Mood:
don't askNow Playing: Why non-Hindus should not be allowed to enter temples
Topic: EXCLUSIVE HINDUISM
Today an old friend of mine in Bollywood send me a message asking me why Hindus in God's own country are so fanatic about not opening temples to people from other religions. Well, I would say they are not far wrong in being steadfast in their demand. To understand the issue we should first understand Hinduism.
Hinduism is not expansionist like other popular religions. The most notable amongst such religions are Christianity and Islam. Both started off with the idea of expanding its cult, and made no bones of the fact that the sword was the best way to increase the count. There is no such prophet in Hinduism.
Although Christianity has toned down a lot because that religion thrives in the western world where people are exceedingly mature and sophisticated, Islam still unambiguously and proudly goes by the sword. Both religions propagate the idea that their own god is the only true god while the rest are fake. The holy trinity is all about that. Of Islam, one has to read Arun Shourie's books to realise how crude, cruel and intolerable is Islam. His books are also demonstrative of the Christian missionaries and their conspiracies.
To understand why Hinduism is not inclusive, one has to understand the genesis of this religion. Hinduism belongs to an era which is at best estimated and at worst, relegated. No one yet knows the exact time period when Hinduism was born. By all estimates, it was not born at one instance when someone sat down to write the holy edicts. It was in all probability evolved by several thousands of generations of extremely intelligent upper caste people who had an incredible insight into rights and wrongs -- not just morals but even about what is sustainable and what is healthy, with no science or technology to aid them.
As Gandhiji once said it is easy to damn Hinduism in today's terms, from today's modern way of life, but it is difficult to find fault if you put it perspective. Hinduism does not belong to this age but it was an impeccable way of life in the past centuries and millennia. Everything about Hinduism, its caste system, treatment of women, culture, dance, music, et al fell perfectly in place.
Hinduism was also prevalent during a time when there were no other religions. And most importantly, there was no marauding religion that would force Hindus to other faiths of a better god. That is the reason for Hinduism's insipid reaction to the Christian missionaries and Islamic jihad. Hinduism simply does not know how to combat conversion.
Yet again, one should understand that Hinduism was more a stringent way of life with no place for gods. Have you by any chance read about any gods in the vedas other that Indradev? If you go through various edicts of Hinduism, be it Ayurveda, music, rituals at home and in society, you will realise the main aim was to bring discipline in people so that the society is manageable. It may not look fair in today's western way of life. But it was most close to nature and the best system in the prevailing circumstances. I always wondered why the environmentalists and wildlife enthusiasts never rooted for Hinduism. It even made gods out plants and animals.
Hinduism is the only religion in the world which gives space to a non-believer. You don't have to believe in god or regularly visit temples to be a Hindu, or read the scriptures. If you are born a Hindu you remain a Hindu. If the vedas don't mention gods it is obvious that gods in Hinduism came much later, only to bring some kind of societal discipline. If people don't follow rituals which bring that discipline you wil invite the wrath of various gods. That's how it is. Now tell me, if Hinduism is such, where is the place for people from other religions coming into the Hindu fold?!
Just as a postscript I should add that the case of Yesudas is being brought into this only to gain some brownie points. Look at what Yesudas has said about Hinduism. He is probably the biggest proponent of Carnatic music today. He has made it very clear right in the beginning of his career that to be a Carnatic singer you need to be Hindu. Because music is taught in temples in south India. You have to bow before the lord, bow before your guru and sing peaens to Hindu gods in Carnatic music. God and Hindu rituals are part of the Carnatic music. Will a follower of Christianity who is told every Sunday that the holy trinity is beyond debate learn Carnatic music? Or will a Muslim who reads five times a day the indisputable fact that all kafirs have to be brought under the sword or be converted, which incidentally includes circumcision, be able to bow before Sarsawati.
Bharat Ratna Ustad Bismillah Khan, India's best ever shehnai player spent all his life in Varanasi amongst the temples, though he was never allowed to enter them. He admittedly sat outside, touched the stone carvings and murals and got inspiration for his music. Cavil was not in his making. He prayed and sang praises of Saraswati all his life.
But Yesudas and Khan were both not born Hindu and hence cannot enter a temple. Just as lower caste people were kept out of Brahminical temples. Temples of lower castes and Dalit Hindus abound the rural landscape. So the point is that even an apostate Hindu, a non-believer can enter temples because he is born Hindu but people who are not born Hindu are barred. Now it is up to us to decide if we want to demolish that edict also, just as we have done with thousands of other Hindu holy edicts. Amen.
Posted by Anil Nair
at 10:48 PM
Updated: Thursday, 19 April 2007 11:00 PM
