Hinduism 101

Lesson 1: Hinduism: Origin and Evolution.

Evolution.

The Evolution:

The Advent of New Religions(500 B.C.-300 A.D.):

The roots of Hinduism were sown by the important synthesis of the Aryan or Vedic deities and the earlier native Dravidian deities. The caste system had already taken roots in Hinduism at the time this synthesis was taking place and the Brahmins were well-entrenched as the priestly class who acted as intermediaries between humans and gods. Since this synthesis took effect under their guidance and tutelage their position in Hindu society was consolidated and confirmed. Thus, the performance of sacrifice, as prescribed in the earlier parts of the Vedas, which was recommended as a means of propitiating the gods and keeping the present order of the world intact was a prime prerogative of the Brahmins, automatically making them the most important class in Hindu society. This trend continued without protest up to the end of the Brahmanic Era, which was for the period 900-550 B.C. Within this period though the Brahmins had further consolidated their position by making the caste system a rigid structure from which none could escape, thus keeping themselves permanently at the top of the social structure.

Both Buddhism and Jainism appeared in India at around 500 B.C. and marked the end of the Brahminic Era. Both new religions were reform movements against the extremes of the Brahminic traditions in Hinduism. Both advocated ethical systems in which the individual could attain union with a Universal Absolute through personal effort without any other human intermediaries like priests. The educated and powerful in Northern India were much enamored by Buddhism and rulers like King Ashoka, who ruled much of North India in the 3rd century B.C. took up the new religion and propagated it not only throughout India but also through neighboring countries. Yet, even then, the Brahmins managed to maintain their preeminent positions by procuring the loyalty of the primarily Hindu populace towards the Buddhist rulers. Gradually, even Buddhism and Jainism digressed from the absolute doctrines of their founders and acquired mythologies and doctrines that were much like Hinduism. These complexities worked in favor of Hinduism which even went to the extent of declaring Buddhism as a particular sect within the broader spectrum of Hinduism.

The Golden Age of the Guptas (400-600 A.D.):

The Great Hindu revival came in the beginning of the 4th century A.D. with the ascent of the Gupta Dynasty to the throne of the ancient city of Ujjain, which soon became the center of Hindu learning and study. The Gupta rulers were all staunch devotees of Hinduism and actively promoted their religion not only throughout India but even beyond its shores to other countries in South-East Asia. This is the time when Balinese Hinduism and the Hindu culture of ancient Cambodia, the Khmer Republic now, took their roots. Even now, the Brahmins maintained their status by indulging the beliefs of the common people and inducting them into the mainstream of the religion. Classical Hinduism changed to a great extent as Buddhist influence together with other common beliefs was gradually inducted. The Brahmins helped the rulers in their task of reviving Hinduism by propagating it among the people and won favor for their work. The Gupta period is rightly called the Golden Age not only of Hinduism but the whole of India as it remained the primary religion of the people as Buddhism had quite declined by then and Islam had not yet reached the Indian Subcontinent. It lasted from the 4th century to the 6th century A.D., a mere 300 years in the history of a religion nearly 4,000 years old, but it consolidated the religion into such a stable system that it was to survive all attempts by future Muslim entrants to subjugate it. It is also during the Gupta Period that the worship of the Shakti Goddesses became firmly established with scriptural backing. The major Shakta Literature began to make their appearance in India from the 5th century onwards.

The Great Acharyas (9th to 16th Century):

By the end of the 6th century A.D. the Gupta Empire had declined and where a large empire had ruled most of India the country had now been broken up into small principalities that were ruled by small kings and lords. There was interminable warfare between these small kingdoms and principalities and this was much to the detriment of Hinduism. Since the rulers were more inclined to their own welfare, which was almost always in jeopardy from within and without, they had little time for the welfare of their subjects. Society lost the cosmopolitan outlook of the Gupta Era and became fragmented and inward-looking. In these circumstances, orthodoxy set in and Hinduism again began to lose its broad outlook. The Brahmins, set at the top of the social order, were quick to capitalize on the situation, and began to dictate social terms in the absence of strong rulers who could keep them in check. The caste system became more rigid and worship became ritualistic. While the Gupta rulers had, of course, been staunch Hindus, they had nevertheless set the moral standards of their times and had looked to both the spiritual and physical welfare of their subjects. The Brahmins had been kept in their places and Hinduism had been a very laissez faire social system, for Hinduism has always been both a religious as well as a social system, under which even the lower castes, the Hindu underdogs, had prospered. Now, under total Brahminical control, the lower order of Hindu society began to feel the pinch and proceeded to look elsewhere for succor.

It is true that both Buddhism and Jainism were on the decline by the end of the 9th century A.D. primarily because the Islamic invaders, who started making incursions into India from the North from the 9th to 10th century onwards, had destroyed the great Buddhist Universities like Taxila in the North and Nalanda in the East. These universities had been the centers of Buddhist teachings and, after their demise, Buddhism also began to decline. Yet, the crisis within Hinduism remained. The Brahministic dogmas and rituals were too complex and confusing for the common people. The simple beliefs of the Vedas, especially the pure monism of the Vedanta, were not available to the common people. They were the private preserve of a few formulating an elitist system that discouraged disclosure to all and sundry. Also, to be absolutely pragmatic, even the educated of the time did not quite comprehend the essence of the Vedas.

It is into this bleak scenario that a series of Five Great Acharyas were born - Sankaracharya (9th century), Ramanujacharya (11th century), Nimbarkacharya (11th century), Madhvacharya (13th century) and Vallabhacharya (16th century). They all brought out the essence of the Vedas and put it down in systemized texts. They not only actively professed their simplified philosophy to the common masses, making direct converts, but they also gave to the Hindu scholars of their times systems of thought they could adhere to. Thus, the Acharyas served to make Hinduism easier to understand not only for the common person but also for the scholars. They were the first to begin a tradition that has lasted to the present day. They were born to find Hinduism facing a crisis both from within and without. So they delved into the Vedic texts and brought out the simplistic essence of Hinduism – the pure monism around which every other detail evolves. In this way they revealed the intrinsic attraction of Hinduism and the religion survived. Since their times to the present day, whenever Hinduism has faced a crisis, either from within or without, highly perceptive men have sought recourse to this simplistic device to rescue the religion.

It is a very accurate philosophical concept that the truth survives all else. The Pure Monism of the Vedanta is such a powerful concept that whosoever has used it to combat negative influences has succeeded in rescuing Hinduism.

The Bhakti Preachers (14th to 17th century):

By the end of the 13th century the Muslim invaders had settled down in the upper parts of the subcontinent and some had even made inroads into the southern and eastern parts. Unlike the previous invaders like the Sakas, Kushans and others who had also chosen to settle down in the fertile plains of northern India, these present ones did not integrate with the indigenous culture and religion. The Muslims firmly adhered to the Islamic faith and did not think much of the native system of religious tradition. As such friction soon arose between the two communities. Also, the Islamic invaders were infused with missionary zeal and thought it their duty to convert the stubborn Hindus to their faith. This further aggravated the situation. The Muslims were mostly in the ruling class while the Hindus were the weaker dominated peoples who had little alternative but to obey their Islamic masters. Thus, naturally, some of the Hindus did allow themselves to be converted to Islam but the majority stuck to their religion and this invited persecution from their hostile rulers. It must nevertheless be mentioned that not all the Muslim rulers of this rigorously proselytizing temperament and generally allowed their Hindu subjects to follow their own customs and traditions without much restraint. Still, the few of the rulers who were of this intolerant bend of mind did enough damage to the social fabric. There remained a constant friction between the Hindus and the Muslims. Both religions were in jeopardy.

At this junction in time a set of very intelligent and devout persons of both communities, both Muslim and Hindu, were born. They understood the nature of the conflict and were pained by the meaninglessness of it. They decided to do something to alleviate the tense situation. For the Muslims these amelioratory persons were the Sufi mystics while for Hindus these were the Bhakti Saints. The Bhakti saints had a difficult task to perform. They had to make the pure monistic precepts of Hinduism understood by the common untaught masses. Though the Great Acharyas had already infused the Hindu religious thought system with their versions of the monism of the Upanishads the prevailing confusion of the times had overshadowed their efforts and the general populace were again in need of some amount of enlightened guidance. This time the crisis was not among the learned and educated as previously when Buddhism and Jainism had threatened Hinduism with converts. This time the untaught masses were in a crisis of religious allegiance. The Hindu masses desperately needed reassurance and support. This was provided by the Bhakti Reformers who did not select a path of confrontation with Islam. Instead they cleverly used the monism of the Upanishads to point out that all religions had the same goal though their individual paths were different. They were amply supported in their efforts at reconciliation between Hinduism and Islam by being met halfway by the Sufi Reformers who were also seeking a means to the same reconciliatory process. Thus, both Hinduism and Islam were preserved in the subcontinent. A means for co-existence was forged and this has lasted to the present day though much upheaval has been experienced.

I cannot treat the Sufi Mystics at any length here but the Bhakti Saints and the precepts they preached has been amply elucidated in the lesson on sects. As mentioned earlier, the crisis was among the masses this time and the Bhakti reformers were from them. These great men were all of common birth and mostly untaught themselves. Most of them, with the exception of a few like Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, had no formal education of the Hindu scriptures yet they were such astute persons that they went to the crux of the problem with their teachings. Since they had to spread their message among the untaught masses they used the local vernacular of their regions of influence in contrast to the Acharyas who had used the highly-stylized Sanskrit, a language of preference by Hindu scholars. Also, The Bhakti Preachers used common mediums of expression like folk-songs which the people immediately correlated to in contrast to the Acharyas who had used highly-stylized argumentative instruments like dialectics and semantics to convince the literati of their times. It must be noted that the substance of the preaching of both the Bhakti reformers and the Acharyas were the same – they both advocated personal worship with minimum rituals and access to such worship to all regardless of caste or creed. The Bhakti reformers were successful in their task of rescuing Hinduism from this medieval crisis.

In the process, Hinduism was much strengthened by the induction at the lowest levels of the basic doctrines of the Upanishads which had previously been the preserve of a few educated persons who were quite reluctant to relinquish the privileged position they held in society because of this highly-prized knowledge. Also, Hinduism became much more open and accessible both on the inside by the removal of the rigidity of the caste system and the outside by promotion of a feeling of tolerance for other religions. Also in the process, much was inducted in the way of mannerisms from the alien customs of the Islamic invaders. The mysticism of the Sufi reformers was also an inherent feature of the folk-songs the Bhakti reformers used. This was not new to Hinduism. The Sutras the ancient Sages and Rishis used to illustrate the wisdom of the Vedas is a mystical device that Hindu scholars through the ages have much savored deciphering and arguing over. This time though, the common people were subjected to it through popular mediums that they easily understood and enjoyed and they took to it like fish to water. The mystical songs composed in this period by both Sufis and Bhakti reformers had a lasting quality to them that has assured their continued popularity to the present age. These songs in their original versions are still being sung, heard and appreciated all over the subcontinent. What is even more important about them is that they have generated a tradition of mystical universalism based on which many talented persons after this period to the present age have composed newer material of the same vein. This has assured a continued tradition of reconciliation between Hinduism and other religions of the subcontinent which has promoted peaceful and interactive coexistence among the multifarious communities. This is of paramount importance to the peaceful survival of the countries of the subcontinent.

The principal effects of the Bhakti Movement was the polarization of the Hindu doctrines towards worship of a personal God through simplistic means and a universal tolerance both within and without the religion. Castes and creeds became of lesser importance and the commonality of origin of human beings was emphasized. Another singularity of the religion was the precedence given to the lower strata of society who spearheaded the Hindu resurgence in this period and continued to be of significance thereafter.

The Hindu Renaissance (19th and 20th Century):

It may seem rather strange to the student that Hinduism seems to have evolved across continuous periods of upheaval but it must be noted that periods of relative stability has only encouraged stagnation and subsequent degeneration to the detriment of the religion. This has been the special case with Hinduism. Thus, whatever invigoration that has rejuvenated the religion throughout its long years of prevalence has been induced under pressure from adverse situations fomented from outside or inside the religion.

Hinduism was again confronted with another such adverse situation at the beginning of the 19th century. The power structure of the entire Indian subcontinent had then passed from the control of the Muslim rulers to another foreign race – the Europeans. Gradually, from the beginning of the 16th century onwards the Europeans, the British, the Portuguese, the French and the Dutch had been making steady inroads into the subcontinent until, ultimately in the first half of the 19th century, the Islamic rulers had been totally sidelined by the superior firepower and Machiavellian policies of the Europeans. Among these the English, with more firepower and Machiavellianism than the rest, acquired a lion’s share of the subcontinent while the rest had to be satisfied with tit-bits here and there.

The new rulers had no proselytizing sentiments and were thoroughly involved in their fiduciary exploitation of the subcontinent but they brought in their wake the Christian Missionaries who were determined to rescue the hapless natives from the eternal darkness of irreligion. As in previous cases, most Hindus ignored them and went on with their age-old ways but, gradually, a number significant enough to be taken notice of found the new religion of Christianity to be attractive and adopted it. Again, the evils of the caste system and the stringent ritualistic practices of the Brahminical system antagonized a large number of adherents who shifted their sympathies to a religion that professed equality for all and a simplistic system of worship.

The Hindu cognoscenti began to take notice with alarm and decided to stem the digression before it did irreparable damage to their religion. This time, though, in addition to the time-tried technique of bringing out the essence of the Upanishads before the laity these Hindu aficionados also took recourse to the available Western thought processes which were progressive and increasingly humanized to implement their purpose.

It must mentioned that the Indian subcontinent, existing in isolation from the rest of the world during the Muslim period, had stagnated and social norms and customs were still medieval and rather backward in comparison to some of those of the Europeans who had progressed beyond their medievalism and were comparatively humanized. The Hindu reformers, this time, not only narrowed down the religion to a more personal level with minimal complex ritualistic worship but they also took notice of some of the evils that persisted within their religious system beyond the times of the previous reformers. They had two great advantages -

• The entire Indian subcontinent was being ruled by a single powerful entity, the English, who had complete control of all of it and were willing to help the reformers in their task of humanizing their religious system.
• Another great plus point of the British rulers was that some of them were men of progressive instincts and they were sympathetic enough of the native populace to take steps in promoting their welfare.

Some of the evils that the Hindu reformists got rids of with the help of the British rulers are:

• They got the British administration to pass a law promulgating the banning of the practice of Suttee. Suttee was an age-old evil practice of forcing a wife to be immolated in the funeral fire of her dead husband. The logic was that a wife should be entirely loyal to her husband and, on his death, should join him on the funeral pyre to die with him. The actual reason was that dishonest relatives forced the poor women to die in this horrible manner so that they could enjoy the dead man’s property without resistance.

• Reformers like Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar and Raja Rammohan Roy persuaded the British Viceroy of their time to promote widow remarriage. This was another evil system existent within Hinduism at that time. Even very young widows, sometimes girls barely in their teens, were forced to remain in their bereaved state after their husbands’ death all their lives. Widowhood, according to Hindu precepts, requires innumerable hardships to be followed and for a very young girl to have to be subjected to such stringent and unsympathetic rules was heinous.

• The reformers besides promoting Hindu culture and scriptural studies also persuaded the laity to induct within their learning process some of the better European thought systems. Thus, the Hindu laity became quite progressive with these modern ways of living which they practiced in conjunction with their Hindu customs and traditions.

Contact with the Europeans certainly gave the Hindus a taste of modern ways of living elsewhere in the world and they became more knowledgeable of what went on outside their subcontinent. This had good as well as bad effects but, certainly, the modern Indian state owes much of its progressiveness to this positive interaction with Western Culture though it must be said in passing that the Hindus did retain the better of their religious habits and this only went to make both the religion and the practitioners more in rapport with the world in general.

The Hindu reformers of the 19th and 20th century did turn around the religious dissensions and Hinduism bounced back to its preeminent position in the subcontinent. The effort for independence from foreign rule only went to strengthen ties between different sects within the broader religion as collaborated to focus on the task at hand. Mahatma Gandhi’s innovative usage of old Hindu precepts like Ahimsa (Non-violence) and Satyagraha (War for truth using non-violence as the principal means) provided impetus to the religion’s reformation and Hindus were again able to look up to their religion with pride in their hearts.

It is true that Independence did dissect the subcontinent into the primarily Muslim countries of Pakistan and Bangladesh and the primarily Hindu country of India and the division was mainly along religious lines with some amount of discontent fomented among the religious communities but, on the whole, the secular policies of politicians like Mahatma Gandhi and other persons on all sides saved the situation and the countries achieved secular legislative administrations within which all religious communities could co-exist in peace and prosperity.

The development of Hinduism after the independence of the subcontinent from foreign rule is discussed in the lesson on Current Trends.

As a special note to the end of this section I mention that though the brahmins have been much reviled throughout the ages for perpretrating the evil of the caste system and complicating worship within Hinduism it must nevertheless be acknowledged that many numbers of them have, throughout the ages, served the cause of their religion with exemplary zeal and truly fulfilled their duty of being keepers of the faith, no matter how controversial that is.

  1  2  3