India - A sacred geography bound by Dharma

[KS]

Imagining India: A sacred geography bound by Hinduism | Firstpost

Washington: Can geography be imagined in the mind and enacted? By billions of feet trekking to sacred rivers and mountain tops over thousands of years?

Diana Eck, an eminent scholar of Hinduism, says this is the real idea behind India or Bharat, a geography carried in the imagination over generations and one that lived much before invading armies or British colonialists tried to define it. Mythology and geography were married in the Hindu imagination, conceiving as it were the land of India. The marriage has lasted for millennia.


The pilgrims' map largely resembles the borders of the modern Indian state. They "knew" the geography from the frozen peaks of the Himalayas in the north where Shiva resided to the four "dhams" threading the east, west, north and south. The seven sacred rivers, the many "sangams" and the veneration of every spot where the gods touched ground created a unity, a map.

India, thus defined, stays bound despite the unimaginable diversity of language and culture, defying the dire predictions of many westerners. British civil servants of the colonial era believed and haughtily declared there was no India. As they understood it, perhaps. The narrative of India having been a jumble of kingdoms, until the British beat it into a united country, survives. Until the 1980s, British and American diplomats would frequently refer to the possibility of India's breakup. It was just plain logic since the country was an artificial union, they would say earnestly.

Eck has challenged the dominant narrative in a way that may disturb the left-leaning historians and will warm the right-leaning ones. She says a certain glue holds India together and that glue is Hinduism. India is an integrated space of culturally diverse Hindus who have a spiritual relationship with the land. So deep is this feeling that other religions of India have absorbed the idea and have their own string of sacred sights – the many dargahs – and their own pilgrimages.

Listening to Eck trace her journey and talk about her latest book India: A Sacred Geography was a rare pleasure. She was a little apprehensive while writing it because her ideas could be used to bolster exclusivist thinking about a "Hindu India," providing fodder to the wrong set of people. Fortunately, no frenzy has developed since the book's publication earlier this year and she has continued to travel to India unhindered to pursue her research. The book is about the "practical everyday pluralism" of Indians and the thrust is not political.

(As an aside, Eck was among those who initiated the effort last year to get Harvard University to discontinue two of Subramanian Swamy's economics courses at the university in response to his op-ed in DNA that, she argued, "demonised an entire religious community". More on that here.)

Eck says that India in the end is "more than a map" and it lives as a "three-dimensional sacred landscape, linked by its storylines." Every place has a story, and every story a god. The temples to Devi are scattered around 108 sites, where parts of Sati fell as a grief-stricken Shiva carried her body back. Most of these temples are rocks covered in sindoor and decorated with flowers but the presence of the devi is felt deeply by the faithful.

Shiva's 12 jyotirlingas knit the length and breadth of this space. The sacred rivers provide the background and life-blood to the cosmic game. The Ganga, the most sacred of them all, is believed to feed many other rivers and water bodies. In a sense it may begin at Gangotri but it is everywhere. Millions of pilgrims have visited the sacred spaces over centuries and created the geography.

It is a lived landscape. And was lived centuries before Google Earth came along. Eck's argument about Hinduism as a binding force is made after a lifetime of scholarship and formidable research on India's myths and rituals. She illustrates her thesis with numerous examples and stories, connecting the multi-layered argument into a seamless whole. All through India, the divine is felt and received by the local, accepted and renewed over the ages by everyday people, not necessarily the pundits and the official keepers of the faith.

An excellent read. As said by me many times - the real glue that binds this land of disparate cultures,ethnicities, tribes, languages and even religions is the native idealogy that we call Sanatana Dharma and its sacred association with this land and if anything happens to it, this country as we know it will simply cease to exist.

 

[balai_c]

She is describing the idea of Dharma through western apparently secular lenses. Sanatana dharma and itÅ› various offshoots have created the idea of India that is a civilization state , not just a mere westphalian nation state. India , if seen through western political philosophy,is bound to fall apart from itÅ› burden of differences. But it is Dharma acting as the glue that is holding India together.

 

[KS]

...Bharat,a geography carried in the imagination over generations and one that lived much before invading armies or British colonialists tried to define it. ....

The most important line the advocates of the "British unified us" school of thought need to remember.

 

[bengalraider]

Not only India as it stands today our religious texts bind us to lands as diverse as Sri Lanka , the site of Ravana's "Golden Kingdom" and Kandahar the site of the birth place of "Gandhari" the mother of the Kauravas of the Mahabharatha.our Dharmic ties link us not only whithin our subcontinental boundaries but beyond as well.

 

[KS]

Not only India as it stands today our religious texts bind us to lands as diverse as Sri Lanka , the site of Ravana's "Golden Kingdom" and Kandahar the site of the birth place of "Gandhari" the mother of the Kauravas of the Mahabharatha.our Dharmic ties link us not only whithin our subcontinental boundaries but beyond as well.

Agreed !

But those lands have only been the periphery and their significance,if you see, is mostly only birth places of few important characters or something like that. From a pure religious POV, almost all sacred places for Hindus are inside the geographical boundaries of modern day India.

 

[LurkerBaba]

India needn't be bound by Dharma. The envelope of Dharma can be expanded

 

[civfanatic]

The idea of India as a sacred geography need not be limited to Aryas (the so-called "Indians). To the ancient Chinese and Japanese who became followers of Buddh Dharma, India was Tianzhu (天主) and Tenjiku (天竺) respectively, both meaning "heavenly land" or "center of heaven". The spread of Dharma across Asia from the lands of the Pahlavas to the sea of Choson, represents the true 'soft power' of ancient Indian civilization, something matched by few other civilizations in history.

 

[sukhish]

yes, excellent article. this is the first time I have found such a comprehensive analysis. the religious epic of india is what binds India together.
it is almost as if it is a god's chosen palce. although in modern time people may not beleive in those epic stories, deep inside most indias , they exists and know they were true and I'm one of them.

 

[LurkerBaba]

There is something similar about how the various religious traditions of India conceptualize 'the Divine'.

All traditions (more or less) are non-dual, there is no sharp difference between the creator and the creation

 

[KS]

The idea of India as a sacred geography need not be limited to Aryas (the so-called "Indians).....

Well that would be the ideal case...but not a practical one.

Moreover why limit to China and Japan - South East Asia is much more influenced by Indian civilization than China or Japan.

But the real focus of this article is not about that but about what binds/defines the core of that civilization, a core that is not a a homogenous one, one that is as disparate as the word disparate can be defined.

India needn't be bound by Dharma. The envelope of Dharma can be expanded

A bird in hand is worth two in the bush.

Dharma first needs to be consolidated in the core before the envelope is extended.....

 

[Tronic]

I believe that the subcontinent shares a larger cultural backdrop in Vedic/Hindu culture. Yet, I differentiate this culture from the Hindu religion, for the fact that I do not have faith in the various gods and goddesses and the subsequent rituals and practices, since to me, it is all stories and mythology. It doesn't mean that I don't want these stories from ancient vedic culture to be revived today in art forms and exported to the world, but to me, they are all still just stories.

So yes, IMO, the subcontinent, and even beyond all the way to South East Asia, do have a common vedic ancient mythological culture, but I wonder if this is the conformality some members here have been looking for, or they wish that all Indians conform to the Hindu religion? That's the question I'm curious about.

 

[civfanatic]

Well that would be the ideal case...but not a practical one.

Moreover why limit to China and Japan - South East Asia is much more influenced by Indian civilization than China or Japan.

Sure, Southeast Asia should also be included. In fact Southeast Asia would be the most ideal place for true Indian soft power to be exercised.

But the real focus of this article is not about that but about what binds/defines the core of that civilization, a core that is not a a homogenous one, one that is as disparate as the word disparate can be defined.

Just curious, what is your idea of 'Dharma'? How would you define it?

Dharma first needs to be consolidated in the core before the envelope is extended.....

How would you go about 'consolidating' it?

I wonder if this is the conformality some members here have been looking for, or they wish that all Indians conform to the Hindu religion? That's the question I'm curious about.

Thank you for getting to the crux of the matter!

 

[KS]

I believe that the subcontinent shares a larger cultural backdrop in Vedic/Hindu culture. Yet, I differentiate this culture from the Hindu religion,

This land,culture and religion are so inextricably intertwined that drawing a clear line between this is the culture and this is the religion is next to impossible.

but I wonder if this is the conformality some members here have been looking for, or they wish that all Indians conform to the Hindu religion? That's the question I'm curious about.

You are confusing the issue. The article is NOT about introducing a "conformal'' factor as to define who are Indians in aa political sense. But to say what was the glue that held together this disparate land with a mind blowing diversity in all respects and how this "idea" of Bharatvarsh has always been there in the imagination of the people thanks to the native faiths of this land.

A simple way is to picture India as a pond - with different rocks, plants, marine life that do not dissolve in the water and loose their individual identity - but the water is that common thread that binds all of them and nourishes them and without which the ecosystem would simply vanish.

That water is the Sanatan Dharma and the rocks, particles, marine life, plants etc are the different ethnicities, tribes, languages, religions etc.

 

[Illusive]

Our history is a testament to the fact that united we stand, divided we fall. We were ruled by invaders when we had multiple kingdoms. But when we were united our influence and culture spread far away from its native land.

To me its more than dharma. Its about not repeating the same mistakes of our past and also taking pride in our culture.

 

[KS]

How would you go about 'consolidating' it?

That is a very deep question and I admit that I am not fully knowledgeable about that. No one is.

But a good starting point would be starting to look Indian history and culture from Indian POV and not western POV, removing the lingering marxist bias that pervades how we interpret our culture and hastening religious reformation. A third reformation is long due.

I would welcome other's view on this very relevant question.

 

[Tronic]

This land,culture and religion are so inextricably intertwined that drawing a clear line between this is the culture and this is the religion is next to impossible.

You are confusing the issue. The article is NOT about introducing a "conformal'' factor as to define who are Indians in aa political sense. But to say what was the glue that held together this disparate land with a mind blowing diversity in all respects and how this "idea" of Bharatvarsh has always been there in the imagination of the people thanks to the native faiths of this land.

A simple way is to picture India as a pond - with different rocks, plants, marine life that do not dissolve in the water and loose their individual identity - but the water is that common thread that binds all of them and nourishes them and without which the ecosystem would simply vanish.

That water is the Sanatan Dharma and the rocks, particles, marine life, plants etc are the different ethnicities, tribes, languages, religions etc.

Utterly confusing.

Like I said before, I agree with the cultural aspect, but I do not believe in the religion, as I do not believe that the stories are anything more than mythology. Nor do I believe in the thousands of rituals and I consider them superstitions. So, if you can explain in layman's terms, where do I fit in into your idea of "consolidation", what are you implying by that?

 

[A chauhan]

A very good article ! she is correct in saying that Hindu dharmic culture binds us; and these are the golden words she wrote:-

India is an integrated space of culturally diverse Hindus who have a spiritual relationship with the land.

The foreigners who came here gave our culture a name of Hinduism or Hindu religion, we do not consider ourselves bound by the definition of a religion or -ism, it is a culture.

I believe that the subcontinent shares a larger cultural backdrop in Vedic/Hindu culture. Yet, I differentiate this culture from the Hindu religion, for the fact that I do not have faith in the various gods and goddesses and the subsequent rituals and practices, since to me, it is all stories and mythology. It doesn't mean that I don't want these stories from ancient vedic culture to be revived today in art forms and exported to the world, but to me, they are all still just stories.

So yes, IMO, the subcontinent, and even beyond all the way to South East Asia, do have a common vedic ancient mythological culture, but I wonder if this is the conformality some members here have been looking for, or they wish that all Indians conform to the Hindu religion? That's the question I'm curious about.

One's religious texts and incidents are stories for others and thats it. No non-Hindu believes these to be true, similarily Hindus can't follow a book, like many religions do, they escape books and connect to Parabrahma in person, sometimes through various Gods and Goddesses which we consider the manifestation of supreme soul and sometimes directly. Not all think like you or me, If you visit Vaishno Devi you will see hundreds of Sikhs go there for Darshan, in the same manner hundreds of Hindus visit Golden temple of Amritsar.I mean the most important thing which we have in common is tolerance, faith and compassion which is due to these vedic and dharmic traditions.

Your approach is somewhat communal when asking the question quoted below, but thats the wrong approach, while you have answered your own question:-

but I wonder if this is the conformality some members here have been looking for, or they wish that all Indians conform to the Hindu religion? That's the question I'm curious about

So yes, IMO, the subcontinent, and even beyond all the way to South East Asia, do have a common vedic ancient mythological culture,

...and that culture acts as a glue, though it is not bound by the definition of religion. And all the religions which came into existence in India shares the same vedic ancient culture more or less.



Edit:- i misunderstood this quetion so editing:-

How would you go about 'consolidating' it?

If your approach towards life is right then you have consolidated your Dharma, that is what Hinduism urges. Dharma means to be correct in your approach, to be morally and practically right guided by the principles of Vedas and other texts, if you see at larger area which was guided by these vedic principles you will find whole south Asia as a part of its culture which were glued together.

Please correct if my approach is wrong.

 

[KS]

Like I said before, I agree with the cultural aspect, but I do not believe in the religion,

In this case it is not possible to draw a clear line between where culture ends and religion starts. And by religion I mean the broader Sanatan Dharma whose offshoots we today know as Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism.

. So, if you can explain in layman's terms, where do I fit in into your idea of "consolidation", what are you implying by that?

A simple way is to picture India as a pond - with the rocks, plants, marine life that are present in it as the different ethnicities, languages, religions in India.

The water is that common thread that binds them together and nourishes it and without which the ecosystem would simply vanish. Sanatan Dharma plays the role of the water.

 

[balai_c]

Utterly confusing.

Like I said before, I agree with the cultural aspect, but I do not believe in the religion, as I do not believe that the stories are anything more than mythology. Nor do I believe in the thousands of rituals and I consider them superstitions. So, if you can explain in layman's terms, where do I fit in into your idea of "consolidation", what are you implying by that?

This book might clear some of your confusions:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images...ck-small,TopRight,12,-30_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

In Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism, thinker and philosopher Rajiv Malhotra addresses the challenge of a direct and honest engagement on differences, by reversing the gaze, repositioning India from being the observed to the observer and looking at the West from the dharmic point of view. In doing so, he challenges many hitherto unexamined beliefs that both sides hold about themselves and each other. He highlights that while unique historical revelations are the basis for Western religions, dharma emphasizes self-realization in the body here and now. He also points out the integral unity that underpins dharma s metaphysics and contrasts this with Western thought and history as a synthetic unity.

 

[spikey360]

Yet, I differentiate this culture from the Hindu religion, for the fact that I do not have faith in the various gods and goddesses and the subsequent rituals and practices, since to me, it is all stories and mythology. It doesn't mean that I don't want these stories from ancient vedic culture to be revived today in art forms and exported to the world, but to me, they are all still just stories.

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that the culture which has been the heritage for many thousands of years has been changed by hardly a thousand year foreign rule, and is wildly different from the religion? The early vedic age dates back to 1700 BC. Mughals established their dynasty in 1500 AD. Do the math in your spare time and try to answer how a Hindu majority state had its 3000 years of culture changed by 500 years of foreign rule during which Hindus were in majority all through.
Of course, the mythologies were just stories. Do you suppose things like the Bramhastra, flying chariots, demons really existed? What is of importance is the message our ancestors passed through these works to us. Their philosophy, their culture. Myth making, they thought would make their acceptability far easier and not surprisingly, look around you, and see if they have succeeded or not.

So yes, IMO, the subcontinent, and even beyond all the way to South East Asia, do have a common vedic ancient mythological culture, but I wonder if this is the conformality some members here have been looking for, or they wish that all Indians conform to the Hindu religion? That's the question I'm curious about.

If you really knew the Hindu religion, you wouldn't even have asked the question. Hinduism has never been imposed on anyone. If you are still in doubt, consult the history books. Neither will it ever be enforced upon anyone.

That is a very deep question and I admit that I am not fully knowledgeable about that. No one is.

But a good starting point would be starting to look Indian history and culture from Indian POV and not western POV, removing the lingering marxist bias that pervades how we interpret our culture and hastening religious reformation. A third reformation is long due.

I would welcome other's view on this very relevant question.

Absolutely, a hindu reformation is long overdue. We must continue what Swami Vivekananda and other luminaries started.

Utterly confusing.

Like I said before, I agree with the cultural aspect, but I do not believe in the religion, as I do not believe that the stories are anything more than mythology. Nor do I believe in the thousands of rituals and I consider them superstitions. So, if you can explain in layman's terms, where do I fit in into your idea of "consolidation", what are you implying by that?

On a lighter note, don't think sickulars have any place in the scheme of Hindu consolidation. As it is, Hinduism is Secularism by itself.