[Y-Indology] Is Buddhism a religion distinct from Hinduism?

[Guest guest]

A lengthy essay on the above topic was posted today anonymously -- obviously

by somebody who is not familiar with basic netiquette -- that reaches the

conclusion:

 

> In conclusion given the civilizational/dharmic unity underlying all

> the spiritual streams of India one thing is very certain : we have to

> find a new way to define and represent the spiritual streams of India.

 

One wonders why we have to do this. Most modern academic writing with which

I am familiar acknowledges the symbiotic relationship between Buddhism and

non-Buddhist forms of religio-philosophy in India throughout its long

presence there. Moreover the implicit idea that the spiritual-religious

phenomenon in India is very amorphous and the entire range of beliefs and

practices can be seen a occupying various points along a spectrum has no

great originality. Similarly, a certain unity of beliefs can be discerned

in religions that originated in the Middle East -- Judaism, Christianity and

Islam. By analogy, would it be useful to say that the latter two have so

much in common with their undoubted Judaic roots that they should be termed

Judaism ? A cynic might answer "yes", seeing it as a solution to the social

and religious problems that currently involve the Middle East.

However, one can agree with the anonymous writer that it may possibly be

desirable to devise an term to denote the entire

philosophico-religio-spiritual emsemble of India with some inclusive term,

though "Hinduism" does not seem to be the best candidate. Moreover, even

granted that this term, divested of its modern connotations, may be

acceptable when considering the pre-modern or classical period when certain

individual schools (including a native Buddhism) that are now defunct were

still active but it would seem that difficulties will arise when some try to

conflate present-day Buddhism etc with what is now generally understood by

the term "Hinduism". I cannot speak for Sikhs and Jains -- though they may

have their own objections -- but the problem with Buddhism is that while is

it hardly present in present-day India, it is strongly represented in most

East Asian countries including Tibet, quite a few SE Asian ones, and, of

course, in the West. While I suspect that the opinions and feelings of

Western Buddhists on this matter will not be of much interest to the

anonymous writer, why should those of Buddhists in the Asian Buddhist

countries be ignored ? Can the anonymous writer assure us that they will

be quite happy, no doubt once the error of their false sense of seperate

religious identity has been dispelled, to be classed as "Hindus" ?

Elsewhere, the anonymous writer suggests that Western scholars approach

India and its culture with respect but do we have any assurance that he/she

will do the same for others ?

 

Best wishes,

Stephen Hodge