Inaccurate and confusing view of Hinduism being spread by Shashi Tharoor: "There are simply no binding requirements to being a Hindu, not even a belief in God."
Last updated on 15-Sep-2018
This post is based on an exchange I had on this Facebook post & comment thread of Dr. Shashi Tharoor, https://www.facebook.com/ShashiTharoor/videos/617885205272899/?comment_id=617999435261476&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R4%22%7D. Note that the thread has a comment of mine as the starter comment. This starter comment of mine is provided in my recent post: My comment on Dr. Shashi Tharoor's 'Why I am a Hindu' short promotional video, http://ravisiyer.blogspot.com/2018/09/my-comment-on-dr-shashi-tharoors-why-i.html.
On this comment thread in Dr. Tharoor's FB post, a person commented (I paraphrase) that Hinduism has widely varying and even contradictory thoughts. That (in Hinduism is implied) "One can be an atheist while the other follows religious books and believes in the divine." And that Shashi Tharoor is celebrating this freedom for contradiction in Hinduism while I (Ravi S. Iyer) am talking about others who follow Hindu books and follow a particular system.
I (Ravi S. Iyer) responded as follows (slightly edited):
I think many other religions including Christianity have many sects with widely varying views and even contradictory views on key aspects of their religious doctrine and practice. E.g. Large variety of Protestants and Roman Catholic Christians. Note that even the Mormons - The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormons, who consider Joseph Smith as the prophet of their sect, view themselves as Christians.
I don't think an atheist i.e. a person who does not believe in the divine/God, can be viewed as a Hindu. The person may be somebody who follows Hindu rituals including the act of visiting a temple and appearing to pray to the deity there, but without belief in God. Mind you, having some doubts and lack of understanding of these rituals is a different matter from saying that one does not believe in God. Belief in God is the very basis of Hindu rituals.
I think it is inappropriate to view persons who follow Hindu rituals but without belief in God, as Hindu. They are closet atheists who are putting on an appearance of being a Hindu for reasons like having Hindu community support or not displeasing their relatives. The accurate category for such persons is atheists. And I fully support the right for people in India to be atheists. Freedom of religion in India includes freedom to have no religion/no faith in God.
Let me give the exact words of Dr. Tharoor from this video, relevant to this discussion: "There are simply no binding requirements to being a Hindu, not even a belief in God."
Tharoor also refers to this part of the Nasadiya Sukta of the Rig Veda, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasadiya_Sukta :
"Whence all creation had its origin,
the creator, whether she/he fashioned it or whether she/he did not,
the creator, who surveys it all from highest heaven,
she/he knows - or maybe even she/he does not know." [11]
—Translated by A. L. Basham
...
Ref. 11. Avinash Sathaye, Translation of Nasadiya Sukta
--- end wiki extract ---
Let's examine a hypothetical statement that Christianity includes lack of belief in Christ's divinity, and specifically his divine resurrection (or reappearance). Note that there are many schools of Christianity ranging from Middle Eastern sects which seem to follow practices rooted in ancient Christianity to the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and a large variety of Protestant faiths especially in the USA. As a comparison to what I consider is the inaccurate and confusing view that Dr. Tharoor is propagating that Hinduism includes atheism and is quoting part of the Nasadiya Sukta of the Rig Veda in that context, I would like to quote the New Testament verses related to Saint Thomas the apostle.
John 20:24-29, Source: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2020%3A24-29&version=NIV
24 Now Thomas (also known as Didymus[a]), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came.
25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!”
But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”
27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”
28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
--- end John 20:24-29 extracts ---
The resurrection (or reappearance among the apostles and followers) of Lord Jesus Christ is a fundamental belief of the Christian faith. Is it not?
Thomas doubted it and the related verses are part of the New Testament! So then can one say that because Thomas doubting the resurrection/reappearance of Lord Jesus Christ is included in the New Testament, the Christian religion includes all people who doubt the resurrection/reappearence of Jesus Christ? I don't think so.
Similarly, just because there is one shloka (verse) or perhaps there are a few more on these lines, in the vast body of verses that comprise the Vedas, that doubts the omniscience of God/Divine power (e.g. Nasadiya sukta, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasadiya_Sukta, partially quoted by Dr. Tharoor in the video), jumping to a conclusion that Hinduism includes atheists and promotes atheism is a wrong conclusion, in my view. Note that the Nasadiya Sukta has the verse (English translation): "There was that One then, and there was no other." That reference to the One is to the Divine Power/God. So the Nasadiya Sukta does NOT propagate disbelief in God.
One has to look at the large body of the associated scripture and then arrive at a view about such scripture. I think the Vedas, Hindu Puranas and Ramayana as well as the New Testament are full of belief in Divine power, miracles, worship and adoration of God. I think no reasonable person who has read Hindu scripture or Christian scripture would say that these books include promotion of and support of atheism.
-----
===================================================================
Given below are comments from my Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/2285890538294177, associated with this blog post:
Alok Dara Shikoh wrote: Very well said sir.
----
Vr Ganti (who is based in Singapore) wrote (slightly edited): Ravi S. Iyer and all others.
Interesting observations. My view is very simple. In SINGAPORE many people claim to (be) FREE THINKERS meaning they don’t belong to any religion. These people may believe in GOD/DIVINE POWER. However, my view is that a person may not be an atheist throughout one’s life. Because of ignorance one may not believe in divine/God but eventually will not continue to be an atheist.
Such kind of persons must be in every religion ... I suppose.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote (slightly edited): Vr Ganti sir, Thanks for your views.
People can move from position of atheism to faith in God or from faith in God to atheism. They may also be in or go to positions in between as agnostics who don't know for sure and do not disbelieve in God but neither believe in God.
And then belief in God also is of various types. In Hinduism, some believe in a non-intervening witness God/Divine Power who/which is observing people's actions and doling out Karmic consequences, but does not respond to prayer and supernaturally intervene in people's lives. This type of Hindu believers in God/Divine Power specifically don't believe in miracles including any miracles attributed to figures like Krishna in Hindu scripture.
And then there are Hindus who believe that God/Divine Power not only is a witness (Sakshi) who/which is observing people's actions and doling out Karmic consequences, but also, at times, responds to prayer and supernaturally intervenes in people's lives. This type of Hindu believers in God/Divine Power specifically believe in miracles including miracles attributed to figures like Krishna in Hindu scripture. I am of this type of Hindu believer now but in my youth I was of the previously mentioned type of Hindu believer where I did not have belief in miracles.
Of course, I fully support the right of a person in India, Singapore and other countries providing freedom of religion, to publicly be an atheist. And like there are good Hindus and bad Hindus, there are good atheists and bad atheists. So I am respectful of atheists so long as they are good people. I know some atheists who are very good people and have contributed significantly to improving the lives of people in the world. I have great respect for such atheists because of the good that they have done.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In my comment thread on the above mentioned Facebook post: https://www.facebook.com/ShashiTharoor/videos/617885205272899/?comment_id=617999435261476&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R4%22%7D , I received a comment that the commenter likes my pattern of thought. He wrote that he liked Dr. Tharoor and that he is a well read intellectual. The commenter then wrote, "I doubt he believes in God or the existence thereof, he is a liberal elite and has to be politically correct for his global appeal especially in the West where public renunciation of God is revered." I (Ravi) wrote (slightly edited): Thanks for your response --Name-snipped--. I found your phrase, "the West where public renunciation of God is revered" to be interesting :-). But USA still has more believers than atheists and I don't think your phrase would apply :-), in many parts of USA. In some parts, however, they would apply, I guess.
----
I wrote:
I also like Dr. Shashi Tharoor. Further please note that I have a PUBLICLY POLITICALLY NEUTRAL role in these social media comments that I have put up. I am an Indian citizen and resident of India. I do vote in Indian elections but I keep who I vote for as a private matter. I should also say that I am a beneficiary, a lover and an open supporter of democracy in India. I do find that Dr. Shashi Tharoor, Member of Parliament, is an articulate defender of democracy in India and I commend Dr. Tharoor for this spirited defense of democracy in India.
----
In my Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/2285890538294177, associated with this blog post:
V V Sarachandran (based in Malaysia) wrote: Thank you Ravi Sir for including me in this thought evoking subject of probably what does it mean to a common person when he says ‘I am a Hindu’. You have chosen Sashi’s declaration as the backdrop😀
To me as a Hindu, growing up in a multi-religious and multi-cultural environment, one of the primary features of all my Hindu readings/ learning has been the appreciation of diversity. That all paths lead to a common summit though over different times and places and societies different names are used to refer to this common summit. In this context Hindu is most accepting and not grudgingly accommodating or tolerating. I can accept ST’s Atheists. I will not be judgmental about them and view them as eternally condemned to hell.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Thanks V V Sarachandran sir for your views. Of course, I am not saying anything bad about atheists and that they are going to hell! And I too accept atheists and have some atheist correspondents whom I respect very much for the good they do.
The point is whether you think that an atheist who follows some Hindu traditions but without any belief in God, can be accurately described as a Hindu. My view is that he cannot be described as Hindu and that the accurate description is atheist (without being judgemental about whether his atheism is good or bad).
----
V V Sarachandran wrote: My concern is as a Hindu we do not subscribe to any dogma as recorded anywhere that all Hindus can accept as fully authentic and more important - authoritative.
So if an atheist wants to call himself a Hindu so be it. No authority is recognized as having the authority to deny the atheist the right to claim he is Hindu if he so chooses🤔
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote (slightly edited): Thanks for your view V V Sarachandran sir.
Actually speaking, there are no ***universally*** accepted authorities even in Christianity and Islam, as they have many sects with some sects claiming other sects to be not Christians or not Muslims. E.g Ahmadiyya sect is not considered as Muslim by the main Islamic sects in Pakistan. The Mormons are not considred as Christians by some Christian sects in the USA.
The Pope is NOT the accepted authority for all Christian sects (in fact some Christian sects are very critical of the Pope). Likewise in Islam there is no single figure accepted worldwide by all Islamic sects as an authority.
But I don't think most Christian believers would accurately categorize an atheist as a Christian. Neither would most Muslim believers accurately categorize an atheist as a Muslim. Note that the issue is that of accurate categorization and not being judgemental about whether the person is good or bad.
Similary I as a Hindu believer do not categorize an atheist as a Hindu while not being judgemental about whether the atheist person is good or bad.
But it is interesting for me to note that you are fine with atheists (who may follow some Hindu traditions but without any belief in God) being called Hindus. Thanks for sharing your view which is different from mine.
----
Vr Ganti (based in Singapore) wrote (slightly edited): V V Sarachandran, Ravi S. Iyer
The point is if one does not believe in the Gods/Divine, can one be considered or claim to be a Hindu. Yes such person may be forced to perform the rituals as pronounced in HINDUISM. It is not that such person should be outcast and let us all agree that the concept of tolerance level probably is the highest in HINDUISM
----
V V Sarachandran wrote (edited): I always stand to be guided by persons of greater wisdom.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote (slightly edited): Vr Ganti, V V Sarachandran sirs, To me it seems that the issue is actually one of dilution and distortion of Hindu belief. However, I could be wrong.
Now I am not talking about outcast stuff at all. Just correct categorization.
Maybe I am missing out on some emotional issues here. As soon as I say that somebody who follows Hindu traditions but does not have belief in God should be categorized as an atheist who is putting on an appearance of being a Hindu, I see concerns being raised about outcastes and about being consigned to Hell. I never said that at all.
However, perhaps that's how the history of Hindu religion has been.
In my late twenties I myself had stopped wearing the sacred thread that was put on me through the Upanayanam ceremony in my teens. As a Brahmin boy I had assisted as the younger brother to my elder brother for the funeral rites of my father, and later I had done the funeral rites of my father's younger brother who did not have any children. But I lost faith in Brahminical rites (but not faith in Upanishads' formless God) sometime in my twenties, perhaps in my late twenties. So I stopped wearing the sacred thread for some time.
Later I faced some big life challenges which severely tested me. I turned to Bhakti (devotion) with Krishna as my Ishta Devata (favourite divine being/Avatar), for help. A few years later I came to know of Sathya Sai and then got into the Sathya Sai fold.
I then wanted to wear the sacred thread again. Especially after joining Sathya Sai fold, I started developing faith in Hindu rituals including Brahminical rituals. I asked one Vadhyar (Hindu priest who visits homes to conduct Hindu rituals) about what I should do. I was shocked when he said words that implied that I had gone out of my (Brahmin) community and now for returning to the community, I should undergo special rituals!
I later found another Vadhyar was not so strict about such matters and through some simple ritual started wearing the Brahmin sacred thread again. I share the above to let you know that I understand what the term outcast means. But I am not saying that in the main part of this discussion of ours.
But then both you and Sarachandran sirs are elders who may have seen more of life related to such matters and so have the concern about atheist categorization leading to other problems like being viewed as outcastes and being consigned to hell!! Perhaps your views are the more wiser views than my narrow logical view.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote (slightly edited): BTW I should add that perhaps a few years after I moved to Puttaparthi in Oct. 2002, I decided that as I am in a semi-sannyasi (semi-renunicant) mode, it would be appropriate for me to remove my sacred thread and so I removed it myself. I do not do any Brahmin rituals now and have not done so for over a decade.
----
Vr Ganti wrote (extract of his comment):
...
Hence, the Hindus who do not recognise Hindu Gods are still considered as Hindus, unfortunately.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Vr Ganti sir, part of your comment was, "Hence, the Hindus who do not recognise Hindu Gods are still considered as Hindus, unfortunately."
In my youth (late teens and twenties), I steadily lost faith in supernatural powers of Rama and Krishna (the last two big Avatars of Hinduism prior to what we Sai devotees view as the triple Sai Avatar) besides other deities like Ganesha. I even stopped visiting temples. I think my studying Physics in college and then getting into Software development field may have been vital factors in my losing faith in such Hindu deities. But I still had faith in the Nirakara Parabrahman (formless Divine power/God) of the Upanishads/Vedanta. And I very much admired and tried to follow some of the philosophy part taught in Bhagavad Geeta.
So I have never been an atheist.
However, even if I had been an atheist, I would not view that as a bad thing. I am NOT judgemental about atheists and atheism. I know and respect some good atheists. And I have condemned some bad Hindus who have committed atrocious things like rape and murder.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: V V Sarachandran sir, Thanks for our polite exchange of differing views on the matter. It has contributed to improving my understanding of the matter.
----
Vr Ganti wrote: Ravi S. Iyer ok.
----
Terry Reis Kennedy (currently based in USA) wrote: Religions are many....God is One. Philosophies are many, the Truth is One......Debates are mental exercises.....attachment to the mind. We are NOT the body....Our Beloved says. That is my opinion Ravi S. Iyer Thank you for asking me to comment.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Noted your view Terry Reis Kennedy. Thanks.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: In my comment thread on the related Facebook post of Dr. Shashi Tharoor: https://www.facebook.com/ShashiTharoor/videos/617885205272899/?comment_id=617999435261476&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R4%22%7D , I received a comment:
"Ravi S. Iyer , your explanation sounds much clearer and better,
now i can understand what Hinduism actually is,"
I (Ravi S. Iyer) responded (slightly edited):
--Name-snipped--, Thank you for your comment. As your profile shows that you are from Pakistan, and your name indicates you may be a Muslim, I am really glad that I have been able to provide you some clarity on Hinduism. I think a better understanding and an early 21st century (our times) interpretation of major religions of the world like Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism etc. can go a long way in improving harmony between Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists etc.
Dilution of Hinduism's core beliefs so as to make it more attractive to people of other religions and atheists, is NOT the truthful (Sathya) and ethical (Dharma) way forward, in my considered opinion. Such approaches, even if they provide some benefits in the short run, eventually will do harm to people of Hinduism as well as relations of Hindus with people from other religions due to the confusion and distortion introduced in the core beliefs of Hinduism.
I would also like to say that as a Hindu, I am very respectful of people of other religions like Christianity, Islam and Buddhism as well as atheists who do good to society, so long as they do not prevent me from believing in and practicing my Hindu religion (with my belief and practices of Hinduism being no threat whatsoever to people of other religions or atheists). One of the saintly figures I revere and whose teachings I try hard to follow is Shirdi Sai Baba. I felt it appropriate to share relevant extracts from his wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sai_Baba_of_Shirdi :
Sai Baba of Shirdi, also known as Shirdi Sai Baba, was an Indian spiritual master who is regarded by his devotees as a saint, a fakir, a satguru and an incarnation (avatar) of Lord Shiva and Dattatreya. He is revered by both his Hindu and Muslim devotees during, as well as after his lifetime. ... [3][4]
According to accounts from his life, he preached the importance of realization of the self, and criticized love towards perishable things. His teachings concentrate on a moral code of love, forgiveness, helping others, charity, contentment, inner peace, and devotion to the God and guru. He stressed the importance of surrender to the true Satguru, who, having trod the path to divine consciousness, will lead the disciple through the jungle of spiritual training.[5]
Sai Baba also condemned distinction based on religion or caste. It remains unclear if he was a Muslim or a Hindu. This, however, was of no consequence to Sai Baba.[6] His teaching combined elements of Hinduism and Islam: he gave the Hindu name Dwarakamayi to the mosque in which he lived,[7] practised both Hindu and Muslim rituals, taught using words and figures that drew from both traditions, and took samadhi in Shirdi. One of his well-known epigrams, Allah Malik (God is King) and Sabka Malik Ek (Everyone's Master is One), is associated with both Hinduism and Islam. He is also known to have said Look to me, and I shall look to you.[5]
...
[References]
3. "Life of Shirdi Saibaba – Life Story of Saibaba of Shirdi – Shirdi Sai Baba Biography". www.shirdi.org.uk. Archived from the original on 7 May 2017. Retrieved 20 March 2017.
4. "Shri Sai Satcharitra in English – Publications". shrisaibabasansthan.org.in. Archived from the original on 19 March 2017. Retrieved 20 March 2017.
5. Sri Sai Satcharitra
6. Rigopoulos, Antonio (1993). The Life and Teachings of Sai Baba of Shirdi. SUNY. p. 3. ISBN 0-7914-1268-7.
7. D. Hoiberg; I. Ramchandani (2000). Students' Britannica India. Popular Prakashan. p. 324. Archived from the original on 3 March 2018.
--- end wiki extract ---
--- end my comment ---
----
Terry Reis Kennedy wrote: Thank you for your extensive research into this post, Ravi S. Iyer. I appreciate it, immensely.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Thanks Terry.
----
[I thank wikipedia and biblegateway.com, and have presumed that they will not have any objections to me sharing the above extracts (short extract from biblegateway.com) from their websites on this post which is freely viewable by all, and does not have any financial profit motive whatsoever.]
Comments
Post a Comment