Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma?

Some clarifications on what these names mean and what they entail.

The Name 

In current times, a common belief is that Hinduism was originally named Sanatana Dharma. This is absolutely false. There is no evidence that such a name was ever used to describe any religion in the Indian subcontinent – either in part or in full. The text “esha dharma sanatanah” from Manu Smriti is sometimes quoted as evidence, but it does not pass prima facie tests of grammar and context, where ‘sanatana’ is used as an adjective. The truth is actually the opposite, with Hindu being the older term – at least 1000 years old, while SD originated as late as in the 19th century, possibly created by Vivekananda due to social and political reasons.

For a long time, the name Hindu was almost exclusively used by by foreigners to denote people in the geographic area, east of the Sindhu river. When Islamic rulers established their governance in India, the name Hindu officially came to be used to denote non-Muslims.

So, which of these two is the correct or preferred name – Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma? The answer is either, as they are exactly the same.

The Form

Hinduism is fundamentally different from other popular religions in the world. Other religions such as Buddhism, Christianity and Islam started out as a single set of beliefs, with a founder and a single set of teachings. Over time, they developed internal schisms and were distributed into different denominations. Buddhism broke up into Mahayana and Theravada, Islam into Sunni, Shia, Sufi, etc., and Christianity into dozens of denominations. However, in general, the root founder and other such fundamentals of the religion are recognized and accepted.

In striking contrast, Hinduism goes the other way. Various indigenous beliefs from India and the surrounding regions such as Veda Dharma, Buddhism, Jainism, Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaiseshika, Pashupata, Vaishnava, Bhagavata, Shaiva, Shakta, Tantra and countless unnamed, regional beliefs have syncretically come together under a convenient banner named Hinduism. Consequently, unlike other religions, Hinduism does not have a singe founder, book or a single set of teachings.

It is commonly claimed that Hinduism is based on the Veda, This is again, a false idea, based on the concept of religion as defined by Western scholars. They modeled Hinduism along western religions – single scripture (the Veda), single God, etc. This is an oversimplification that ignores the complexity of the syncretic Hindu system, which contains various beliefs that are not rooted in the Veda (Tantra, Veera Shaiva, Gadhimai and several others). There is no common set of books or even a single book that is regarded as the definitive scripture by all Hindus. Millions of Hindus do not have scriptures at all – their beliefs, traditions and practices being handed down to them by the previous generation. This is hard to understand if one has not spent time with different Hindus around the country.

The Identity

So, who is a Hindu? A Hindu is anyone who meets one of these conditions –

1. Born to a Hindu parent and does not reject the Hindu identity
2. Not born to a Hindu parent, but subscribes to one or more Hindu beliefs by choice.

The constitution of India provides a much broader definition. Anyone who claims to be a Jain, Buddhist, Sikh or Hindu, is a Hindu.

Al-Beruni on Hindus

These excerpts are from the book Al Beruni’s India translated by Edward Sachau. Al Beruni, a Persian, visited India during the 10th century CE and stayed there for several years, learning sanskrit and translating books on yoga and Sankhya. He was adept in mathematics, physics, astronomy, natural sciences, Khwarezmian, Persian, Arabic, Sanskrit, Greek, Syriac, Hebrew and Berber. He was a historian, a chronologist and a linguist.

He displays a keen intellect and goes to some trouble to set out his position on Hindus – it is not his intent to criticize or disagree, but to simply observe and record facts as he believes the written word is the only way to know and remember the history of nations.

General Observations

The reader must bear in mind that the Hindus differ from us in every respect.

They (Hindus) consider canonical only that which is known by heart and not that which exists in writing.

They totally differ from us in religion as we believe in nothing which they believe and vice-versa.

There is very little disputing about theological topics among themselves. On the contrary, all their fanaticism is directed against those who do not belong to them – the foreigners. They call them mlechcha (impure) and forbid any connection with them or sitting. eating, drinking with them.

The Hindus believe, there is no country but theirs, no religion like theirs and no science like theirs. They are by nature niggardly in communicating their knowledge and they take the greatest possible care to withhold it from men of another caste among their own people and much more, from foreigners. If you tell them about scholars in Khurasan or Persia, they will think you are an ignoramus and a liar. if they traveled and mingled with people of other nations, they would quickly change their minds as their ancestors were not as narrow-minded (quotes Varaha-Mihira here as example where he acknowledged Greek contribution to Indian astronomy).

When I showed them some of the elements on which science rests, pointing out logical deduction and scientific methods, they flocked eagerly around me, asking me which Hindu master I had learnt this from!

The heathen Greeks before Christianity, held the same opinions as Hindus, their educated classes thought much the same as Hindus and their common people held the same idolatrous views as Hindus.

You find that the so-called scientific theorems of the Hindus are in utter confusion, devoid of logical order, always mixed up with the silly notions of the crowd – such as immense numbers, enormous spaces of time and all kinds of religious dogmas, which is never called into question.

The beliefs of the educated and uneducated people differ in every nation. Educated Hindus believe there is one God (quotes Yoga and Sankhya). But among common Hindus, the beliefs are of a great variety. Some of them are simply abominable, but such mistakes occur in all religions.

The educated among Hindus abhor anthropomorphisms, but the common classes use them extensively. Nobody minds these classes and their theories, though they be many. The main and most essential point of the Hindu world is what the Brahmanas believe, for they are specially trained for preserving and maintaining their religion.

Hindus differ on which varnas are eligible for liberation. Some hold that only Brahmanas and Kshatriyas are eligible as no one else can study the Veda. Some others believe all varnas and indeed the entire human race is eligible for liberation – if the intent of obtaining liberation is perfect.

On abrogation of laws, the Hindus say it is possible – for example, consumption of beef (now forbidden) was allowed before the coming of Vasudeva.

Idol worship

The common mind has an aversion to the world of abstract thought – which is only understood by highly educated people. In all places and times, such educated people are very few in number. As common people will only acquiesce in pictorial representations, many of the leaders of religious communities have deviated from the right path and given such imagery in their books and houses of worship. For example, if a picture of the prophet was shown to an uneducated man or woman, their joy would bring them to kiss the picture and roll in joy as if they were not looking at a picture, but the original. This is the cause which leads to the manufacture of idols and monuments.

We now examine the ludicrous views (on idolatry) of the Hindus. We declare at once that these views are held only by the common uneducated people. For those who are on the path to liberation; those who study philosophy and theology; who desire abstract truth which they call ‘saara’ would never dream of worshipping an image manufactured to represent God. ( The story of Ambarisha is presented here as the cause of idol manufacturing).

It is evident that the first cause of idolatry was the desire of commemorating the dead and of consoling the living’ but on this basis it has developed and has finally become a foul and pernicious abuse.

Veda

The Brahmins recite the Veda without understanding its meaning and in the same way, they learn it by heart; one receiving it from the other. Only a few learn of its explanation and still less is the number of those who master its contents and interpretations to such a degree as to hold a theological disputation.

The Brahmins teach the Veda to the Kshatriya; but the Kshatriya is not allowed to teach it. Vaishya and Shudra cannot hear or recite the Veda. If it happens, the Brahmins drag him before the magistrate and have his tongue cut off.

They do not allow the Veda to be committed to writing because it is recited according to certain modulations and writing can introduce defects. However, Vasukra, a Kashmiri Brahmin has committed it to writing as he was afraid it may all be lost as he observed man was deteriorating day by day without caring for virtue or duty.

The common meter is Shloka, but the Veda uses a different meter than the Shloka meter. Some say it is impossible to compose anything in the Vedic meter, but scholars say they can; they just do not do so out of veneration for the Veda.

They have a book that they hold in high veneration claiming that everything found in other books is found in this book, but not vice-versa. This book is the Bharata containing 100,000 verses.