A Multi-Religious Society
India is a multi-religious society. According to the census of 2001, 80.5% of the population are Hindus, 13.4% are Muslims, 2.4% are Christians, 1.9% are Sikhs, 0.8% are Buddhists and 0.4% are Jains. There are small groups belonging to other world religions like Zoroastrianism and Judaism. There is much popular religiosity rooted in local cosmic religions. But they are assimilate to one or other major religions. After its independence from the British in 1947, India has established a secular political order. Three key provisions in the Constitution promulgated when India became a republic in 1950 assure and protect this secularism. Indian secularism is not anti-religious, but looks on religions positively and treats them all equally.
25.1. Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion.
26. Subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right (a) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes; (b) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion; (c) to own and acquire moveable and immovable property; and (d) to administer such property in accordance with law.
30.1. All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
51A. To promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities;… to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture;… to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform. (e,f,h)
Occasional efforts by the State governments to restrict this freedom have been strongly opposed by the Courts.
While Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism have had their origin in India, Christianity and Islam have come from outside the country. While tensions and occasional persecutions have not been absent, people have, on the whole, learned to adjust and live together. Political power has belonged to various religious groups at various times and places. Hindu-Muslim political tension led to the partition of the sub-continent into India and Pakistan in 1947. Even after this India has remained the third largest Muslim country in the world (after Indonesia and Pakistan). Hindu-Muslim riots have been a regular feature and, more recently, Hindus have also attacked Christians. But the reasons for such confrontation are often political rather than religious. The Indians would call this “communalism” or the political use of religion, rather than religious fundamentalism.
A Structured Social System
There is a spirit of religious tolerance, if not acceptance, in India – as I will show shortly. But another reason that may help this co-existence, I think, is the caste system. The Indians are divided into more than 4000 caste communities, culturally different and hierarchically ordered, related, yet different. These communities have been living and growing together for centuries. New religious communities may find a living space in this multiple, complex social structure. Provided they are faithful to their socio role, others, especially the dominant community, may not worry about their religious affiliation. It is only in a democratic order in which different communities are considered as vote banks that religious identity becomes a political issue leading to an assertion of one’s identity and confrontation with the others. Though minority and majority communalism have been promoted in recent times by political parties seeking to base themselves on religious identity, especially Hindu, Muslim and Sikh, a spirit of tolerance has been holding strong among a vast majority of the people as successive elections have shown. I think that such a spirit of tolerance is inbuilt into the Indic tradition.
An Ancient Tradition of Tolerance
The Rig Veda (c.2000 BCE) has the often quoted verse: “Truth/Reality is One: those who perceive it speak of it in different ways.” (Rig Veda 1.164.46) This perspective that though reality is one it can be experienced and expressed in different ways has been present in India since then. The search of the Upanishadic seers for unifying principle for all reality lead them to the experience the unity of Atman (Self)- Brahman (the Universe). The Katha Upanishad says: “There is one Ruler, the Spirit that is all things, who transcends, who transforms his own form into many.” (5) In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna affirms “In whatever way men approach me, in the same way they receive their reward.” (4:11) The Buddhist emperor Ashoka (c.304-232 BCE) was very open to religious diversity. He saw dharma or righteous behavior as common to all religions and defended it rigourously. He had a special minister whose task was to protect the interest of all religious groups. In one of his edicts he says:King Priyadarsi (Ashoka) honours men of all faiths, members of religious orders and lay men alike, with gifts and various marks of esteem. Yet he does not value either gifts or honours as much as growth in the qualities essential to religion in men of all faiths. This growth may take many forms, but its root is in guarding one’s own speech to avoid extolling one’s own faith and disparaging the faith of the others improperly or, when the occasion I appropriate, immoderately.
The faith of others all deserve to be honoured for one reason or another. By honouring them, one exalts one’s own faith and at the same time performs a service to the faith of others. By acting otherwise, one injures one’s own faith and also does disservice to that of others… Therefore concord alone is commendable, for through concord men may learn and respect the conception of Dharma accepted by others… The objective of these measures is the promotion of each man’s particular faith and the glorification of Dharma. In the early centuries of the CE, in the south of India, in the Tamil country, we have the great Tamil poet Thiruvalluvar. He wrote an ethical treatise called Tirukkurral with 1330 couplets of which only 10 refer to God in such general terms that it is difficult to say what religion he belonged to: Hindu, Jain or even Christian, as some have claimed recently. So he can be considered a ‘secular’ ethical poet.
A similar openness is found among a group of South Indian Shaivite poets called Siddhars, starting in the 7th cent. CE. One of them sings:
What are temples? What are bathing tanks?
Fools who worship in temples and tanks!
Temples are in the mind. Tanks are in the mind.
You say that Siva is in bricks and granite,
In the red-rubbed lingam, in copper and brass!
If you could learn to know yourself first,
the God in the temple will dance and sing within you.
The Middle Ages
In the middle ages Basavanna (1134-1196), the Virasaiva poet from Karnataka, declares: “God is one, but many his names. The faithful wife know but one Lord.” Kabir (1440-1518) was a saintly poet and mystic, open to other religions. He sang: If God be within the mosque, then to whom does this world belong? If Ram be within the image which you worship upon your pilgrimage, then who is there to know what happens without? Hari is in the east; Allah is in the west. Look within your heart, for there you will find both Karim and Ram: all the men and women of the world are His living forms.
- N.A. Nikam and Richard McKeon (eds), The Edicts of Ashoka. Mumbai: Asia Publishing House, 1959), pp.49-50 (Edict XII). Hari and Ram are names of the Hindu God Vishnu.
- Quoted in Hans-J. Klimkeit, “Indigenous Elements in Modern Tamil Secularism”, Religion and Society 23, 3 (1976) 92
In founding Sikhism Guru Nanak (1459-1539) sought to integrate the Islamic God without form with the devotional song tradition of Hinduism, insisting on the equality of all humans. The Muslim emperor Akbar (1542-1605) has Hindu wives and generals. He assembled a group of scholars from various religions, including some Jesuits from Goa, to ‘dialogue’ on religious issues. He tried, unsuccessfully, to found a new religion called Din Ilahi, gathering together all the elements that he found good in the different religions.
Another South Indian Tamil poet, Thayumanavar (1706-1744) sings:
The meaning of the goodly way of wisdom
Or truth its rival creeds maintain
No single one of all the faiths so many
Can claim in itself to contain
But when I gazed into the hall of Glory,
Tillai’s, whose fame words fail to frame’
I found the feuds of all the faiths forgotten,
For all men stood with reverend aim,
Adoring, in the openness of splendor,
That sky-wise stretched to seeing eyes,
And even in my heart, its hardness melting,
I felt divinest raptures rise.
Modern Times
The Bengal mystic Ramakrishna Paramahamsa (1836-1886) claimed to have experimented successfully the sadhanas or religious practices of various religions and found that God is one. He says:
Different people call on [God] by different names: some as Allah, some as God, and others as Krishna, Siva, and Brahman. It is like the water in a lake. Some drink it at one place and call it ‘jal’, others at another place and call it ‘pani’, and still others at a third place and call it ‘water’. The Hindus call it ‘jal’, the Christians ‘water’, and the Moslems ‘pani’. But it is one and the same thing.
One can ascend to the top of a house by means of a ladder or a bamboo or a staircase or a rope; so too, diverse are the ways of approaching God, and each religion in the world shows one of the ways. . . . A truly religious man should think that other religions are also so many paths leading to the Truth. One should always maintain an attitude of respect towards other religions.
His disciple Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902), who took part in the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1892 recalled a popular hymn he used to sing as a child: “As the different streams having their sources in different places all mingle their water in the sea, so, O Lord, the different paths which men take through different tendencies, various though they appear, crooked or straight, all lead to thee.”
3. Quoted in T. Isaac Thambyah, Psalms of a Saiva Saint (New Dehi: Asian Educational Services, 1925), p. xxvii.
In the 20th cent. Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948), in a letter to Narandas Gandhi (Sept. 30, 1930) spoke of his attitude:
When I was turning over the pages of the sacred books of different faiths for my own satisfaction, I became sufficiently familiar for my purpose with Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Hinduism. In reading these texts, I can say that I felt the same regard for all these faiths although, perhaps, I was not then conscious of it. Reviewing my memory of those days I do not find I ever had the slightest desire to criticize any of these religions merely because they were not my own, but read each sacred book in a spirit of reverence and found the same fundamental morality in each.
Even as a tree has a single trunk but many branches and leaves, so is there one true and perfect religion, but it becomes many as it passes through the human medium.
It is significant that Gandhi finds a commonality, not in symbols and doctrines, but in ethical principles.
This consistent openness to different religions in India from the Rig Veda to Mahatma Gandhi – and I could have quoted a host of others – is indeed amazing. Even today, driving along the roads in Chennai, I come across pictures from various religions grouped together – Jesus Christ, Lord Ganesh, the Black stone of Mecca – inside homes of mixed couples, buses and auto rickshaws and on the compound walls of houses and institutions. Popular sacred shrines attract pilgrims from different religions. A question then arises: Is there something in the religious culture of India that accounts for this? There are two possible answers: the nature of Hinduism itself as a religion and, more deeply, the philosophic-religious principle of advaita or non-duality (or aduality, as Raimon Panikkar says). Let me explain.
4. http://vedanta.org/the-ramakrishna-order/ramakrishna/
5. http://ibnlive.in.com/news/full-text-swami-vivekanandas-chicago-speech/220148-53.html
6. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (Ahmedabad: Navjivan Trust), XLIV, 190.
7. Ibid., p. 166.
An Inclusive Religion
Hinduism, the dominant religion in India, is not an institutionalized religion like Christianity or Islam. It has no founder. There are many well organized sects that co-exist but no overall organization of the whole community. There is no controlling leadership. Even its scriptures come from a variety of sources. It is a confluence of the Aryan and Dravidian genius. Side by side with a common scriptural and philosophical tradition, there are at least three major devotional groups centred around Siva, Vishnu and Kali, the Goddess. There are also a host of cosmic religions with local gods and goddesses. All these are different, but related. Kali is the consort of Siva. Vishnu is the brother-in-law of Siva. The gods of the cosmic religions are the servants of the principal Gods. Major Gods like Siva and Vishnu have many local manifestations with particular names and forms. Vishnu has ten avatars or manifestations in history. Such a pluralism of gods is not so much different manifestations of one god, but the linking together under one common name of many local gods. Some basic doctrines like karma and the cycle of births is common to all sects. Certain traditions of sadhana or spiritual practice like the yoga are common to all.
Communion with the divine, understood in a variety of ways, is the final goal that every one strives for. In this way Hinduism has established itself in the country by inclusion and integration of many local traditions, pointing to unity within a rich diversity. It is this tendency that makes many Hindus accept the Buddha and Jesus as Avatars of the one Divine Principle, beyond name and form. Difference in this sense does not lead to opposition, but to communication and convergence. So when a Hindu says that though they have many gods and goddesses they are only different manifestations of one divine principle they are recognizing both multiplicity and unity. They can honour one particular manifestation without rejecting other manifestations. Hinduism can therefore be seen as a commonwealth of many religions. Such a community could have evolved only with a certain “give and take”. While a western mind, influenced by Greek logic, sees difference as conflictual (“either-or”), the Indian mind sees multiplicity as convergent (“both-and”). I was surprised to see this inclusive principle defended by an Italian theologian in the name of the Council of Chalcedon which affirmed the unity of person in the duality of natures in Jesus Christ.
From the catholic, and I would think even from the human, point of view, when man is confronted with the above mentioned polarities, nothing is more harmful than a fanatic “either… or” (aut…aut); rather, one should opt for a “both…and” (et…et) approach following the spirit and perspective of Chalcedon.
The Principle of Advaita
The Upanishadic Seers in the 6th cent. BCE look at the world round them and ask questions like: “Who sends the mind to wander afar? Who first drives life to start on its journey? Who impels us to utter these words? Who is the Spirit behind the eye and the ear?” Their answer is: “What cannot be indrawn with breath, but that whereby breath is indrawn; know that alone to be Brahman, the Spirit; and not what people here adore.” Similar questionings lead other sages to answer in different ways. The Isa Upanishad says: “Behold the universe in the glory of God: and all that lives and moves on earth. Leaving the transient, find joy in the Eternal.” The Mundaka Upanishad declares: “in the supreme golden chamber is Brahman indivisible and pure. He is the radiant light of all lights… From his light all these give light; and his radiance illumines all creation.” The Katha Upanishad affirms: “Concealed in the heart of all beings is the Atman, the Spirit, the Self… The whole universe comes from him and his life burns through the whole universe.” Then comes the proclamation of the Chandogya Upanishad: “This invisible and subtle essence is the Spirit of the whole universe. That is Reality. That is the Truth. THOU ART THAT.” The Atman (the Self) is the Brahman (the universe). But they are not one. They are not-two.
8. Cyprian Vagaggini, Doing Theology. Bangalore: I.J.A. Publications, 2003, p. 141.
9. Kena Upanishad. This and other texts from the Upanishads adopt the translation by Juan Mascaro, The Upanishads. Harmondsworth: Penguin books, 1965. This text is on p.51.
This is the mystery of the advaita (a+dvaita = not+two) in the Indian tradition. This is neither monism (one) nor dualism (two), but unity-in-duality. In practice this means that one ultimate principle can have many historical and cultural manifestations. The ‘many’ is not unreal. But it is not a second ultimate reality. It is dependently and relatively real. This is not the place to go into the metaphysics of the advaita. One reason, of course, is that it may not be intelligible conceptually. It is in the area of mystery and symbol. We can compare it with the visions of Jesus: “That they all may be one. As you, Father, art in me and I am in you, may they also be in us” Jn 17:21) and of Paul: “God may be all in all” (1 Cor 15:28). These are advaitic visions, understood in the West by a few mystics like Meister Eckhart.
Such an advaitic vision makes it possible to understand that the many can be the dependent manifestations in space, time and culture of the One. In dynamic terms one can envisage many ways that lead to the same goal or many rivers flowing into the same ocean. One can be faithful to one’s own path while accepting that others may be following their own paths. A dialogue between them can lead to mutual enrichment and a certain convergence, while the common goal remains a mystery. At this level one can go beyond tolerance to acceptance of others as following their legitimate ways to the same goal. One can become aware of the limitations of one’s own way so that mutual learning and enrichment remains meaningful and possible. Mahatma Gandhi, while remaining a Hindu and being inspired by the Bhagavad Gita can claim to be a disciple of Jesus and to learn from his Sermon on the Mount. Similar followers of Jesus are not uncommon in India today.
Conclusion
The Indic tradition, both in the way that Hinduism as a religion has grown in an inclusive way and in the manner in which reality is seen as advaitic or adual from a philosophico-theological point of view, is helping Indians to face the situation of religious pluralism in which they are living. Till fundamentalist currents started making their inroads in recent years because of the international situation, not only Hindus, but also Christians and Muslims shared the same open attitudes towards others. As a matter of fact, theologians in India have started talking about double religious identities. Inter-religious families are becoming more frequent and we have to see how the children growing up in such families respond to their situation. India with its multi-religious past and present can be a laboratory to develop patterns of inter-religious living. The Indic tradition offers ideological support. The challenges of life will have to be encountered and overcome in practice.
10. Ibid.
11. Ibid., p. 49.
12. Ibid., p.79.
13. Ibid., pp. 59, 65.
14. Ibid., p.118.
15. For a Christian perspective see Raimon Panikkar, The Rhythm of Being.Maryknoll: Orbis, 2010, pp. 216-224; M. Amaladoss, “Theosis and Advaita: An Indian Approach to Salvation”, Vidyajyoti Journal of
Theological Reflection 75 (2011) 887-901..