The Dual Nature of Hinduism - Research Paper Example

The Dual Nature of Hinduism Mahatma Gandhi once wrote that the true meaning of Hinduism is not to be found in any narrowly defined, well-practiced religious doctrine. Hinduism, Gandhi emphasized, is far too complex, culturally diverse and religiously amorphous for that. “If I were to define the Hindu creed, I would simply say, a search after truth through nonviolent means. A man may not believe in God and still call himself a Hindu…Denial of God we have known, denial of truth we have not known” (Fischer, 144). Gandhi, with his disarming simplicity, summed up in a few words what so many members of other faith traditions have failed to grasp: Hinduism is more a socio-cultural phenomenon than a hierarchical religious orthodoxy governed by a regulatory, ecclesiastical body. As such, Hinduism is more directly influential in the social life of its adherents than in its liturgical observances. There is probably no more pertinent example of Hinduism’s singular nature than its well-known caste system. The four levels of Indian society, which have their origins in ancient Vedic literature, have often been regarded as a written manifestation of the enforced stratification of Indian society by the Aryans, the theocratic invaders whose military prowess enabled them to conquer the subcontinent about 1500 B.C. “One fourth of the Supreme Being constitutes all beings, while three fourths of Him are immortal and stand above. With the one-fourth (He) extended on all sides into the animate and the inanimate…His face became the Brahmin. His arms were made into the Kshatriya. His thighs became the Vaisya. From his feet the Sudra was born” (Rig Veda, 90). Historians generally concur that the strict social regimentation described in the Vedas was not actually created or introduced by the Aryan invaders but had existed in a somewhat less formal version prior to the conquest. Hinduism as we know it today, with its concepts of karma and samsara, grew up against this socio-cultural backdrop, with which it was suffused and which it in turn influenced. Social norms and the means whereby they are passed on are pervasive and give form to the Hindu caste system. Each caste, or varna, is sub-divided into jatis, which divide each varna into specific occupations. Social interaction among the jatis of a particular caste is regulated “through an elaborate ritual system,” which governs social behavior (Deshpande, 2010). The Vedic texts offer a rationale for classifications and rituals, “rules that are laid down concerning appropriate occupational pursuit, appropriate behavior within and between castes, as well as rules related to marriage” (2010). The fact that Hindu religious beliefs provide rationalization for the detailed ordering of society emphasizes the “society first, religion second” nature of Hinduism. Central to this belief system is reincarnation, in which the soul is reborn into circumstances that are based on the relative virtue of its previous life. Social mobility during one’s life is impossible. Reincarnation plays a mitigating social role in that its promise of a better life after death through social responsibility and virtuous behavior encourages the tacit acceptance of one’s caste. In Classifying the Universe: the Ancient Indian Varna System and the Origins of Caste, Brian Smith writes it is no accident that Hinduism is so closely associated with the caste system. Modern Hinduism is as “as much of a social system as a religion…Its social framework has from very early times been the caste system…” (Smith, 9). Rituals aimed at preserving social norms, such as sati, in which a widow is burned to death on her husband’s funeral pyre, and arranged marriage are manifestations of an ages-old orientation toward social conservatism, of which caste itself is the defining institution. Marriage has traditionally been a social compact between a male and female from the same caste, and usually from the same jati. Marriage has typically implied the woman’s complete subjugation to the man, though in recent years this situation has been relaxed as social pressures have forced the illegalization of formalized sati and afforded women a more equitable role within marriage. The 20th century saw gradual change within the social order, the Sudra jatis, for example, having won new freedoms during the last century (Sarkar and Sarkar, 108). As well, transgressions against the caste system have, in some cases, been treated with greater leniency and dealt with on an ad hoc basis. And yet the core convictions and overall composition of Hindu society have remained solidly intact. “The system, in other words, made piecemeal adjustments, but lacked the capacity to cushion and absorb the shock of any sudden or radical organizational reform” because the caste system acts as a “massive chain” that must “exist in its entirety” in order to function (108). Hinduism provides the moral basis by which this social-cultural-religious continuum remains bound together. The seamlessness of Hinduism, which transcends Western notions of society and religion, confounded colonial authorities throughout the roughly 200 years of British dominance in India. This likely has much to do with the fact that Hinduism is not a religious tradition the origins of which can be ascribed to an individual, or figurehead, as do Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and others. In fact, the name itself has from its beginnings had a far broader meaning than that of other faith traditions. “The term started life as basically a cultural expression, referring to the way or ways of life of a culturally unified and geographically designated people, in which ‘religious’ phenomena of course were included” (Lipner, 2005). As well, “Hindu” and “Hinduism” are terms that have different meanings based on the particular perspective (and understanding) of insider and outsider. Lipner points out that Hinduism has often had “negative or neutral” connotations for outsiders, though this is because of the deeper social, not religious, meaning attached to them. For indigenous Indian peoples, it describes a cultural system, first and foremost (2005). It is a curious matter and fully in keeping with the great mystery of Hinduism that it is such an anomalous institution. Indeed, one way in which India has remained enigmatic and largely indefinable is because of its anomaly, in the difficulty one has determining just where socio-cultural tradition ends and religion begins. Just when one feels confident in saying that the intricacies and overlapping layers of deities and rituals that characterize Hinduism are simply part of a tradition begun by an ancient invading force bent on controlling the natives, one is reminded of the truly rich and enduring tapestry of religious expression that the term “Hinduism” also implies. And yet there is no avoiding the social ordering and stability that Hinduism and its rigid caste system has historically provided, despite what we today would consider its inequities and general restrictions on social mobility. If there is wisdom to the vagueness inherent in the practical meaning of Hinduism, it lies in its resistance to strict definition and its emphasis on truth and non-violence. Hinduism, as Gandhi mentioned, is less concerned with a rigid concept of God than with seeking truth. Yet Hindus have often come into violent conflict with their Indian Muslim brethren over politics and the drawing of borders, temporal matters that have little to do with religion. The history of organized religion is rife with examples of the negative consequences that stem from the assignation of one-dimensional definitions, which have all but forced religious traditions into violent conflict. Flexible though Hinduism is in terms of religious practice and worship, its primacy as a socio-cultural force in the lives of Indians always seems to trump other aspects of native life. Thus, the caste system pre-determines that Hinduism as a religious system comprises only a part of the overall picture. This may account for some of the confusion outsiders experience in trying to understand a religion with hundreds of deities and countless variations of religious ritual. It can be a confusing, albeit fascinating, network of major and minor gods and goddesses to absorb, though a specific knowledge of each is considerably less important than the sum total effect of the entire pantheon. Each god or goddess may be seen as “supreme centers in one particular stem system or other of the Hindu banyan…The entire far-flung system functions in that it is a theologically unified network of textual, metaphysical, mythological, ritual, and social centripetal and centrifugal forces” (Lipner, 2005). In other words, the entire patchwork operates more as a “polymorphic monotheism” than a polytheistic system of belief (2005). For the monotheist, this chaotic jumble can make it difficult to relate to Hinduism in terms of ultimate spiritual goals (such as salvation). Today, it is illegal to discriminate based on caste in India, yet many elements of the caste system still prevail. It remains “a means for competing for access to resources and power in modern India, such as educational opportunities, new occupations, and improvement in life chances” (Deshpande, 2010). In many ways, modern India resembles early-20th-century America, where African-Americans were technically enfranchised, yet still faced discrimination in many phases of life. India’s lower castes today are represented in elected office, in government jobs and in the educational system (2010). However, members of the upper castes in many parts of India remain hostile to this integration. In some places, such as Bihar, caste violence has occurred. Hindus may claim to pursue truth through their religion, but the socio-cultural primacy of Hinduism remains in place. It is still true that nowhere are religion and social hierarchy more intertwined than in India. In that society, religion has for centuries been used to maintain social stratification, a remnant of India’s ancient past. “Hinduism was the backbone of the purity-pollution complex, and it was the religion that influenced the daily lives and beliefs of the Indian people” (Deshpande, 2010). In many ways, it still serves this mitigating social function, though the lives and professional prospects of the lower castes, and women, have improved in recent times. Nevertheless, religion remains an instrument of social conservatism, even after the country’s independence from British colonial rule and a move toward modernization. It is an undeniable fact that “Even after sixty-three years of independence, Indians continue to be in the grip of caste consciousness” (2010). Works Cited Deshpande, Manali S. “History of the Indian Caste System and its Impact on India Today.” California Polytechnic State University. Fall, 2010. Fischer, Louis. The Life of Mahatma Gandhi, New York, N.Y: Harper Collins, 1950. Lipner, Julius J. “The Rise of ‘Hinduism;’ or, How to Invent a World Religion With Only Moderate Success.” Lecture. James Madison University, 13 October, 2005. Rig Veda, Book X. Forgotten Books, 2008. Retrieved July 21, 2012 from http://www.books.google.com. Sarkar, Sumit and Sarkar, Tanika. Women and Social Reform in Modern India: A Reader. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ. Press, 2008. Smith, Brian K. Classifying the Universe: the Ancient Indian Varna System and Origins of Caste, New York, N.Y: Oxford UP, 1994. Read More