Who is a Hindu?
The question is deceptively simple whose precise answer is difficult if not impossible. A number of court judgements have tried to define the term 'Hindu' from the viewpoint of a religious denomination. These are only a part of the whole what denotes the term Hindu.
At the very outset it must be clarified that the term Hindu, as originally used, denoted inhabitants of area drained by the Indus River System. In view of the fact that letter 'स' in Persian is pronounced as 'ह' the people living on the other side of the river सिन्धु were pronounced as Hindu by them for sake of convenience. Later western invaders also addressed the people beyond Indus as such. The Greek pronounced Indus as 'Indoi' that also formed the basis of evolution of the term India and Hindu for understandable convenience. Thus the term Hindu, originally is of territorial significance rather than a creedal one. Probably it also denoted nationality. Hinduism as a religion or faith and for that matter the Hindu as a member of that religion is of much later development.
Hence, historically speaking in view of the above perspective /explanation it would not be incorrect to say that all the people inhabiting the area South of the River Indus are hindu.
However, it is still a matter of great rummage that as to since when the territorial connotation associated with word 'Hindu' gave way to assume an altogether different meaning signifying religion.Though for many the use of term Hindu in context of religion is inappropriate. Such people prefer to use the term Sanatani for identifying their religious belief for what the Hinduism is known to stand for.
Leaving that distinction aside the word Hindu came to be associated with a definite religious identity of people who called themselves the Aryans. Even all those who we know them as Hunas, Kushan and Sakas etc. were to become and called Hindu subsequently on account of merger and acquisition of cultures of theirs with that of the Aryans. Technically their assimilation was called Aryanization by the people writing history. Together they constituted a faith of unique character which though accepted the authority of Vedas the latter did not pose an obstacle in maintaining their original tradition, custom, deities and modes of worship.Thus assimilation, inclusion and collectiveness among individuality was the vital force that succeeded to bind these races of different stocks and regions unified by a common spirit to be called Hindu as a religion. A unique approach to devise a way of life was synthesized where disagreement was not a matter of life and death but was happily accepted as a individual's own way of quest for what is called Truth. A Hindu prefers Experience to Dogma, Outer expression to Inward realization and Intellect to Intuition etc. In higher analysis of the term, it may appear that Hinduism is more a culture than religion and it is both a way as well as view of life. The Hindu believes not in the negation of life but enjoyment of it without a sense of attachment to the source of means of enjoyment. For a devout Hindu आत्मविजय is more cherishable than दिग्विजय. Thus it would have been better to discuss what is Hindu instead of who is Hindu. The life is conceived to draw energy from that spirit of the Absolute despite it being chequered by way of a number of customs, belief, deities. Nevertheless it is inspired by the faith in the Great Text, the Vedas-the oldest scripture on the earth. If the source of history is taken to be a written one then history definitely starts from the Vedas which is the oldest scripture mankind has known to have on the earth.
Now in order to ascertain who is a Hindu it is relevant to proceed in such a way that if a person who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsis or Jews by religion he should be considered at the first instance a Hindu so far as application of Codified Hindu law with or without modification is concerned.
Alternatively a person may be Sikh,Jain, Buddhist by religion or birth yet governed by Codified Hindu law like a person following Hindu religion either by birth or by choice.
Hindu by Birth- a person will be a Hindu
if he is born of a Hindu parents(that is when both parents are Hindus) or if he is born to a Hindu Parent(that is one of the parents is Hindu)
And
He is brought up as a Hindu.
Hindu by religion--
Any person who follows Hindu religion in any of its form or development, either by practising it or professing it, is a Hindu. Hindu religion is multifaceted and in the light of the above discussion it is difficult to say with precision what makes a person to be called Hindu.
A bold attempt to define Hindu in terms of religion was made by Gajendragadkar, J. in Shastri v. Muladas (1966). His Lordship observed the following essentials of Hinduism:
A. Acceptance of the Vedas as the highest authority in religious and philosophical matters.
B. Belief in cycle of creation, maintenance and dissolution common to all six systems of Indian philosophy.
C. All the branches of Hindu philosophy save that of Charwak believe in rebirth and pre-existence.
Needless to say that the attempt to define who is a Hindu by way of above judicial pronouncement is not only insufficient but defective also. It says nothing in respect of a person or sect who/which is non religious. Moreover, It can't be said that a person not covered by the definition given in the Muladas is not a Hindu. Thus, a person who has faith in Hindu religion and who practises or professes it, is a Hindu. But a person does not cease to be a Hindu and is not a less Hindu who does not have faith in Hindu religion or does not practise or profess it. Thus, even when a Hindu starts practising, professing or having faith in a non-Hindu religion, he will not cease to be a Hindu unless it is conclusively established that he got converted into that faith. Similarly a person does not cease to be a Hindu if he becomes an atheist or dissents central doctrines of Hinduism, or lapses from orthodox religious practices or adopts western way of life or eats beef. Besides, the task was also relatively easy since the matter to be adjudicated was based on the contention that the Swamynarayan sect of satsangi denied temple entry to a non-satsangi dalit person, named Muladas.
Even before the codified Hindu law it was well settled that Jains, Buddhist and Sikhs were governed by Hindu law as modified by custom prevailing amongst them. The codified Hindu law also included them under the term Hindu.
Converts to Hinduism -
The second important judicial
pronouncement in the matter is Supreme Court decision in Peerumal v. Poonuswami(1971) wherein the Hon'ble Court held that a person may also become Hindu is after expressing an intention, expressly or impliedly, he lives as a Hindu and the community or caste accepts him as a member of that community even without undergoing formal conversion. As the Dharmashastra does not prescribe any ceremony for conversion. The Court held in such a case one has to look into the intention and conduct of the convert and if the consensus of the community into which he was initiated is sufficiently indicative of his conversion, then the lack of some formalities cannot negative what is an accomplished fact.
Hindu by declaration -
In Mohandas v. Dewaswan Board(1975) the High Court of Kerala held that when a person declares that he is a follower of Hindu faith and if such a declaration is bonafide and not made with any ulterior motive or intention, it amounts to his having accepted to Hindu approach to God. He becomes a Hindu by conversion. In this case one Jesudas, a catholic Christian by birth and a famous playback singer used to give devotional music in a Hindu temple and worshipped there like a Hindu. He had also filed declaration, "I declare that I am a follower of Hindu faith." On these facts the Court held that Jesudas was a Hindu and couldn't be prevented from entering the temple.
Hence, a non-Hindu becomes a Hindu by conversion
* through formal ceremony of conversion.
* bonafide intention and matching conduct leading to his acceptance by the community. This may be without formal ceremony.
* bonafide declaration that he is a Hindu.
R.R.Prabhakar.
27.05.2019.
At the very outset it must be clarified that the term Hindu, as originally used, denoted inhabitants of area drained by the Indus River System. In view of the fact that letter 'स' in Persian is pronounced as 'ह' the people living on the other side of the river सिन्धु were pronounced as Hindu by them for sake of convenience. Later western invaders also addressed the people beyond Indus as such. The Greek pronounced Indus as 'Indoi' that also formed the basis of evolution of the term India and Hindu for understandable convenience. Thus the term Hindu, originally is of territorial significance rather than a creedal one. Probably it also denoted nationality. Hinduism as a religion or faith and for that matter the Hindu as a member of that religion is of much later development.
Hence, historically speaking in view of the above perspective /explanation it would not be incorrect to say that all the people inhabiting the area South of the River Indus are hindu.
However, it is still a matter of great rummage that as to since when the territorial connotation associated with word 'Hindu' gave way to assume an altogether different meaning signifying religion.Though for many the use of term Hindu in context of religion is inappropriate. Such people prefer to use the term Sanatani for identifying their religious belief for what the Hinduism is known to stand for.
Leaving that distinction aside the word Hindu came to be associated with a definite religious identity of people who called themselves the Aryans. Even all those who we know them as Hunas, Kushan and Sakas etc. were to become and called Hindu subsequently on account of merger and acquisition of cultures of theirs with that of the Aryans. Technically their assimilation was called Aryanization by the people writing history. Together they constituted a faith of unique character which though accepted the authority of Vedas the latter did not pose an obstacle in maintaining their original tradition, custom, deities and modes of worship.Thus assimilation, inclusion and collectiveness among individuality was the vital force that succeeded to bind these races of different stocks and regions unified by a common spirit to be called Hindu as a religion. A unique approach to devise a way of life was synthesized where disagreement was not a matter of life and death but was happily accepted as a individual's own way of quest for what is called Truth. A Hindu prefers Experience to Dogma, Outer expression to Inward realization and Intellect to Intuition etc. In higher analysis of the term, it may appear that Hinduism is more a culture than religion and it is both a way as well as view of life. The Hindu believes not in the negation of life but enjoyment of it without a sense of attachment to the source of means of enjoyment. For a devout Hindu आत्मविजय is more cherishable than दिग्विजय. Thus it would have been better to discuss what is Hindu instead of who is Hindu. The life is conceived to draw energy from that spirit of the Absolute despite it being chequered by way of a number of customs, belief, deities. Nevertheless it is inspired by the faith in the Great Text, the Vedas-the oldest scripture on the earth. If the source of history is taken to be a written one then history definitely starts from the Vedas which is the oldest scripture mankind has known to have on the earth.
Now in order to ascertain who is a Hindu it is relevant to proceed in such a way that if a person who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsis or Jews by religion he should be considered at the first instance a Hindu so far as application of Codified Hindu law with or without modification is concerned.
Alternatively a person may be Sikh,Jain, Buddhist by religion or birth yet governed by Codified Hindu law like a person following Hindu religion either by birth or by choice.
Hindu by Birth- a person will be a Hindu
if he is born of a Hindu parents(that is when both parents are Hindus) or if he is born to a Hindu Parent(that is one of the parents is Hindu)
And
He is brought up as a Hindu.
Hindu by religion--
Any person who follows Hindu religion in any of its form or development, either by practising it or professing it, is a Hindu. Hindu religion is multifaceted and in the light of the above discussion it is difficult to say with precision what makes a person to be called Hindu.
A bold attempt to define Hindu in terms of religion was made by Gajendragadkar, J. in Shastri v. Muladas (1966). His Lordship observed the following essentials of Hinduism:
A. Acceptance of the Vedas as the highest authority in religious and philosophical matters.
B. Belief in cycle of creation, maintenance and dissolution common to all six systems of Indian philosophy.
C. All the branches of Hindu philosophy save that of Charwak believe in rebirth and pre-existence.
Needless to say that the attempt to define who is a Hindu by way of above judicial pronouncement is not only insufficient but defective also. It says nothing in respect of a person or sect who/which is non religious. Moreover, It can't be said that a person not covered by the definition given in the Muladas is not a Hindu. Thus, a person who has faith in Hindu religion and who practises or professes it, is a Hindu. But a person does not cease to be a Hindu and is not a less Hindu who does not have faith in Hindu religion or does not practise or profess it. Thus, even when a Hindu starts practising, professing or having faith in a non-Hindu religion, he will not cease to be a Hindu unless it is conclusively established that he got converted into that faith. Similarly a person does not cease to be a Hindu if he becomes an atheist or dissents central doctrines of Hinduism, or lapses from orthodox religious practices or adopts western way of life or eats beef. Besides, the task was also relatively easy since the matter to be adjudicated was based on the contention that the Swamynarayan sect of satsangi denied temple entry to a non-satsangi dalit person, named Muladas.
Even before the codified Hindu law it was well settled that Jains, Buddhist and Sikhs were governed by Hindu law as modified by custom prevailing amongst them. The codified Hindu law also included them under the term Hindu.
Converts to Hinduism -
The second important judicial
pronouncement in the matter is Supreme Court decision in Peerumal v. Poonuswami(1971) wherein the Hon'ble Court held that a person may also become Hindu is after expressing an intention, expressly or impliedly, he lives as a Hindu and the community or caste accepts him as a member of that community even without undergoing formal conversion. As the Dharmashastra does not prescribe any ceremony for conversion. The Court held in such a case one has to look into the intention and conduct of the convert and if the consensus of the community into which he was initiated is sufficiently indicative of his conversion, then the lack of some formalities cannot negative what is an accomplished fact.
Hindu by declaration -
In Mohandas v. Dewaswan Board(1975) the High Court of Kerala held that when a person declares that he is a follower of Hindu faith and if such a declaration is bonafide and not made with any ulterior motive or intention, it amounts to his having accepted to Hindu approach to God. He becomes a Hindu by conversion. In this case one Jesudas, a catholic Christian by birth and a famous playback singer used to give devotional music in a Hindu temple and worshipped there like a Hindu. He had also filed declaration, "I declare that I am a follower of Hindu faith." On these facts the Court held that Jesudas was a Hindu and couldn't be prevented from entering the temple.
Hence, a non-Hindu becomes a Hindu by conversion
* through formal ceremony of conversion.
* bonafide intention and matching conduct leading to his acceptance by the community. This may be without formal ceremony.
* bonafide declaration that he is a Hindu.
R.R.Prabhakar.
27.05.2019.
Comments