace, and
> steadily losing its nationalistic identifi-
> cations with India.  

What you are describing is a real process but you completely misunderstand
its implications.  All religions have faced a jarring head on collision
with modernity over the past couple of centuries.  As a defensive reaction
some adopted a universalistic worldview.  I say as a defensive reaction
because the truly universalist abandoned religion, nationalism and all
other parochial identifications.  However this religious universalism is
untenable in the light of the actual history and tradition of the religions
of the world.  So what actually happened was at the same time as they were
expanding the grasp of their religions they ended up diluting and weakening
them.  The religions which for want of a better word are known as Hinduism
went through the same process.  (See my comments on Ramakrishna below.)

>It's similar to the process Christianity underwent
> when it broadened its peremeters beyond the originally Jewish adherents
> (and thus its identification as an exclusively Jewish sect connected with
> Israel/Pales-
> tine) to include "gentiles".  

Here also you've got the facts wrong.  Judaism during the early Christian
era had already expanded far beyond Israel.  The Greek translation of the
Jewish scriptures which were used as the basis for the Christian version
were edited in Egypt.  The Talmud which is the central scripture of Judaism
today was compile in Babylonia.  In fact prior to its adoption as the
official religion of the Roman Empire, the _only_ way Christianity was able
to spread was amongst the International network of Jewish communities.  And
how did Christianity react to this almost completely Jewish heritage?  By
attempting to destroy it.  I hope this is not what my religion has to look
forward to from its so-called reformers.


>For Hinduism the process seems to have
> started late in the 19th century with Rama-
> krishna's disciples, and picked up steam with the 60's.  

Of the various movements that rose up during the 60's claiming to represent
"authentic" Hinduism the only one that's had much success in surviving is
the resolutely non-modern ISKCON.  And that has more to do with its
Indian-American followers than the hippies.

Let's take a look at the Ramakrishna mission and it's fellow travellers.
They are a perfect example of the scenario I'm describing.  It was founded
during the colonial era and gained it's major following amongst the
servants of the British Empire.  This class of people were conscious of
their inferior position yet at the same time felt guilty for departing from
tradition.  They had to resolve this contradiction by trying to prove their
religion was as "enlightened" as their White master's.  Thus you see the
major event in RK mythology is Vivekanands address to the World Parliament
of Religions.  Apparently this was a big deal but I don't know any
Westerner who has even heard of this event.  

Neither Ramakrishna nor Vivekanand were particularly learned but far from
being a liability, this was their chief attraction to their followers.  Far
from being ambassadors of classical Indian culture this group is nothing
more than a fig leaf for people who are assimilating out of their culture. 
(At least in America.  In India Vivekanand has become the figurehead of the
Hindu nationalists.  Hardly a shining example of universalism.)

What does this mean for someone who is converting.  Do the RK mission and
other universalist groups tell converts the truth about what they're
getting into?  As you can see I don't have a very high opinion of such
groups.  What attitude should I have towards their converts?

>I know of quite a
> few Brahmanas who are already giving namadiksha to nonIndians so they can
> officially enter the religion, complete with name-change and all

I don't know if you were around then but a little while ago there was some
discussion of these "official" conversions.  Suffice it to say outside
whatever little sect issued it, these conversions are officially worthless.

-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas [jaldhar@braincells.com]  o-   beable      .-_|\
Consolidated Braincells Inc.                              /     \
http://www.braincells.com/jaldhar/          Perth Amboy-> *.--._/
"Witty quote" - Dead Guy      finger me for PGP key            v  McQ!
Advertise with us!
This site is part of Dharma Universe LLC websites.
Copyrighted 2009-2015, Dharma Universe.