The Hindu Business Line : For a religion that binds all

The word `Hinduism' has very little meaning, says Geoffrey A. Oddie, the author of Imagined Hinduism, a new book from Sage (www.sagepub.in) . He is an honorary research associate in the Department of History at the University of Sydney, Australia, and his book studies how the understanding of Hinduism evolved in the minds of British Protestant missionaries in the late-18th and 19th centuries.

"The word Hinduism includes a vast array of different cults, traditions and sects, and some teachings which contradict others. Ideas of Advaita Vedanta, bhakti and many forms of popular worship are usually implied by the term. Quite possibly, the only thing Hindus have in common is a sense of being Hindu," he reasons.

"Personally I prefer the terms like `spirituality' or `faith tradition' to the term `religion' which is heavily influenced by the European enlightenment idea that religion is `a system' or object `out there' with boundaries which separate people of one religion from another."

So, should we have more or less of religion? If religion means an inner life, spiritual growth and an inclusive love of others, or a force that is the source of empowerment and drive in the right direction, then the more religion the better, he says. "But if what is meant by religion is `primary' allegiance to the institutions, rituals and outward forms, above a faith which expresses a concern for individuals and social justice, then religion can be a negative force in society. The existence of religious allegiances and boundaries, like social and other boundaries, can create barriers to understanding."

Alas, we have many examples of such barriers around. "Indeed, we all create categories and stereotypes which can greatly impede our understanding of traditions and ethnic and other groups different from our own," says Oddie. Yet, he wouldn't advise democracies to mandate that religion be kept outside of political processes and discussions. Because in a true democracy there is open debate and people of faith will have different views.

However, religious activities should not endanger or subvert the democratic process itself through such things as intimidation and violence, he insists. "Furthermore, while demanding rights and status for themselves, adherents of different faiths should respect the rights of others, including those of a different faith tradition. The freedom to change one's mind is a fundamental human right. If therefore people who profess a particular religion use force and intimidation to prevent people (of their own free will) from joining other religious groups, then this form of oppression and persecution should not be permitted in a truly democratic society."

Oddie is not a historian who buries himself only in the things of the past; he looks at current issues that rock the world. Such as the veil controversy raging in the UK schools and Europe. "This is a complex issue which involves the right of individuals against the cohesion, ethos and unity of the nation State," he starts hesitantly. He is certain though that we should treasure diversity and that India is a great example of a multi-cultural, generally tolerant and inclusive state.

As an academician, he explains how, in pedagogy, communication is partly by reading the face and through words. "If the veil inhibits communication or effective teaching, then yes perhaps in that instance it should not be permitted among teachers. Many Muslims do not wear the veil and where possible the issue is perhaps best left to the Muslims themselves — provided they do not use the mechanism of the State or some other authority to impose the wearing of the veil on women," he says.

Sitting with Oddie in the lounge of a Chennai hotel, I ask him what he would tell George Bush if he were in front of him. He draws three circles on a paper lying on the tea table and names them `H', `M' and `C', to represent three religions. In the `C' circle, he writes Bush in the top half and `Me' in the bottom, and firmly separates the two with a diameter thickened many times over. "I have more things in common with H and M than with Bush," he says. "I would be polite, and if he were prepared to listen I would explain that the world is full of dictators — some of them supported by the US. Why, therefore, did he decide to remove Saddam Hussein when he knew there were no weapons of mass destruction? Why did he not take similar action to remove dictators in South America, Burma and elsewhere," he asks. And he has more questions for the Big Brother: "I would also ask him if he thinks US national interests are the same as the interests of humanity as a whole. If he replied in the affirmative, I would then ask why he thinks that so many countries and people (including people in the US) oppose his policies, especially in the Middle East..."

There are only hours to go before Oddie leaves for Thanjavur to pursue his current research on `the effect that Christianity has had on society in South India with special reference to the life and development of the kaller community'. He hopes to contribute to an ongoing debate among scholars about the difference between caste and tribe, and about the various factors that helped shape Indian society as it is today.

Suddenly it appears to me as if he is getting more filled with caste thoughts than we are! Aren't religious preoccupations holding down India's economic growth, I ask Oddie. He shakes his head and says that the question is impossible to answer without more research. But he is definite that there are many areas of work in modern India where caste sensibilities and attitudes no longer come into play.

True, the success of the new economy, and especially information technology hinges on the focus on merit rather than other divides. "If faith leads to a concern for social justice and greater social and economic equality, then this may mean that people with this view are less focused on an unsustainable GDP (gross domestic product) growth which might threaten the world, and more on the distribution of wealth and the elimination of the vast disparities within society," he says. A case of sustainable religion, perhaps.

Well, there is just enough time for one last poser before the cab arrived. And I ask him, "What is the religion that unites rather than divides." A wearied question, but he gives it profound thinking before saying that the religion that unites rather than divides is open to the possibilities in other faiths and is a faith that has love and compassion as its core. "This is a faith that should not only affect personal and family relationships but also the way adherents think about business, politics and public issues generally."

Response can be sent to MuraliDe@gmail.com