Hinduism, like other religions, has many religious groupings. The Sanskrit word for this is sampradaya, which comes from the verbal root “da” meaning to “give.” A sampradaya therefore is something that is “given” or passed down from generation to generation. Hence, the idea of a religious tradition. In Christianity the equivalent of sampradaya is denomination.

In general terms Hinduism breaks down into four broad religious groupings or sampradayas determined mainly by which Deity is the major object of worship. There are Shaivas who focus on Shiva, Vaishnavas who focus Vishnu, Shaaktas who focus on a female form of Divinity, and an almost endless number of folk traditions. The expression “folk traditions” is a catchall phrase to mean the huge number of local traditions that pervade every part of Hinduism and which commonly intermix with the Shaiva, Vaishnava and Shaakta traditions. Each of these major groupings can be called a sampradaya, but even more so, within each of these major groupings there are many sub-groupings that can also be called sampradayas. Amongst the Shaivas, for example, there are Kashmiri Shaivas, the Shaiva Siddhanta, and the Vira Shaivas, and so on. Amongst the Vaishnavas there are Shri Vaishnavas, Madhva Vaishnavas, and Caitanya Vaishnava, and many others. In this way, we can speak of each major grouping as a sampradaya as well as each sub-grouping as a sampradaya. If we compared this to Christianity, it would be somewhat similar to saying, Christianity is divided into three major groupings, the Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions and within each of these major groupings are many sub-groups. Amongst Protestants, for example, there are Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, Quakers, and so on. All of these major groupings and sub-groupings are the “sampradayas” of Christianity, which they call denominations.

Within Hinduism the sampradaya is similar to the tree model of religion. Elsewhere we spoke of different models of religion, namely the tree and the river models. We described Hinduism as a river, distinct from most other religions that follow a tree model of religion. The sampradaya is akin to the tree model of religion. Most of the sampradayas of Hinduism start from a source, a major philosopher or guru. Ramanuja is the founder of the Shri sampradaya of Vaishnavas, Madhva is the founder of Madhva Vaishnavas, and so forth. Similarly Shankara is the founder of a major sampradaya of Hinduism called Advaita Vedanta. In this way we can say the within the river of Hinduism there are many religions. This is the sampradaya.

What are the sacred writings of Hinduism? This question begs a more basic question, namely, what are sacred writings? In other words, before we can discuss the sacred writings of Hinduism, we should first come to an understanding of scripture. When we use the terms “sacred writings” or “scripture,” this implies written texts. As we have noted earlier, written texts are a part of a cumulative religious tradition, the “stuff” of religion. In many cases, and particularly in the case of India, the original sacred texts were not texts a
t all; they were oral transmissions passed down from teacher to student through memorization. But even these transmissions are part of a cumulative religious tradition, and though it was considered profane to put these sacred dialogues into writing, today, virtually all sacred writings of all major religions are in the form of written documents, scripture. Given this fact, one could argue that what scripture actually is are voice sounds and words on paper, or more likely today, digital code and marks on a computer screen. In this sense, scripture is not different from any common dialogue or piece of writing. But we know there is a world of difference between scripture and a common newspaper or a novel. Scripture is sacred. Newspapers and common novels are secular. It is therefore, the quality of “sacredness” that creates the difference between scripture and an ordinary piece of writing.

What is the source of such sacredness? Is it something within the voice of the teacher or the text itself that creates sacredness? The answer to this question is the same as what lays at the heart of religion; namely, faith. It is the faith of the reader that gives sacredness to the written text. A person reads a common newspaper with a certain mental state; he interacts with the newspaper in a certain way; the same reader, when he reads a religious text, also enters a certain mental state, but in this case he perceives the religious text as sacred. When reading the religious document his mental state is one of “scripturalizing.” Through his faith, he scriptualizes the religious document. Another reader, without the element of religious faith, reads the same religious document simply as a literary or an historical document and so may not perceive the scriptural aspect of the text. What is scripture, therefore, is determined by the mental state of the reader; and when enough readers agree that a certain document deserves the stature of sacredness, the document attains the collective status of “sacred writing,” scripture. This is how scripture is created. One may also argue that it is the word of God or even of saints that create sacredness, but we know that one person’s God may be another person’s demi-god or even a demon, and that one person’s saint can also be another person’s terrorist. It always comes down to individual and collective faith. All aspects of a cumulative religious tradition are predicated upon faith.

The Shruti Vedas

There is good evidence that the ancient Indian, Zoroastrian, Greek, Roman, and pre-Christian European religions all share a common Aryan heritage. They are of the same religious type, even though they have been processed differently. The great contribution of these Aryans in India was primarily their language, Sanskrit, and their sacred writings, the early Vedas. The word veda comes from the Sanskrit root vid, “to know.” So the Vedas are literally what was known by the ancient Aryans, in other words, their sacred knowledge. As we have noted, the reference to writings is not strictly correct because the early Aryan traditions in India were oral. The sacred traditions of early Hinduism inform us that their seers, known as risis, “heard” the Vedas. By “heard” we mean that a kernel of these Vedas appeared in the hearts of these seers, who then elaborated upon this kernel to produce the oral tradition of the Vedas. The early Vedic tradition is consequently called shruti, “what is heard.” This shruti tradition was also known as an apaurusheya tradition. Purusha means man, paurusheya means composed by man and apaurusheya means not composed by man, i.e., made by God. Today, this shruti tradition appears as the four Vedas: Rig, Sama, Yajur and Atharva. These four Vedas comprise what is often called the Shruti Vedas. These four Vedas were then each divided into four divisions known as branches: Samhitas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas and Upanishads

The Samhitas are hymns praising various Vedic Deities. These Deities, for the most part, do not include the common Deities of modern Hinduism: Krishna, Rama, Shiva and Hanuman for example. Instead, the primary Deities of the Shruti Vedas are Agni, Indra, Varuna, Mitra, Soma, the Rudras, the Vasus, and a whole host of Deities that are barely known in modern Hinduism. The Deities of the Shruti Vedas are primarily “nature” Gods and these Samhita hymns were used to call upon these Deities for rain, food and other necessities of life. These hymns formed the substance of the rituals used to propitiate these Deities. The Brahmanas are works detailing these rituals. They may be compared to the Book of Leviticus in the Bible. They are technical books describing the details of the Agni Hotra or fire and other rituals. They elaborately describe the articles to be used in these ceremonies as well as the cosmic significance of these rituals to the universe. The Brahmanas are the beginnings of Hindu theological reflections. The next branch of the Vedas are the Aranyakas. Aranya means forest and aranyaka means “in the forest.” These forest works continue the theological speculations of early Hinduism, but they go beyond the rituals and start to develop the theology of the early Aryans that eventually takes mature form in the Upanishads which, today, are the most well known part of the Shruti Vedas. The Upanishads are the premier theological discussions of early Hinduism and they appear mainly in the form of dialogues between students and teachers asking such question as, What is soul? What is God? What is the nature of reality? What is death? and so forth. The number of Upanishads varies with the highest number being over a hundred. Today, the most popular number of Upanishads are between 10 and 13. The famous teacher, Shankara commented on 10 Upanishads. Later Madhva and others followed his example. These works are well worth reading for they are some of the most profound theological discussions of humankind.

Interestingly, these four Shruti Vedas appear in a version of the Sanskrit language that is considerably different than the Sanskrit of m
odern Hinduism. This early Sanskrit is generally called Vedic Sanskrit as opposed to the more common classical Sanskrit of modern Hinduism. In addition to these four Vedas, there are a set of works collectively called the Vedangas, supplementary works. In order to read and perform the rituals of the Shruti Vedas, one needed a knowledge of grammar, meter, pronunciation, astronomy/astrology, and so forth. These are the Vedangas, which are traditionally six in number. For the most part these four Vedas, along with all their divisions and the Vedangas, comprise the Shruti Vedas.

The Smriti Vedas

Hinduism views time in great cyclic periods known as yugas. There are four such yugas and today we live in the time period known as Kali Yuga. This is the period of spiritual darkness, ignorance and destruction. At the beginning of this Kali Yuga, it is described how the great sage, Vyasa, looked into the future and saw mankind in a fallen condition with decreased mental abilities and a shortened life span; and so, to mitigate the suffering of mankind, he codified and put the Shruti Veda into writing. He also saw the need for a simplified form of the Shruti Vedas that could be understood by the fallen people of Kali Yuga, so he created what is sometimes called the “fifth Veda.” This fifth Veda is a catch-all term that refers to all subsequent developments after the four original Vedas. This new phase of the tradition is called the Smriti Vedas and it is described as a paurusheya, man-made tradition. Literally, smriti means “remembered,” but a better way to think of this later Vedic tradition is in terms of what has been made by man and written down from the outset. Thus the Smriti Vedas are the Vedas for Kali Yuga and they include the two epics poems, the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, and the numerous Puranas that, all together, form the basis of modern Hinduism. The compiler of this fifth Veda is known to be Veda Vyasa, but he word vyasa simply means compiler and debate continues whether there is one Vyasa or many vyasas. Popular tradition informs us that there was only one Vyasa. The Mahabharata is the history of ancient India from the beginning of Kali Yuga and the famous Bhagavad Gita (The Song of God) appears within this great epic. The other major epic of ancient India is the Ramayana composed by the sage Valmiki. The Ramayana is said to predate the Mahabharata, but it is also included within the compass of the Smriti Vedas. The Ramayana is the story of Rama and Hanuman, two of the most popular Divinities of modern Hinduism.

As far as the Puranas are concerned, they are collections of ancient stories. The word purana means old and so they are compilations of old stories about gods, sages, and kings, along with the genealogies of famous royal families. The Puranas include stories of creation, destruction, and stories taken from different yugas and even different parts of creation such as the various heavens and hells. Tradition mentions eighteen Puranas, the most common of which are: the Bhagavata, the Vishnu, the Shiva, the Skanda and the Garuda Puranas. There is even a set of smaller Puranas known as upapuranas that are also eighteen in number. Most people, however, do not know all these works. In general, the two epics and the Puranas comprise the bulk of modern-day Hinduism. Of all these books, theologically the Bhagavad Gita is the most prominent book within the Smriti tradition. If the Upanishads are the most prominent works of the Shruti tradition, it is safe to say that modern Hinduism is mainly based on the works of the Ramayana, the Bhagavata Purana and the Bhagavad Gita. The Mahabharata is well known, but it is so vast, over ten times the size of the Iliad and the Odyssey combined, and therefore so overwhelming, that it is almost unreadable. Many people are even afraid to keep a Mahabharata in their homes since it describes the story of a devastating war that almost ended humanity. People do not want war in their homes.

There are also many other works that are not written in Sanskrit, but which also play a major role in modern Hinduism. The most common of these works is the “Hindi Ramayana” known as the Ramcharit Manas, by Tulsi Das. It is a devotional reworking, composed in an older form of Hindi about 500 years ago, of the original Sanskrit Ramayana. The famous Hanuman Chalisa, forty verses in praise of Hanuman, is taken from this Hindi Ramayana and is still commonly recited today. Another set of books that are not in Sanskrit, but which also inspire the lives of millions of Hindus today in South India are the works of the twelve Alwars. This is the Divya Prabhanda, which is a collection of devotional and theological prayers written in Tamil. These are ancient works and they are also considered to be “Vedic.” In addition, there are many more secular works also included within the general category of being Vedic. These are works on medicine, Ayur Veda; law, the Dharma Shastra; architecture, Vastu Shastra; political science, Artha Shastra; morality, Niti Shastra; and of course, love and pleasure, the Kama Shastra. So all of these, the Shruti and Smriti Vedas, comprise the shastra or sacred writings of Hinduism.

Hinduism and Sanskrit are inseparably related. The roots of Hinduism can be traced to the dawn of Vedic civilization. From its inception, Vedic thought has been expressed through the medium of the Sanskrit language. Sanskrit, therefore, forms the basis for much of Hindu civilization.

As language changes, so religion changes. In the case of Hinduism, Sanskrit stood for millennia as the carrier of Vedic thought before its dominance gradually gave way to the vernacular languages that eventually became the modern day languages of India: Hindi, Gujarati, Bengali, Telugu, Kannada, and so on. Although the foundations of Hinduism are largely built on the vocabulary of Sanskrit, these modern languages are now the primary carriers of Hindu thought within India. While the shift from Sanskrit to these regional languages forced a change in the meaning of words, and therefore a change in how subsequent generations interpreted the religion, the shift was at least within the context of languages that were directly related to Sanskrit and within an intellectual and social context that was largely Hindu. In other words, the change was slow and organic.
In the last century a new phenomenon has been occurring. Hinduism has begun to emerge in the West, and as Hinduism expands into the West, the emerging forms of this ancient tradition are naturally being reflected through the medium of Western languages, the most prominent of which is English. But as we have pointed out, the meanings of words are not easily moved from one language to the next and the more distant two languages are separated by geography, latitude and climate, and so forth, the more the meanings of words shift and ultimately the more the world view shifts. While this is a natural thing, it does mean that the emerging Hindu religious culture in the West is changing radically from its Sanskritic and even vernacular language roots. The differences between the Indian regional languages and Sanskrit are minuscule when compared to the differences between a Western language such as English and Sanskrit.

The “Christianization” of Hinduism

With this problem in mind, the difficultly in bringing Hinduism to the West and having a language such as English serve as the prime carrier of the tradition, is that it becomes all too easy to import foreign concepts of religion into the tradition. Especially Christian and Jewish, and  even Islamic concepts are built into words like God, soul, heaven, hell and sin. So if one translates brahman as God, atman as soul, papa as sin, dharma as religion, one imperceptibly changes Hinduism. This is because the Sanskrit word brahman is not the same as the English word, God, atman is not equivalent to soul, papa is not sin, and dharma is much more than religion. The only true way to understand these terms is through Sanskrit, which means reading and understanding the sacred texts of Hinduism in the original language, Sanskrit. But if no one is reading these texts and if no one is teaching what these terms actually mean, it becomes inevitable that the Hinduism developing in the West is going to be reflected through the lens of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, which ultimately means that the theological uniqueness of Hinduism is going to be changed or even lost. And few people will even know!

I do not suggest that this means the end of Hinduism. In fact, I see positive signs when Hindu youth come to temples for darsana and prayer and increasingly ask for Hindu weddings and other pujas. But it does suggest that the new Hinduism that is developing in the West is evolving in a way that is divorced from not only its Sanskrit roots, but even from its vernacular roots, in the same way that Christianity in the West developed separate from its original language base.

It is therefore important that Hindu institutions in the West, such as temples, teach Sanskrit. Ideally Hindu youth should learn at least a little Sanskrit. This will connect the next generation to its foundations and give a basic understanding of the roots of Hindu culture. Centers of Sanskrit and Hindu scholarship should be established at major universities. Wealthy Hindu patrons should endow chairs of Hindu studies at established universities. Jewish and Christian communities have been doing this for generations. We do not expect the majority of Hindus to become Sanskrit scholars or anything near that, but at least the facility should be available to those who wish it. A culture of Sanskritic learning must be created.

In addition certain key words of Hindu theology should be identified and a glossary of Sanskrit religious words should be created. Words such as brahman, dharma, papa, and atman should remain un-translated and become part of the common spoken language when we speak of Hindu matters. In this way, at least an essential vocabulary that contains the subtleties of Hinduism can remain somewhat intact. I therefore include, as a part of this site, a glossary of Sanskrit religious words along with an explanation of their meanings that I suggest should be learned and remain un-translated by students of Hinduism. These are terms taken primarily from theBhagavad-gita and the major Upanishads and they are used throughout this site. If measures such as these are undertaken then there can be a healthy growth of Hinduism in the West.

We have mentioned the Indus Valley Civilization, which seems to have existed over a vast period of time between 7000 BCE and 1700 BCE, and although the debate still rages over the nature of this great culture, whether it was Dravidian, Aryan or other, the Indus River has had a great effect on defining modern Hinduism. The Sanskrit name for this river is “Sindhu” and with the coming of Arabic speakers to India around 1000 CE the term “hindu” first appeared. Arabic speakers pronounced “sindhu” as “hindu” and used the word to refer to those living on the other side of the Indus River. Consequently, the term was originally a geographical reference that included many peoples. As late as the 16th century the term even referred to Muslims living within India because they too lived beyond the Indus. By the end of the 18th century, however, the British were using the term to refer to the people of India who were not Christian, Muslim, Sikh or Jain. The “ism” was added early in the 19th century. Later the word was appropriated by “Hindus” themselves as part of their national and religious identity; and so today the term has evolved as the name for the religion of the Vedas. The more correct Sanskrit term for this religion is, sanatana-dharma, “the eternal way,” but since the term “hinduism” has emerged, we will use this word.

Who is a Hindu?

As we have noted, there is a problem in defining Hinduism in the same way that we do Christianity, Islam or Buddhism. In this sense it is hard to call Hinduism a religion at all. Hinduism has no founder or even a fixed belief system. Hinduism has no corporate hierarchy. There is no church or governing institution that says all Hindus must believe a particular creed, or that all Hindus should act in a certain way. For this reason, Hinduism has tended to remain a religion of individual experience rather than institutional doctrine. It is true that most Hindus revere the Vedas, but not all do to the same extent. Many consider the Vedas as divine revelation, but others consider them as ancient human inspiration, and yet both groups are within the Hindu fold. Some Hindus are highly theistic, believing in a personal God, while others are not. It is true that most Hindus accept the ideas of reincarnation, karma and liberation, but others do not. At the same time most Jains and Buddhists also accept the ideas of karma and reincarnation. Are they Hindu? At a recent meeting, one educated Hindu gentlemen declared that even Christians are Hindus, only they just don’t know it! We could say that Hinduism is an ethnic religion of the people of India, but the largest Hindu temple in the world, a Vishnu temple, is not even within India. It is in Cambodia! And here in the West it is common to see Westerners coming to Hindu temples for puja and havan. These Westerners generally consider themselves Hindu. In fact, there are many Western groups building major Hindu temples throughout the world. So even this attempt at a definition does not work. Perhaps the first prime minister of modern India, Jawaharlal Nehru, best captured the essence of the problem when he said that Hinduism is “all things to all men.” Certainly I would not go this far in defining Hinduism, but the Prime Minister’s comment does express the difficultly in defining this ancient tradition.

Regardless of how we define Hinduism, there is one glaring truth that is emerging. Hinduism is now expanding into the world to an extent that it has never done before, and in so doing, it is changing in fundamental ways. Our next section about religion and language will explain the root cause of these changes, but for now, not only is Hinduism under the pressure of modernity as all religions are, even more importantly, it is under pressure from the monotheisms of the world to conform to a more standard religious model–that religion is something you believe. Consequently, Hinduism is becoming a religion of belief, similar to Christianity. But Hinduism has never been a religion of belief. Hindus are under increasing pressure to have a common set of beliefs and practices: acceptance of the Vedas as divine revelation, acceptance of reincarnation, karma, and the divine nature of Krishna and Rama, and even to have standard prayers, songs and dietary practices. We now even see prominent Hindu groups publishing Hindu “catechisms” and other publications outlining what Hindus believe. And such books are well-received by Hindu parents who are struggling to teach their children the beliefs of Hinduism before they go off to college and are confronted with aggressive Christian or even secular humanist’s attempts at conversion. In spite of these recent developments, I am still hesitant to provide a definition of Hinduism, other than to say that it is simply a union of multi-religious streams. And so, if you think of yourself as a Hindu, and you can accept the idea behind the Rig Veda verse, “Ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti,“ you are a Hindu.