Thanks for the shout out, aankh! Although I haven’t done so much in-depth study of Vaishnava classics as Anaamika has, at least I have an idea what Vaishnavism is about and how it fits in with other Hindu currents. It has some really interesting history, especially how the bhakti movement originated and spread. You might be surprised to know how Vaishnava bhakti got started.
I, personally, would like a shout out for Shaktism, Shaivism, and Tantrism, just FTR that Vaishnavism, while a major form of Hinduism, is not the only thing. My contact, such as it is, with the Hindu universe has been through yoga, the Upanishads, and Goddess sadhana.
I would rather discuss a Shakta classic like the Devi Mahatmya, but first it would be nice if anyone else around here has heard of it. What is famous in some Hindu circles may be entirely unknown elsewhere. I’ve been a member of several online discussion groups for Shakti lovers, which is the focus of Hinduism that calls to me the most.
The introduction to the English translation of the Devi Gita pointed out that there had been many Gitas (songs) of various deities across India. The Bhagavadgita, filed as an episode within the Mahabharata but thematically almost independent from it, was raised to unusual prominence during British colonialism because Christian missionaries were pushing the Bible on Hindus. As Hindu reformers learned English and regrouped to push back in defense of Hinduism, they came to promote the Bhagavadgita as the Hindu equivalent to the Bible. Never mind that the concept of a single authoritative text for all Hindus, as the Bible is for Christians, had been alien to Hinduism up to that point. So ironically by resisting Christians and replying in kind, they reshaped Hinduism by imposing a more Christian outlook. The translator of the Devi Gita was making the point that there has long been far more diversity in Hinduism than one would expect from taking a single book as the “Bible” of Hinduism. The title Devi Gita means ‘Song of the Goddess’ and was revealed by the Goddess Bhuvaneshvari (Supreme Ruler of the Universe), to whom the male gods Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva all pay homage.
Shaktism played a significant role in India’s struggle for independence, and it would be nice to see that acknowledged.
Shaivism is the main current behind the hatha yoga craze that has spread around the world, although yoga is as diverse as Hinduism itself. You can find Vaishnava yoga, Shaiva yoga, Shakta yoga, and Tantric yoga. Georg Feuerstein, a scholar of Tantra, views hatha yoga as coming from just one branch of Tantric yoga, the original source. The god Shiva is of course the great prototype of the Yogi, sitting up there meditating in the Himalayas. He’s also the original Lord of the Dance—Nataraja. For that matter, Vedanta, without which Hinduism would not be Hinduism as we know it, is mainly connected with Shaivism (although there is plenty of Vaishnava Vedanta too).
Hinduism is so diverse, in what sense can it be reified into a single coherent phenomenon? The usual answer is that Hindus are those who accept the authority of the Vedas. This sets aside other Indian religions that rejected the Vedas, namely Jainism and Buddhism, as non-Hindu, and gathers in pretty much everything else. It’s perhaps an overly simplistic answer and can be criticized for what it doesn’t take into account, but then I’ve already noted my bias is Shaktic and Tantric. The Vedas are still chanted by Brahmin priests in temples, a remarkable continuity over thousands of years, and in this sense Hinduism remains a Vedic-based religion… however, the texts of the Vedas themselves can hardly be said to contribute anything to forming the Hindu worldview as we know it today. Many of the Vedic deities are little remembered today, while many of the most popular deities today were never mentioned in the Vedas. Vedanta, Tantrism, Shaktism, and the bhakti movement—plus vegetarianism for which the Jains, not the Vedas, get credit—are what formed Hinduism as we know it. You can trace present-day Hinduism directly back to the Vedas, but it has changed so much over the years in its intellectual elaborations and practical applications that it’s like a different religion.
Some of the most interesting developments in North Indian Hinduism, to me anyway, occurred only a few hundred years ago, when the bhakti and sahaja currents fused with Sufism to bring forth a new synthesis represented by Kabir, who mocked Brahmins and mullas alike and redirected the search for God into the immediate and personal. Nowadays the concept that God cannot be found in temple or mosque, you have to look within your heart, is sung in Hindi film lyrics and is widely familiar. But when Kabir first came out with it, it was revolutionary and radically democratic. The Sikh religion also came about as an offshoot of these developments.
Anyway, although I am not a Hindu, I have spent many years drawing from the richness this great tradition has to offer. Thanks for starting this, Anaamika.
) but I would be able to discuss it on a literary level.