2. Hinduism
Text
It is my discernment that the so-called Hindu religion is actually of two different spiritual antiquities.
The first one is connected to the Vedic people. They are supposed to have lived somewhere in the north-western or northern or even north-eastern parts of South Asia, some more than 5000 years back.
It is not known to me if any kind of archaeological sites of the Vedic people have been discovered. However, it is a fact that there are Sanskrit literature that stand as testimony to the fact that such a people have lived somewhere on the globe in the past.
It is possible that these people might have had some great literary traditions. As to whether they had great technological skills and gadgets, is not known to me. If they did have grand technological capabilities, the question should come up as to why they were not able to preserve their literary texts in a printed book or paper form, or in some other media which are more easy to read, use and preserve.
This people’s spirituality is connected to the Vedic texts, I feel. Since I do not know Sanskrit and have not read any Vedic texts in their original form or in a translated version, I cannot say anything about them other than what is commonly mentioned.
The Gods in this spirituality are said to be Indira, Varuna, Agni, Mitra and such other gods. It is seen mentioned that in the later period of this age, Varuna came to the fore and became the foremost divinity.
The second spirituality that has also been added to the Hindu definition is that of the Puranic texts and age. This spirituality is disconnected from the Vedic spirituality by at least a few thousand years, I feel.
The concept of god and divinity in this second Hindu spirituality is totally different from that in the Vedic spirituality. The gods in the second Hindu religion are Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. This I gather is what is mentioned in the Puranic texts.
The most prominent common feature in the two different spiritual systems, I think, is the fact that the sacred texts in both the religions have been written in Sanskrit.
Why Sanskrit was used in the second Hindu religion might require an investigation.
In South Asia, there is a mood among the higher classes to protrude a pose that they are in possession of a higher knowledge and scholarship that is far beyond the reaches and capability of the common masses. In pursuance of this purpose, the higher classes must have accumulated a lot of readership in the ancient Sanskrit texts.
There was always a belief that there was something of the extraordinary in the ancient Sanskrit text and antiquity. However whatever it was was shrouded in a veil of hazy and hoary ancientness.
I feel that Sanskrit was never the language of the common masses of the land at any time in the historical periods of South Asia.
Sanskrit traditions were maintained over the centuries by certain sections of people who defined themselves as Brahmins. They maintained a detachment from the lower classes of the local peoples. This was necessitated less by any Spiritual exclusiveness, and more by the need enforced by the codes in the local feudal languages.
Even in current-day India, people keep distances from others as per the dictates in the adornment versus pejorative word forms in the local language.
Beyond that most persons in current-day India, who want to protrude a pose of extraordinary scholarship, do quote from ancient Sanskrit texts in their talks, writings and debates. This would promote a feeling that the person is of solid profundity in the ancient texts.
During the English East India Company administration as well as of the British Crown’s indirect administration over India, there was a confused idea in the administration as to who was a Hindu.
The administration recorded everyone who was not a Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi &c. as a Hindu. However, the social reality was that the various lower placed ethnic populations in all the locations in India and outside India in South Asia were not Hindus. They had no access to Sanskrit studies or to the Hindu temples. However, many of them had their own spiritual worship systems. Some of them were of a Shamanistic type.
However, the non-Brahmin lower populations were not allowed to enter Hindu spiritual premises. This did actually lead to various kinds of acrimonious claims from the non-Hindu lower class ethnic populations. For, they had been identified as Hindus for up-to around 150 years by the two English administrations.
By around 1930s, the non-Hindu sections had more or less forced themselves into the Hindu Brackett. This might have been promoted by the socially elevated families in the lower-placed sections in the various locations in India. They wanted to assert their social leadership over the traditional social leadership of their own caste or people. It is possible that the traditional social leadership were not willing to clothe themselves in a Hindu spiritual address, when they actually had been following their own Spiritual systems and divinities over the centuries.
As of now, I understand that the various state governments of current-day India as well as its central government has nationalised most of the traditional Brahmin temple. The Brahmins have lost all semblance of ownership over their traditional spiritual possessions. The others, that is, the new entrants into the Hindu definition, have takeover what has been stolen from the Brahmins.
Current-day Hinduism is a mix of the two different religions that had been defined as Hinduism, and of various other local ethnic populations’ spiritual antiquities.
The first one is connected to the Vedic people. They are supposed to have lived somewhere in the north-western or northern or even north-eastern parts of South Asia, some more than 5000 years back.
It is not known to me if any kind of archaeological sites of the Vedic people have been discovered. However, it is a fact that there are Sanskrit literature that stand as testimony to the fact that such a people have lived somewhere on the globe in the past.
It is possible that these people might have had some great literary traditions. As to whether they had great technological skills and gadgets, is not known to me. If they did have grand technological capabilities, the question should come up as to why they were not able to preserve their literary texts in a printed book or paper form, or in some other media which are more easy to read, use and preserve.
This people’s spirituality is connected to the Vedic texts, I feel. Since I do not know Sanskrit and have not read any Vedic texts in their original form or in a translated version, I cannot say anything about them other than what is commonly mentioned.
The Gods in this spirituality are said to be Indira, Varuna, Agni, Mitra and such other gods. It is seen mentioned that in the later period of this age, Varuna came to the fore and became the foremost divinity.
The second spirituality that has also been added to the Hindu definition is that of the Puranic texts and age. This spirituality is disconnected from the Vedic spirituality by at least a few thousand years, I feel.
The concept of god and divinity in this second Hindu spirituality is totally different from that in the Vedic spirituality. The gods in the second Hindu religion are Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. This I gather is what is mentioned in the Puranic texts.
The most prominent common feature in the two different spiritual systems, I think, is the fact that the sacred texts in both the religions have been written in Sanskrit.
Why Sanskrit was used in the second Hindu religion might require an investigation.
In South Asia, there is a mood among the higher classes to protrude a pose that they are in possession of a higher knowledge and scholarship that is far beyond the reaches and capability of the common masses. In pursuance of this purpose, the higher classes must have accumulated a lot of readership in the ancient Sanskrit texts.
There was always a belief that there was something of the extraordinary in the ancient Sanskrit text and antiquity. However whatever it was was shrouded in a veil of hazy and hoary ancientness.
I feel that Sanskrit was never the language of the common masses of the land at any time in the historical periods of South Asia.
Sanskrit traditions were maintained over the centuries by certain sections of people who defined themselves as Brahmins. They maintained a detachment from the lower classes of the local peoples. This was necessitated less by any Spiritual exclusiveness, and more by the need enforced by the codes in the local feudal languages.
Even in current-day India, people keep distances from others as per the dictates in the adornment versus pejorative word forms in the local language.
Beyond that most persons in current-day India, who want to protrude a pose of extraordinary scholarship, do quote from ancient Sanskrit texts in their talks, writings and debates. This would promote a feeling that the person is of solid profundity in the ancient texts.
During the English East India Company administration as well as of the British Crown’s indirect administration over India, there was a confused idea in the administration as to who was a Hindu.
The administration recorded everyone who was not a Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi &c. as a Hindu. However, the social reality was that the various lower placed ethnic populations in all the locations in India and outside India in South Asia were not Hindus. They had no access to Sanskrit studies or to the Hindu temples. However, many of them had their own spiritual worship systems. Some of them were of a Shamanistic type.
However, the non-Brahmin lower populations were not allowed to enter Hindu spiritual premises. This did actually lead to various kinds of acrimonious claims from the non-Hindu lower class ethnic populations. For, they had been identified as Hindus for up-to around 150 years by the two English administrations.
By around 1930s, the non-Hindu sections had more or less forced themselves into the Hindu Brackett. This might have been promoted by the socially elevated families in the lower-placed sections in the various locations in India. They wanted to assert their social leadership over the traditional social leadership of their own caste or people. It is possible that the traditional social leadership were not willing to clothe themselves in a Hindu spiritual address, when they actually had been following their own Spiritual systems and divinities over the centuries.
As of now, I understand that the various state governments of current-day India as well as its central government has nationalised most of the traditional Brahmin temple. The Brahmins have lost all semblance of ownership over their traditional spiritual possessions. The others, that is, the new entrants into the Hindu definition, have takeover what has been stolen from the Brahmins.
Current-day Hinduism is a mix of the two different religions that had been defined as Hinduism, and of various other local ethnic populations’ spiritual antiquities.
