,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Few questions for students of Hinduism and Hindu history -
a) What explains the ability of Vaishnavism (especially krSNa Bhakti) to make inroads among foreigners? (ranging from Heliodorus and Kushans in the pre-Common Era to Tulsi Gabbard in 21st cen)?
a) What explains the ability of Vaishnavism (especially krSNa Bhakti) to make inroads among foreigners? (ranging from Heliodorus and Kushans in the pre-Common Era to Tulsi Gabbard in 21st cen)?
b) Why have other sectarian movements like Shaivism, Kaumarism lacked this ability?
c) Is Vaishnavism the sole bearer of the burden in ensuring a global footprint for Hinduism? Given that the orthodox Smartha outlook looks askance at conversions / religious expansionism
c) Is Vaishnavism the sole bearer of the burden in ensuring a global footprint for Hinduism? Given that the orthodox Smartha outlook looks askance at conversions / religious expansionism
d) Historically it is Vaishnavism that has traditionally been the vehicle of upward mobility and Sanskritization in Hindu society. At least that is my view
However Vaishnavism is also populist. And many of its strands have a theologically exclusive streak.
However Vaishnavism is also populist. And many of its strands have a theologically exclusive streak.
This is problematic to smArthas, and orthodox brAhmaNas, though the concern is usually not explicitly articulated
Are these two streaks in Indian religion deeply incompatible. Or merely complementary to each other. I see it as the latter.
Are these two streaks in Indian religion deeply incompatible. Or merely complementary to each other. I see it as the latter.
A brahminical tradition like Sri-Vaishnavism suggests that the two can be reconciled
But then this raises the bogey of sectarianism and a narrow outlook to which Vaishnavites (including Sri-Vaishnavites) are particularly vulnerable
But then this raises the bogey of sectarianism and a narrow outlook to which Vaishnavites (including Sri-Vaishnavites) are particularly vulnerable
Vaishnavism and its checkered history requires a deeper study.
Much of the smArtha establishment has come to terms with it - look at how Bhagavad Gita has now become the pre-eminent Vedanta text even among non vaishnavites in our times
Much of the smArtha establishment has come to terms with it - look at how Bhagavad Gita has now become the pre-eminent Vedanta text even among non vaishnavites in our times
But the mutual unease cannot be ignored
An excessive focus on the Vaishnavite way may result in Hinduism becoming something unrecognizable.
We already see that with the unease among many Hindus w.r.t Gaudiyas and ISKCON in particular.
Perhaps the unease is warranted
An excessive focus on the Vaishnavite way may result in Hinduism becoming something unrecognizable.
We already see that with the unease among many Hindus w.r.t Gaudiyas and ISKCON in particular.
Perhaps the unease is warranted
Postscript : Some have countered the first 2 tweets by citing the historical influence of Shaivism - esp in SE Asia, and also among Hunas
Point taken. But it is Vaishnavism which has retained its influence for far longer as compared to other sectarian Hindu movements
Point taken. But it is Vaishnavism which has retained its influence for far longer as compared to other sectarian Hindu movements
Postscript 2 : Kushans belonged to the first couple of centuries of Common Era ofcourse, and not before Common Era as incorrectly mentioned in the first tweet
