Q and A on Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity
On 23 June 2020, I delivered a webinar organized by a premier Buddhist Education Institution in Australia. I gave three lectures. Lecture 1: Hindu, Hinduism and Hindutva, Lecture 2: Comparing Buddhism and Hinduism and Lecture 3: Comparing Christianity and Hinduism. The Twenty participants — included Australians, Chinese, Bhutanese, and others.
Some of the questions raised and a gist of my responses thereto (as edited with some additions) are presented below which may be of interest.
What is the difference between Astika and Nastika?
A system that uses the Vedic framework is Astika, one that does not is nastika. As Buddha, Charavaka, and Mahavira Jain did not use the Vedic Framework they are considered nastika. Though the Poorva Mimansa and Vedanta are well-grounded in the Vedic framework, other systems, that is, Sankhya & Yoga, as well as Nyaya & Vaiseshika, have developed independently though these refer to the Vedic framework.
How is the concept of Moksha different from Nirvana?
Moksha assumes an eternal self while Nirvana is about ‘’no-self’’. The realization of the eternal self is Moksha while the realization that there is ‘’no-self’’ is nirvana.
How does the concept of dependent origination find a parallel in the Hindu thought?
The twelve fetters described by Buddha are called dependent origination. But the chain starts with Ignorance or (avijja in Pali) and likewise in Hinduism. In Sanskrit, it is called Avidya. The genius of Buddha lies in systematically putting the thoughts that were scattered all around in the Upanishads. There no single author of the Upanishad (there are over 120 known Upanishads. These are all compiled by different sages). Buddha also contributed some new concepts such as the doctrine of momentariness, doctrine of ‘’no-soul’’, and the doctrine of universal suffering.
What led to the demise of Buddhism from India?
This can be considered from two perspectives.
From the ideological perspective, as a legend goes, one of the Buddhist stalwarts was defeated in a debate by Adi Sankara — who is credited with Hindu revivalism.
Politically, Muslim invaders converted Buddhists by force. Khilji, for example, burnt Nalanda university in the 1190s to destroy the Buddhist and Indic literature. Similar destruction of libraries was carried out by the Romans and Christians in Alexandria, for example. It goes to the credit of Indic religions (Hindu, Buddhist, Jains, and Sikhs) that they have never ever burnt libraries thereby ensuring the free flow of thought. They have never imposed their world-view on others as the two proselytizing religions have.
Afghanistan (Queen Gandhari in the Mahabharata was from the Gandhara Region which is currently called Kandahar), current Pakistan, parts of India, and the whole of Bangladesh were Buddhists. These were converted to Islam by force by invaders as ancient history tells us. Actually, the transition was from Hinduism to Buddhism and thereafter to Islam. Some of the Buddhists in India could have converted back to Hinduism following Mandana Mishra.
Is Hinduism secular?
Hinduism is not a religion (not an ism at all). It is largely atheistic and hence secular. There is no concept of God in Hinduism as it is in Abrahamic faiths. So, from the Abrahamic perspective, Hindus would be considered an atheist. The Hindus do have a concept of Isvara but it is unlike the God of Abrahamic faiths. The Isvara concept is used as an aid to understanding the Ultimate Reality which is consciousness or Brahman. It is the Ramanuja interpretation of Vedic thought.
Please explain the concept of God in Hinduism? How can Hinduism be secular in that case?
There is no External God in Hinduism as it is in the Abrahamic faiths. The murtis (loosely idols) or images that you see are manifestations of the divine. These are used as an aid to exploring the divine but as soon as the divine is realized there is no need for these images. In operations research, for example, one cannot solve the ‘’primal’’ problem hence it is converted to the ‘’ dual of the primal’’ and you work with the dual to find the solution to the primal. A similar purpose is served by a murthi or image.
The image makes God more approachable, more personal.
Can one attain Moksha in one lifetime?
Yes. Depending upon your progress either derived from past birth or attained during present birth. Krishna tells in the Bhagavat Gita that one who has not realized the Ultimate continues his efforts (yoga) in the next birth.
How does Shamanism reconcile with Rationality?
Shamanic practices are a part of the Tantric literature. It is not a part of the mainstream Vedic thought which is purely rational as enunciated in the Upanishads.
What does ‘’ don’t speak unpleasant truth’’ as enunciated in the Manu Smriti mean? Should we not be speaking the truth however unpleasant it maybe?
Manu Smriti is laying down the rules of conduct for a ‘’social man’’. Towards that end, the above verse is there. It was probably to maintain social order. Freedom of expression of thought is an ancient tradition in Hindu culture. Buddha, Mahavira, and Charvaka were all rebels against the then extant Vedic tradition — way back in 500 BCE — but they could freely express their thoughts unlike what Galileo and Copernicus underwent in Christianity.
Isn’t the essential difference between Abrahamic thoughts and Indic thoughts that of One life/birth (as in Christianity) and multiple births (as in Indic thoughts)?
Yes. That could be the essence of difference. But the University of Virginia School of Medicine is studying for the last 50 years the phenomena of ‘’re-birth’’ or past lives. They have compiled several thousand cases of such past life experiences or recall from all over the world.
Why is animal sacrifice present in Hinduism?
In Tantric literature, the ferocious Kali Goddess needs animal sacrifice so it is still in practice in parts of West Bengal in particular. But it is not a mainstream Hindu practice. Hindu scriptures, including the Gita, and the Puranas prohibit animal sacrifice. Kali is an example that God is not ‘’all good’’ as assumed by Christianity and could be ferocious as well.
What is the difference between Brahmanism and Hinduism?
There is a difference between Brahmanism and Brahminism. The former refers to the philosophy of the Vedas and Upanishads while the latter to the priestly class and their practices. Hinduism can be considered as ‘’popular’’ philosophy or the religion part. The term Hinduism itself became a part of the popular lingo only in the 19th century. The ancient and continuous tradition is known as the Sanatana Dharma or eternal religion. It is called eternal since it is like a time series in statistics. The assumption is it is continuous without beginning or end and when researchers do the statistical analysis they focus on a particular realization, for example, the rainfall in the last decade. Accordingly, our present life is a particular realization of the continuous flow of life or journey of the Atma. In statistics, one deals with lagged variables and so also in the Hindus the belief is the karma of the past birth affects your present life.
What is the ‘’self’’ of Hindus and the ‘’non-self’’ of the Buddhist?
Hindu philosophy asserts that the ‘’self’’ is eternal and transmigrates and takes another body after death. In Buddhists, there is ‘’no-self’’ yet there is the concept of rebirth. Buddha asserts that everything is momentary and the constituent parts come together and there is life. When the constituent parts separate there is no life (no-self). What transmigrates according to Buddha is the ‘process’’ or the ‘’character’’ the psycho-physical entity that continues to exist or takes birth. It is a continuous process (a flux or flow) and that the ‘’psycho-physical entity’’ acquires a new body (or a new set of constituent parts one could say).
Could we say that Abrahamic faiths have an ‘’external god’’ while the Hindus have an ‘’internal god’’?
True. The Upanishads tell us that the Brahman (consciousness) permeates everything and naturally it can be found within us. When it is encased in a body, we call it Atman. Both are the same. Accordingly, the central thesis of Hindu Thought is ‘’Know Thy Self’’. This knowledge of the Self is achieved when one becomes (a) desireless and (b) one sees the extension of the Self everywhere -you within the world and the world within you. The duality (Maya) disappears and one experiences the dance of the divine everywhere. Given that it is Brahman everywhere the outer forms are illusory or Maya. Consequently, a Hindu worships everything including a snake. S/he considers that the outer form is a snake but the in-dweller is the same Brahman as it is inside anyone. It is the realization of this Brahman everywhere is what non-duality is all about.
What is the concept of Maya in Hinduism? is the world unreal then??
In the Advaita Vedanta, a distinction is made between the transcendental and phenomenal perspective. From the transcendental perspective, everything is Brahman, and the world of appearances just an illusion or Maya. Of course, from the phenomenal (vyavaharika) perspective the world is real. It is the world of appearance that prevents us from knowing the Ultimate Reality which is the Brahman. So, the world of appearances (or Maya) is like a veil. Once the veil of ignorance is removed one realizes the Atman (which is the same as the Brahman). This state is known as the state of knowledge or self-realization.
When Hinduism is atheism what do the images stand for?
Hinduism is largely atheism if we use the concept of God as enunciated in the Abrahamic faiths. Hindus do have their own concept of God called Isvara — which is very different from the concept of God of Abrahamic faith. The Abrahamic God is an external entity while in the Hindus, God is an in-dweller.
Who is the nuclear physicist who says the world is unreal?
Ervin Schrodinger who won the Physics Nobel for Atomic Theory ‘’offers in his writings a quasi-empirical proof for Vedanta, exemplified in the unity of knower, known and knowledge’’ (Klostermair, K. 2002. Hinduism: A Short Introduction, Oneword publications, Ontario. p112). Vedanta perspective is considered from a transcendental level
Why do Gods marry in Hinduism?
As Hindu Thought is largely atheistic, the concept of Brahman or consciousness underpins it. The Brahman is without naam and roopa (mind-body complex), unlimited, Sat-Chit-Ananda or existence, consciousness, and bliss. However, as this concept is hard for a layman to understand and to make the esoteric thoughts more palatable and comprehensible, images or murthi form of worship came to the fore from the Puranas in particular. The Murthi is not an idol (which means devil as per Abrahamic religions) but a manifestation of divinity.
In order to make the divine more accessible to people, the images were typically in human form, wearing clothes as do humans and having a consort or a wife. Yet the images have something that distinguishes it from being confused with ordinary humans so it may have four arms and it is raising a palm to bless. It is to remind that it is divinity. The Brahman (consciousness) according to Hindu thought is formless, of course.
A further and deeper meaning to God having a consort or wife could be traced to the Sankhya philosophy of Purusha (Consciousness) and Prakriti (Goddess/Maya). As per the Sankhya system, the coming together or marriage of purusha and prakriti gives rise to the world of appearances. These are the two realities as per that system. So, the Sankhya system finds expression in the marriage or coming together of say Shiva and Parvati or Laxmi and Vishnu. As one can see the ordinary person through the worship of say Rama and Sita or from Radha and Krishna is being groomed up to think of the reality that underpins the appearances. Esoteric philosophy is getting percolated through such concepts of God and Goddess and their marriage. The kids are symbolic of the world which according to Sankhya is made of two realities as above.
Is Hindutva political?
Hindutva refers to the totality of Hindu culture, history, philosophy, theology, sociology, etc. Hinduism refers to only a part thereof which is related to theology. Essentially, Hinduism or broadly Hindutva is welcoming to all faiths as ancient history tells us. However, when the guest becomes ungrateful and starts pushing the host (in our case Hindutva/Hinduism) to the wall then out of self-preservation instinct the Hindu’s would react. It is to protect their ‘’freedom of thought’’ culture which they fear is under attack. Hindus are born-free and consider freedom of thought to be their birth-right. Accordingly, they refuse to get imprisoned in any thought or doctrine.
It needs to be understood that of all the faiths in the world only the two proselytizing faiths -Christianity and Islam — are pushing all the others to the wall all over the world given the pan-Christian or pan-Islamic world view that they harbor. But this encroaches upon the Hindu way of life and the Hindus, as well as other religions, would definitely stand-up to such bullying else, they face extinction as history has shown.
The political parties in India, missionaries, jihadists, and Marxists are all involved in propaganda that Hindutva is militant Hinduism. Actually, neither Hindutva nor Hinduism have any political agenda. If it was so then Hindus would not have welcomed all faiths to its shore. In fact, the Jewish people acknowledge that while they were persecuted all over the world, the Hindus gave them a sanctuary. However, when faced with faiths and ideologies who expressly spell out their political agenda, those who want to have the freedom that Hindu Thought provides would naturally defend their turf. If only the religious and ideological schools that want to impose their world view on others stop their expansionist agenda, the political Hindutva would get automatically stunted. Consequently, the onus to stop Hindutva from becoming political rests on these expansionist faiths and ideologies.
