Hinduism, Belief and the Colonial Invention of Religion: A before and after Comparison

Religions 13 (10) (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX


As known from the academic literature on Hinduism, the foreign, Persian word, “Hindu” (meaning “Indian”), was used by the British to name everything indigenously South Asian, which was not Islam, as a religion. If we adopt explication as our research methodology, which consists in the application of the criterion of logical validity to organize various propositions of perspectives we encounter in research in terms of a disagreement, we discover: (a) what the British identified as “Hinduism” was not characterizable by a shared set of beliefs or shared outlook, but a disagreement or debate about basic topics of philosophy with a discourse on tenets of moral philosophy anchoring the debate; and (b), the Western tradition’s historical commitment to language as the vehicle of thought not only leads to the conflation of propositions with beliefs, but to interpreting (explaining by way of belief) on the basis of the Eurocentric tradition rooted exclusively in ancient Greek philosophy. Interpretation on the basis of the Western tradition leads to the Western tradition vindicating itself as the non-traditional, non-religious, rational platform—the secular—for explaining everything—the residua are what get called religions on a global scale. This serves the political function of insulating Western colonialism from indigenous moral and political criticism. Given that Western colonialism is the pivotal event, before which South Asians just had philosophy, and after which they had religion (the explanatory residua of Eurocentric interpretation), we can ask about Hindu religious belief. This only pertains to the period after colonialism, when Hindus adopted a Westcentric frame for understanding their tradition as religious because of colonization. Prior to this, the tradition the British identified as “Hindu” had a wide variety of philosophical approaches to justification, which often criticized propositional attitudes, like belief, as irrational.



External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Bhāratīya dharma evaṃ darśana meṃ yoga.EnaKe Tivārī - 2012 - Naī Dillī: Yūnivarsiṭī Pablikeśana. Edited by Anitā Tivārī.
Indigenous secularism and the secular-colonial.Ryan Carr - 2022 - Critical Research on Religion 10 (1):24-40.
Is a logic for belief sentences possible?Karen Green - 1985 - Philosophical Studies 47 (1):29 - 55.
The World's Living Religions. [REVIEW]K. J. - 1966 - Review of Metaphysics 20 (1):145-145.
Hinduism: religion and philosophy.Cyril Bernard - 1977 - Alwaye: Pontifical Institute of Theology and Philosophy.
The Brahmo Dharma Debate: Part 1.Deepa Nag Haksar - 2018 - Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research 35 (3):513-548.
Belief-that and Belief-in: Which Reductive Analysis?Uriah Kriegel - 2018 - In Alex Gzrankowski & Michelle Montague (eds.), Non-Propositional Intentionality. pp. 192-213.
Propositional attitudes in fiction.John Zeimbekis - 2004 - British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (3):261-276.


Added to PP

1,356 (#7,994)

6 months
862 (#1,259)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Shyam Ranganathan
York University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Word and Object.Willard Van Orman Quine - 1960 - Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.
Naming and Necessity.Saul Kripke - 1980 - Philosophy 56 (217):431-433.
Knowledge and Its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (2):452-458.
The principles of morals and legislation.Jeremy Bentham - 1988 - Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books.

View all 12 references / Add more references