The Student Room Group

if India is predominantly Hindu, why is it not declared a Hindu country?

basically the title.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by RickHendricks
basically the title.


There are only three. I dont think Hinduism becomes significant internationally, so it just isn't referred to. I think the only countries which are referred to based on religion are the Muslim countries , which can operate politically together. I dont think people refer to Christian countries really because they have become more secular these days. That may be the way India prefer to think about itself.
During the independence movement the indian leaders did not buy into the logic that because pakistan was to be formed as a separate country for muslims therefore what remained should be a hindu country. the movement had leaders of every religion, language, culture and therefore the country was to be one for everybody.

And despite grave incidents of religious violence that have happened in india since partition it has been reasonably successful at maintaining unity and cooperation between all groups because we rejected that logic of partition.
We see and hear about the incidents of communal violence in india via the media but we rarely hear about cooperation between different communities because it is considered to be normal - hindus celebrating eid, muslims celebrating diwali, sikhs building mosques etc

Not just that but we have entire states and union territories where hindus are in the minority. punjab has a sikh majority, J&K and lakshwadeep have a muslim majority, 4 states in north east india have more christians than hindus

If india is declared as a hindu country then the country would need a hindu scripture to be guided by. not only would that be unacceptable to the religious minority, which is about 21% of the population, but even to many hindus too because hinduism is such a diverse religion that we do not have just one scripture - we would never agree on which one to take inspiration from.

From a political and constitutional point of view for india to be declared as a hindu country there would need to be 2/3 majority support for it in both houses of indian parliament. that support is not there.
A Hindu country may allude to a Hindu State, and sanskrit laws would be dysfunctional in a progress-seeking westernising India.
It's not progressive and many Indians don't consider India to be a homogenous entity. Rather it's a country made up of different cultures, languages and religion. Even hinduism itself is an issue, there are different versions of hinduism in each part of the country.
Original post by m4ttch4mp
It's not progressive and many Indians don't consider India to be a homogenous entity. Rather it's a country made up of different cultures, languages and religion. Even hinduism itself is an issue, there are different versions of hinduism in each part of the country.


exactly. we would never agree on which form of hinduism should govern the nation or which scripture we should base our laws on
Original post by m4ttch4mp
It's not progressive and many Indians don't consider India to be a homogenous entity. Rather it's a country made up of different cultures, languages and religion. Even hinduism itself is an issue, there are different versions of hinduism in each part of the country.

I agree, there are many different concepts of God within Hinduism itself and Hinduism is not a very homogeneous religion. Cultures are also different so therefore I believe that Secularism is the only system that could work.


"The concept of God in Hinduism varies in its diverse traditions.[1][2][3] Hinduism spans a wide range of beliefs such as henotheism,monotheism, polytheism, panentheism,pantheism, pandeism, monism, atheism and nontheism.[1][4][5] "

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Hinduism
Hindus are divided and historically known not to embrace religious brotherhood as sikhs and muslims do. They look for their own 'fayda' which means benefit.. and this lead to the mughals to take over india.. and the british to take over India.

The variation of beliefs, views, worship, tolerance among the Hindus in India will never allow us to unite under one umbrella. I do respect the RSS and VHP trying to stand up for the Hindu state ( although some methods i disagree with) but generally their attempts are futile because ( it pains me to say) that hindus will backstab each other for their own benefit.

Also another point, there is no other nation on Earth that has such a variety of religions, ethnicities, cultures. Saying that no one can escape the fact that India is still a majority Hindu country. I dont think many indians want India to be a Hindu nation but just that the ethinic minorities in India should respect hindus and call themselves Indian before their religion.
Reply 8
Avatar for desaf1
desaf1
12
Original post by sachinisgod

Also another point, there is no other nation on Earth that has such a variety of religions, ethnicities, cultures.


America? Canada?
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by desaf1
America? Canada?


maybe in the last few decades.. and this has been due to immigration to these countries.

India has been this diverse since hundreds of years.
Original post by RickHendricks
basically the title.

Because Hinduism isn't a single, unified, codified religon.
I think it is unfair. India is the most populous Hindu country but can't call itself Hindu. Sri Lanka is a Buddhist. Bangladesh is Muslim. The UK is a Chrisitan country. But India can't be a Hindu country?
Original post by muthalganesan18
I think it is unfair. India is the most populous Hindu country but can't call itself Hindu. Sri Lanka is a Buddhist. Bangladesh is Muslim. The UK is a Chrisitan country. But India can't be a Hindu country?


It is not a question of can't, the fact is that it is not something that the majority of indian politicians or indian voters want.
The hinduthva, RSS and rashtra fans seem to favour the approach.
But the rest of india's population do not- liberal hindus, atheists, sikhs and other religious groups.

Henry VIII took england down the Church of England route as a means of concentrating power in his own hands not Rome's- brutally crushing all direct opposition to his reforms. Later monarchs and the celtic unions expanded the scope of the CofE/Anglicanism into the modern UK of today.
De Valera led Ireland down a different road in the mid twentieth century, avoiding a formal national affiliation between the Irish free state/EIRE and Rome- Catholicism.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by londonmyst
It is not a question of can't, the fact is that it is not something that the majority of indian politicians or indian voters want.
The hinduthva, RSS and rashtra fans seem to favour the approach.
But the rest of india's population do not- liberal hindus, atheists, sikhs and other religious groups.

Henry VIII took england down the Church of England route as a means of concentrating power in his own hands not Rome's- brutally crushing all direct opposition to his reforms. Later monarchs and the celtic unions expanded the scope of the CofE/Anglicanism into the modern UK of today.
De Valera led Ireland down a different road in the mid twentieth century, avoiding a formal national affiliation between the Irish free state/EIRE and Rome- Catholicism.


The socially liberal middle class of India are right-leaining. I'm gay and this is where all the Hindu liberals are - we support Hindu Nationalism too.
Identitarianism is always a recipe for disaster. It leads to discrimination and divison. Its the main tool by which enemies of states destroy states by divide and conquer. Indentity politics divide people. An Islamic state is one that by its name puts muslims and their beliefs and teachings above those of others. The same can be said for a Hindu state or a christian state or any other type of state that identifies with a specific identity. I think it's always very important to employ in politics ideas that are all encompassing. Ideas that make everyone, within reason, feel like their opinions and their identity is as imortant to the state as everyone else's.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Pinkisk
Identitarianism is always a recipe for disaster. It leads to discrimination and divison. Its the main tool by which enemies of states destroy states by divide and conquer. Indentity politics divide people. An Islamic state is one that by its name puts muslims and their beliefs and teachings above those of others. The same can be said for a Hindu state or a christian state or any other type of state that identifies with a specific identity.


That's religious theocracy- imposing fundamentalist interpretations of ancient religious doctrines upon the national population through the power of the law and state, with enforced compliance and harsh punishment for those who reject the doctrines or oppose the enforcement tactics.
Not suitable for multicultural, liberal or secular modern societies.
Original post by muthalganesan18
The socially liberal middle class of India are right-leaining. I'm gay and this is where all the Hindu liberals are - we support Hindu Nationalism too.


From what I've seen on an economic level the majority of voting populations across most asian nations seem to be right leaning, as far as economic growth, limited taxation, low welfare spending and attracting international trade/investment go.
The socially liberal climate seams to manifest itself through combining age old popular cultural aspects like bollywood, cuisine and harmonious religious pluralism alongside more modern overseas cultural phenomenons (like open adult sexual liberation, rap & hip hop music, globalisation and more free market orientated capitalism).

Based on your TSR posts that I've read, you don't give the impression of being that liberal.
Sound more of a social conservative like Mrs Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, emphasizing the role of traditional religion (minus homophobia) and national demographic continuity.
Original post by londonmyst
From what I've seen on an economic level the majority of voting populations across most asian nations seem to be right leaning, as far as economic growth, limited taxation, low welfare spending and attracting international trade/investment go.
The socially liberal climate seams to manifest itself through combining age old popular cultural aspects like bollywood, cuisine and harmonious religious pluralism alongside more modern overseas cultural phenomenons (like open adult sexual liberation, rap & hip hop music, globalisation and more free market orientated capitalism).

Based on your TSR posts that I've read, you don't give the impression of being that liberal.
Sound more of a social conservative like Mrs Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, emphasizing the role of traditional religion (minus homophobia) and national demographic continuity.


I'm basing this off from my travels of South Asia, and my British Hindu friends. The socially liberal middle class of India are the ones that support LGBT and the like, and these tend to be supportive of the BJP. Islamophobia is really common among the middle class of India - I presume you're a Pakistani. And black music is nothing to do with politics so I don't know why you're bringing that into this.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by muthalganesan18
I'm basing this off from my travels of South Asia, and my British Hindu friends. The socially liberal middle class of India are the ones that support LGBT and the like, and these tend to be supportive of the BJP. Islamophobia is really common among the middle class of India - I presume you're a Pakistani but I don't consider Pakistanis to be South Asian, and posts like yours are why I think it's stupid that Pakistanis talk as if they were Indian. And black music is nothing to do with politics so I don't know why you're bringing that into this - it's lower class and shameful due to British views on Black culture.


I'm a white British female with plenty of friends born or currently working in India.
I have friends who are staunch hinduthva supporters, those who prefer other forms of hindu nationalism, are secular atheists or liberals of other religious backgrounds.
You may have read some of my other TSR posts about rejecting all identity politics including feminism, not having any time for virtue signalling jargon and my 80 year old maternal grandmother being a toxic bible ranter who hates all other religions along with everyone who disagrees with her.

Your obsession with pakistan and hostility towards other religious & ethnic groups is affecting your judgement terribly- leading you to honestly believe that everyone who disagrees with you must be connected to pakistan.
This is such a shame because your posts are fascinating to read.

A few months ago, I got an abusive message from a very disturbed neo nazi with complaints about me having a best friend born in india and once living in southall- his final line was " why is it always the white woman who lets the side down ... your kids are gonna be half c****".
I daresay you can figure out what the redacted letters are.
Do you really want to tar yourself with the same brush as a vicious scumbag like that whose only hobbies are being abusive online and spewing race hate?
Once you earn yourself that sort of reputation you can never shake it off and few people will take anything you say seriously.
Original post by londonmyst
Your obsession with pakistan and hostility towards other religious & ethnic groups is affecting your judgement terribly- leading you to honestly believe that everyone who disagrees with you must be connected to pakistan.


This. Most, if not all, of his posts always contain some sort of rant about Muslims or Pakistanis. Sad and pathetic tbh.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you