Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Vehl

(1,915 posts)
83. I'm a Hindu Atheist.
Tue Dec 27, 2011, 08:11 PM
Dec 2011

The reason most people in the west, or even outside the Dharmic religions/philosophies(Hinduism,Buddhism, Jainism) have not heard a lot about Hindu Atheists is usually due to one (or more) of the following reasons

1 We never called ourselves Hindu's in the first place...let alone Hindu Atheists (the term "Hindu" is hardly used by Hindus, and even when used, it's almost always only used when speaking to a non-Hindu)..add the fact that we still use the names of the Hindu schools of philosophy instead of the English term "atheist" and one can see why you don't see Hindu's going about claiming they are "hindu atheists". In fact every-time I look at my signature on DU, i mentally cringe...because imo its redundant, because for us Hindus Atheism has always been a part of Hinduism..at least in our neck of the woods. So claiming Hindu Atheist is like claiming Human man..or something to that effect.


2 Atheism was not called "Atheism" in India. It was found in many of the Hindu philosophies and usually go by the particular name of the philosophy. In my case, I usually refer to myself as a practitioner of the Advaita Vedanta philosophy. ( "Advaita" roughly translates to English as "non-dualist" ) . For someone well versed in Hindu/Buddhist philosophy, the term "Advaita Vedantin' (Which btw has no exclusive claim to Atheism within Hinduism..cos many other Hindu Philosophies also have Atheism in them) is more than enough. Even online debates and discussions are done using these terminologies. So it is understandable most people will not be aware of this unless they know the terminology.

3 What most Westerners(I hasten to add that I hate to generalize) know about Hinduism is usually rephrased and reworded books and views on that "way of life" (not exactly a "religion" ) by outsiders, who often enough tend to be not only followers of the Abrahamic religions, but missionaries as well. They could not comprehend a system that was so very different from the Abrahamic "religious" worldview that they knowingly or unknowingly translated/confused Hinduism with what they thought were similar ideas/notions found in their own religions. This leads to some hilarious pieces of "common knowledge" about Hinduism.

A good example of this would be the oft repeated claim that Hindus have 330 Million gods.

This piece of "info" has been so overused in the Western media that its taken for granted. For anyone well versed in Hindu philosophy the answer makes perfect sense. The "correct" answer to the 330 million gods statement is only to be found when one looks at India's population(at the time this question was asked). it was 330 million. The Hindu philosopher who answered 330 million when asked "how many gods does Hinduism have", gave a very profound answer.... 330 Million gods, 330 million Indians. In other words, one god per Indian...in the more philosophical Hindu schools...it means each person is a god. Not only does this zen koan-like answer contain the highest form of Hindu philosophy (There is no "god"..if there is ..then everyone is god (which btw would devalue the notion of "god' to such an extent that it does not mater anymore)) but it also underscores the Atheistic views which are core to Hinduism.

sadly the person who listened to this answer(an answer which most Hindu/Buddhist scholars would have no problem understanding) took it at face value and wrote down that Hindus have 330 million gods


anyways, here are some samples of Atheistic ideas in Hinduism


Fate or divine dispensation is merely a convention which has come to be regarded as truth by being repeatedly declared to be true. If this god is truly the ordainer of everything in this world, of what meaning is any action, and whom should one teach at all?
The Concise Yoga Vasistha, Translated by Swami Venkatesananda • State University of New York Press, 1984



Fortune or God is merely a convention which has come to be regarded as truth by being repeatedly declared to be true. If this God or fate is truly the ordainer of everything in this world, of what meaning is any action? The simpleminded who believe in God might well jump into a fire, trusting in God's grace to keep them safe. God will make us bathe, give to the poor and do our spiritual practices. What is the use of the exhortations of the scriptures if God will do everything? In this world, excepting a corpse, everything is active and such activity yields its appropriate result. In this world no one sees God, but we do see mind and intelligence. There are not two things, intelligence and God. Only intelligence is. If between two people of the same intelligence one fails and the other succeeds, God is not the cause, but laziness and effort are. If one thinks God is the director and doer of all things, let this whole world sleep, God will do everything. This may be a consoling outlook, but in truth, there is no God. It was foolish ones who created God. The followers of God will perish. The sages became so by individual effort. Please tell me why the heroic men of valor, the wise and the learned should wait for God? If astrologers predict that a certain man will become wise and he does so without ever studying - - then I will accept that God is great.

Rama, this sage Vishvamitra became a Brahma-Rishi by self-effort; all of us Rishis have attained self-knowledge by self-effort alone. Hence, renounce the chimera of God's providence and apply yourself to self-effort.




Sanskrit had a larger atheistic literature than what exists in any other classical language. Madhava Acharya, the remarkable 14th century philosopher, wrote this rather great book called Sarvadarshansamgraha, which discussed all the religious schools of thought within the Hindu structure. The first chapter is "Atheism" – a very strong presentation of the argument in favor of atheism and materialism.




I have posted a few threads, posts on DU about Atheism in Hinduism. I'll post the links here.

The God Project: Hinduism as Open-Source Software/Faith
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x285480

Quick heads up, Atheism has always been/is an accepted philosophical tradition in Hinduism
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=314847&mesg_id=315308

Are there any practicing Hindus on DU?
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x270091

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_Hinduism



Some contemporary examples of Hindu Atheists

1 Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India

2 Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the president of Hindu Mahasabha, described himself as a Hindu atheist. He is credited for developing a Hindu nationalist political ideology he termed as Hindutva ("Hinduness" ) . All the Hindu nationalists in India Consider him to be their founding father.

3 Amartya Sen - The Nobel laureate and a self proclaimed Hindu Atheist.



Hinduism is a collection of philosophies so diverse that its hard to define.It is a way of life. Hindus themselves call it by many names, the most common being "Sanatana Dharma" which means "The Eternal way".


"I think I have understood Hinduism correctly when I say that it is eternal, all-embracing and flexible enough to suit all situations."
~Mahatma Gandhi, as quoted in Relentless Brush Strokes : A Memoir


Even one of the most ardent of Missionaries, one who wanted to convert all of Asia, Monier Williams had this to say about Hinduism

"has something to offer which is suited to all minds. Its very strength lies in its infinite adaptability to the infinite diversity of human characters and human tendencies"
~ Monier Williams




I DO hear some people say that they are
buddhist atheists, but they don't mean
that they believe in reincarnation, just
that they hove to certain philosophies.


Belief in Reincarnation and/or karma are not required to be considered a Hindu/Buddhist. And btw Reincarnation and Karma do not require deities.

Furthermore the Hindu and Buddhist philosophies apply "Two Truth's doctrine"
the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine

In the highest form of "Truth" in Hinduism/Buddhism there is
1 No God
2 No karma
3 No reincarnation

all the "karma" and 'reincarnation" go out the window the moment one becomes enlightened, as the aforementioned concepts are crutches for those in the path to enlightenment.

hope this helps

----------------------------------
[IMG][/IMG]

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Probably the most provocative link I have seen here on this forum. MarkCharles Dec 2011 #1
Atheism says nothing about the individual other than MineralMan Dec 2011 #2
At the very least, it means the individual doesn't believe in punishment or reward after death. PassingFair Dec 2011 #10
Does it? tama Dec 2011 #16
I haven't met any. PassingFair Dec 2011 #18
E.g. buddhist and hindu atheists nt tama Dec 2011 #20
Have you ever met someone who identified as a "hindu atheist"? PassingFair Dec 2011 #28
There're are millions of Hindu atheists. laconicsax Dec 2011 #29
Do Hindu atheists believe in reincarnation? PassingFair Dec 2011 #30
I don't know what they believe, you should ask them. laconicsax Dec 2011 #32
I already said that I don't know anyone who calls themselves a "hindu atheist". PassingFair Dec 2011 #38
There's one here on DU. laconicsax Dec 2011 #42
And they say that they believe in reincarnation? nt PassingFair Dec 2011 #54
At the risk of repeating myself, "I don't know what they believe, you should ask them." n/t laconicsax Dec 2011 #61
OK. Let's put it this way. No atheist that I've ever actually known IRL... PassingFair Dec 2011 #62
And how large is your sample size? laconicsax Dec 2011 #63
Lifetime, probably 100 or so. PassingFair Dec 2011 #64
Well, if you've known a hundred, you surely know everything there is to know! laconicsax Dec 2011 #65
I know that most atheists eshew the supernatural. PassingFair Dec 2011 #68
Some do, some dont Vehl Dec 2011 #84
and what is your source for this interesting statistic? kwassa Dec 2011 #55
You can start here: laconicsax Dec 2011 #60
The statistic I was interested in was "millions" kwassa Dec 2011 #80
You must not be synthesizing information. n/t laconicsax Dec 2011 #82
Hindu Atheists use the names of the Hindu philosophies they subscribe to. Vehl Dec 2011 #85
It does help. kwassa Dec 2011 #87
you are welcome. nt Vehl Dec 2011 #91
So are you saying tama Dec 2011 #33
"Atheists have been saying that it's just about disbelief in god..." PassingFair Dec 2011 #39
Einstein tama Dec 2011 #43
Spinoza's God Ron Obvious Dec 2011 #58
Not an atheist tama Dec 2011 #66
There's an awful lot of Einstein worship among believers, MarkCharles Dec 2011 #67
"Spinoza's God" PassingFair Dec 2011 #69
I'm a Hindu Atheist. Vehl Dec 2011 #83
I knew about Nehru..... PassingFair Dec 2011 #86
I dont, because it does not exist Vehl Dec 2011 #89
I think that Tagore's position is muddied. PassingFair Dec 2011 #92
Hey! I know that guy from that one thread! =) opiate69 Dec 2011 #88
Hey! Vehl Dec 2011 #90
I know atheist Buddhists who strongly believe in reincarnation. ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #70
Yes. Those buddhists probably refer to themselves as buddhist. PassingFair Dec 2011 #71
What do you thing that means? MineralMan Dec 2011 #22
I think it means that they act in a manner of self determination. PassingFair Dec 2011 #31
Would the writer have hesitated skepticscott Dec 2011 #3
Not everyone feels the need to be labeled. tinrobot Dec 2011 #4
Yeah before those guys atheists were just benevolently treated.... dmallind Dec 2011 #5
That was 100 years ago, and it wasn't even my point. tinrobot Dec 2011 #6
I am. Those things were relgious oppression manifested into law. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #11
People can certainly be outspoken about those things if they want... tinrobot Dec 2011 #12
Is the label "bald" "forced" on people without hair? dmallind Dec 2011 #14
Not a good comparison. tinrobot Dec 2011 #15
A man with no hair on his head is bald skepticscott Dec 2011 #27
What the hell difference does that make? dmallind Dec 2011 #34
Au contraire. The meaning of the word "atheist" has changed. kwassa Dec 2011 #56
No it hasn't. Not even close. Fundies TRY to make explicit atheism the ONLY meaning. dmallind Dec 2011 #76
To clarify. kwassa Dec 2011 #81
Bald using Wig? Hair growing but shaven bald? tama Dec 2011 #17
It's very simple indeed. A bit simpler than atheist even. nt. dmallind Dec 2011 #79
I still realize there is a bias against women and drinkers. Do you against atheists? dmallind Dec 2011 #13
But atheist is simply a label for someone who lacks belief Meshuga Dec 2011 #7
'Atheism" has such a scorning ring to it' LARED Dec 2011 #8
Words can have stong meanings, multiple meanings, and those meanings can change. tinrobot Dec 2011 #9
My point was that LARED Dec 2011 #21
So you don't think people treat atheists badly in the US Goblinmonger Dec 2011 #40
As a general rule no. LARED Dec 2011 #46
Then you need to read Goblinmonger Dec 2011 #49
You hold unpopular views, people have opinions about those views, and act accordingly LARED Dec 2011 #53
I know one guy who hates the term and sees it as kind of a religion in its own ButterflyBlood Dec 2011 #19
There is an interesting tension LARED Dec 2011 #23
Ever wonder why? dmallind Dec 2011 #25
Spoken like a true victim. LARED Dec 2011 #35
Riddle me this? Goblinmonger Dec 2011 #41
the long-standing denial of equal rights for women also comes from religion RainDog Dec 2011 #44
let's not forget skepticscott Dec 2011 #45
So no response from you Goblinmonger Dec 2011 #50
I did not forget. Just busy nt LARED Dec 2011 #52
Imagine if you were responding to a homosexual. trotsky Dec 2011 #57
Where the hell do you live that religion has little influence on laws? dmallind Dec 2011 #73
The assertion that religion leaves laws alone has already been generously disproven. LiberalAndProud Dec 2011 #48
**MY** assertion?? Read that again please.... nt dmallind Dec 2011 #74
many apologies, dmallind LiberalAndProud Dec 2011 #77
Nae worries. Just don't want lurkers or newbies confused. thx. nt. dmallind Dec 2011 #78
As usual, you misstate things skepticscott Dec 2011 #26
Actually what you said and what I said are much closer than you think. LARED Dec 2011 #36
Sorry, lousy argument skepticscott Dec 2011 #37
I don't feel like a persecuted minority where I am RainDog Dec 2011 #59
We can however, prove that is so. dmallind Dec 2011 #75
Yeah and fat people often dislike being called fat. Still ARE fat though. dmallind Dec 2011 #24
I think I would prefer Empiricist as a more accurate categorization LiberalAndProud Dec 2011 #47
There are probably Christians who don't want to identify themselves cbayer Dec 2011 #51
Because you'd be as bad as a religious fanatic onion belt Dec 2011 #72
Because the greater culture has successfully loaded the word, like they did the word liberal. TransitJohn Dec 2011 #93
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»I don't believe in God, s...»Reply #83