How religion became a cultural weapon
Once a source of universal connection, religion in India is now manipulated by crony capitalism to create an “Obedient Society”.
Published : Mar 02, 2025 08:46 IST
A mob waves swords during the Godhra riots, March 1, 2002, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Modern religion often promotes fanaticism and identity-based conflict, with rituals detached from their original concepts. | Photo Credit: AFP
Religion is a superstructural institution of human society, alongside entities such as caste, marriage, family, and politics. Modern scholars like Durkheim, Malinowski, and Brown view religion as maintaining social order, while Weber connected Protestant ethics to capitalism’s emergence. Conversely, Auguste Comte’s Positivism viewed religion as superstition, favouring scientific thinking instead. Religious followers typically emphasise either worldly improvement or otherworldly concerns.
The central question remains: How well do these perspectives illuminate religion’s historical dynamics? Until recently, religion was the standard for evaluating all actions, but now its societal importance is questioned. What caused this reversal, and has religion been reduced to mere tradition?
The 1000-year-old Hitopadesha states: “Food, sleep, fear and sex are common to humans and animals. Only religion distinguishes them. A human without religion is like an animal.” Pashupata Shaivas similarly describe transforming animal instinct into absolute knowledge.
The Brahman tradition (Vedas, Upanishads, Dharmasutras) and Shramana tradition (Buddhism, Jainism) offer comprehensive views of religion’s social role. These texts show religion as a discourse explaining creation and regulating the universe.
Research suggests humans began social activities after the Cognitive Revolution 70,000 years ago—changes not explained by biological evolution. While biological activities stem from instincts (anger, libido, greed), social activities arise from perceptions. Religion likely formed during this early period.
Historian Yuval Noah Harari describes society as based on “Imagined Reality”—concepts such as nation, money, or deities that communities collectively accept as true. Creation stories such as Adam-Eve or Manu-Satrupa unified humans through shared belonging.
Religious thinking developed philosophical systems explaining creation through the projection of consciousness. These concepts were later personified as myths. Rituals (Yajna, Puja) developed to embed these concepts in society, serving as symbolic expressions. Value systems emerged to regulate the universe, manifesting as norms, patterns, and ethics.
Religion thus has five dimensions—Philosophy, Ritual, Value Systems, Symbols, and Religious Structure—functioning around interpretation and regulation. It connects human consciousness to group consciousness and universal consciousness.
Religious consciousness
The Taittiriya Upanishad describes humans as having five sheaths: Annamaya Kosha (physical body), Pranamaya Kosha (vital energy), Manomaya Kosha (instinct-driven mind), Vijnanamaya Kosha (disciplined, targeted thought) and Anandamaya Kosha (blissful state of thoughtlessness).
The first three are shared with animals. Few humans activate the fourth, where thought becomes disciplined and concentrated. In the fifth, self-inquiry leads to momentary bliss before either regressing or merging into pure consciousness (Aatman).
These concepts have always been central to religion. Initially, humans recognised their responsibilities toward other beings, ancestors, and the universe. As hegemony developed, these responsibilities diminished, and religion changed accordingly.
India’s history confirms religion’s evolutionary nature. The Agricultural Revolution (1000 BCE) established regional states and the Varna system, while resistance emerged through renunciation. Urbanisation (500 BCE) expanded trade and empires, followed by foreign invasions and cultural assimilation.
The Gupta dynasty (4th century) renewed hegemonic efforts and sowed feudalism’s seeds. Different castes developed in the post-Gupta period. By 1000 CE, feudalism had expanded and grew increasingly harsh. Religion often struggled for societal democratisation.
Capitalism’s spread in the early 20th century and its evolution into crony-capitalism in the 1990s exemplify socioeconomic change. Throughout most historical turning points, religion has prepared ideological backgrounds for both hegemony and resistance.
Major transformations in religion
Researchers identify the first major change in religion when humans settled for agriculture. For millennia, humanity lived nomadically, practicing Devavad (Polytheism), which saw supernatural qualities as creation’s root. Yaska’s Nighantu Nirukta describes deities (Devata) as beings who illuminate and give. The Vedic tradition categorises deities into three realms: Prithvi (foundation for desires), Antariksha (horizon of desire), and Dyuloka (equilibrium after desires). Each realm divided into 11 parts, creating 33 deities representing these aspects. Nomadic religion idealised practising divinity or supernatural qualities.
When humans settled for agriculture, religion shifted from emphasising supernatural qualities to Absolute Knowledge (symbolised as Brahma, later called God). Social hegemony and resistance became part of religious activities, with the Shramana tradition emerging as resistance. The Industrial Revolution brought the third major change, as Protestant Ethics facilitated capitalism’s rise with profit as its ideal. Though initially connected to democratic values, capitalism gradually shed these ethics. Modern religion often promotes fanaticism and identity-based conflict, with rituals detached from their original concepts.
Hegemony and resistance
During the agricultural revolution, Devavad was reinterpreted to impose social hegemony. Brahman and Sutra texts exemplify this shift, crystallising the Trideva concept. This change introduced Varna divisions and regional states (Janpadas). The nomadic chief, once distinguished by brilliance, became Khetrapati (regional ruler). The new discriminatory system spread sorrow, prompting philosophical streams to seek solutions for suffering.
This hegemony faced obstacles from diverse racial communities (Negrito, Australoid, Mongoloid, Dravid) besides Aryans. The solution involved assimilating these communities’ religious-cultural traditions, evidenced in how Vedic Rudra evolved into Shiva.
Strong reactions against this discrimination emerged through Sannyas (renunciation). P.V. Kane identifies four types of renouncers—Kutichak, Bahudak, Hans and Paramhansa—classified by degrees of renunciation. These renouncers composed the Upanishads as resistance literature. They presented the ideal of practising the Absolute (Brahma) rather than supernatural qualities. Shankaracharya defines Brahma as “one who expands” or “grows.” The Upanishadic sages promoted consciousness without attachment or detachment, depicting pure consciousness as Soul.
The Varna-based hegemony took centuries to establish firmly, strengthening during the Sutra period. Vedic rituals transformed significantly—Kane distinguishes between original Panchamahayajnas (five great sacrifices performed by householders toward ancestors, sages, living beings, and the universe without professional priests) and later Shrauta Yajnas (motivated by selfish desires for heaven, wealth, and progeny). The Varnashrama system attempted to compromise between Varnavadis and renunciants, though some accepted while others (Shramanas) rejected it. Haripad Chakravarti calls early renunciants “Yatis” and references Rigvedic accounts of Indra’s attacks on them—symbolising hegemonic assaults on renunciants.
Shramana traditions
During the Shramana traditions’ rise, regional states eroded as empires formed amid significant wars and expanding trade. The Shramanas created conceptual frameworks suitable for these changes.
The Shramana approach to ultimate truth differs fundamentally from Brahmanical traditions. Buddhism, founded by Buddha, argues no absolute truth exists in external or internal worlds—only change is constant. External objects are composites of characteristics, while the soul is merely a flow of feelings and thoughts (Bhaavas and Vijnans). This concept of Pratitva Samutpada (dependent origination) demonstrates all objects are relative, dependent on others, and not absolute. Buddha rejected the soul’s existence, describing instead a 12-link chain of causation from ignorance to ageing, with Nirvana representing liberation.
Similarly, Jainism (Anekantavada) sees pure consciousness manifesting in many forms, recognising that knowledge depends on space and time. Every substance has unchangeable, eternal qualities (Svarupa Dharma) and changeable, temporary aspects (Aagantuk Dharma). Jainism divides existence into living (Sajiva) and non-living (Ajiva), with the latter comprising five elements. Only those achieving Kaivalya can comprehend all aspects of existence.
Foreign influence and religious evolution
India’s third major turning point came between 200 BCE and 200 CE, with urbanisation, trade expansion, foreign invasions, and foreign kingdoms. Foreign rulers like the Indo-Greek Menandhra and Kushan king Kanishka patronised or embraced Buddhism. After these dynasties fell, integrating these foreigners into the Varna system became problematic, with Shramana traditions likely facilitating this process.
During this period, Buddhism split into Hinayana and Mahayana. Mahayanists developed the Bodhisattva concept—beings who selflessly strive for all creatures’ liberation until every being achieves Nirvana, contrasting with earlier Buddhism’s focus on personal liberation. This concept incorporated cultural elements from foreign groups. Simultaneously, Jainism divided into Shvetamvara and Digamvara traditions. Its strict non-violence principle limited its appeal to many communities, reducing its following over time.
The Gupta Era and religious transformation
The next phase of religious evolution accompanied the Gupta Empire’s establishment and continued into the post-Gupta period. The Puranas became crucial texts during this time. Researchers believe harsh provisions against Shudras in the Smritis were added during this period, intensifying untouchability. Three new Brahmanical sects emerged: Shaiva, Vaishnava, and Shakta, developing between the fifth and ninth centuries through reinterpreting the ancient symbols of Shiva and Vishnu, with Shakta establishing independence from Shaiva concepts.
This period introduced the theories of Avatara (Incarnation) and Bhakti (Devotion) to Brahmanical traditions, likely inspired by the Mahayana concept of Bodhisattva. Vishnu’s incarnations were systematised, and Shaivism adopted similar incarnation theories. These concepts promoted belief in a saviour who would liberate devotees from worldly sorrows—an idea particularly appealing to lower social strata. Various community traditions were assimilated into these frameworks. While some Puranas elevated Shiva as Supreme Deity, both Vaishnava and Shaiva traditions enjoyed royal patronage. Despite reinforcing caste discrimination, Bhakti theory proclaimed all were equal before God and salvation was possible through devotion alone.
This period laid foundations for significant socioeconomic changes that transformed India’s socio-cultural life. Administrative power decentralised, a system first adopted by the Satavahanas. The practice of granting land and villages to priests and temples began during this time. Unlike the Mauryas, Gupta rulers lacked large professional armies, relying instead on feudal lords’ forces. From the 7th-8th centuries, military chiefs and administrators received land grants with administrative rights, accelerating society’s feudalisation and creating a landlord class.
Long-distance trade declined during the Gupta period, causing urban deterioration by the third-fourth century. Untouchability intensified beyond previous periods.
Post-Gupta India witnessed numerous small kingdoms—Gaud, Maukhari, Pushyabhuti, Gurjar-Pratihara, Pala, Pallava, Pandya, Rashtrakuta, Chauhan, Gahadwal. Amid shifting political powers, feudalisation progressed on two levels. First, land grant recipients acquired administrative and judicial rights, exercising increasing authority over residents. Second, village leaders became state machinery extensions rather than community advocates, claiming greater rent rights and behaving like feudal lords regarding land control, property acquisition, and forced labour.
In hegemonic religious thought, the practice of attributing divinity to kings had existed since the late Vedic period. Under feudalism, kings became God’s earthly representatives. Tantrism and Vammargi-Sadhana (left-handed practices involving meat, wine, sex, cremation grounds, and corpses) emerged in the 6th century and expanded by the 8th, adopted by both Buddhist (Bajrayan) and Shaivite (Kapalika and Kalamukh) traditions. Many scholars view these practices as resistance against hegemony.
Philosophical developments
Six philosophical systems (Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Purva Mimamsa, and Vedanta) systematically developed during this period through debates between Brahmanical and Shramana views. Adi Shankara introduced Advaitvaad (non-dualism) to Vedanta philosophy, originally established by Vadrayan. Later centuries saw additional Vaishnava philosophical dimensions: Dvaitvaad (dualism) by Madhvacharya (12th century), Dvaitadvait (dualistic non-dualism) by Nivarkacharya (7th century), Shuddhadvait (pure non-dualism) by Vallabhacharya (15th century), and Vishishtadvait (qualified non-dualism) by Ramanujacharya (11th century). Many researchers consider the Gupta period a development of classical ideals influenced by these ideological movements. Shaiva philosophy similarly developed its Vedantic concepts.
Buddhist thought also evolved during this period. Vigyanvad (consciousness-only), introduced by Arya Asang (4th century), was advanced by Vasubandhu. Buddhism’s philosophical journey had begun with Nagarjuna’s Shunyavad (emptiness doctrine). The 9th century Sahajayana-Bajrayana fiercely opposed hegemonic thinking but lost popular respect by neglecting moral values. Buddhism’s failure to adapt to new circumstances led to stagnation by the 9th-10th centuries, resulting in communal conflicts between Buddhists and Shaivites, including violent incidents recorded in history. These tensions are visible in Pala-period museum artifacts depicting Buddhist deities Aparajita, Sambar, and Buddha himself. Buddhism gradually declined against this backdrop.
Emergence of new traditions and Hinduism
From these conflicts emerged the Nath Sampraday (10th century), emphasising unity between Buddha and Shiva. Scholar Hazari Prasad Dwivedi considered this the second largest religious movement in Indian history after Buddhism. Concurrent efforts sought to unify India’s tense religious landscape, eventually resulting in Hinduism. Sociologist David Lorenzen explains that before the 13th century, “Hindu” wasn’t used as a community identifier.
Sociologist Hetukar Jha, citing Vidyapati’s works Kirtilata and Purushpariksha, notes that “Hindu” first appeared as a community identity in these texts and in Chandravardai’s Prithvirajraso. Purushpariksha presents Hinduism’s enduring structure, dividing religion into Kulachar (community/family practices) and Sadharan Dharma (common religion). Different religious practices were categorised as Kulachar, while concepts and moral values (including the four Purusharthas) common across traditions were classified as Sadharan Dharma. Vidyapati considered the combination of these elements the true form of religion (Hindu religion).
Under this framework, traditions such as Shaiva, Vaishnava, Shakta, Buddhist, and Jain were collectively termed “Hindu,” each retaining its scriptures. Hinduism thus emerged as a federation or joint front of these traditions, requiring no independent scripture. Within this evolutionary process, Buddha was eventually accepted as an incarnation of Vishnu.
The origins of “Sanatan” and modern Hinduism
Despite current trends of referring to Hinduism as “Sanatan,” no religious belief by this name existed throughout history. Theosophical Society founder Annie Besant first used “Sanatan” to describe Hinduism in her book, which became the Society’s religious textbook. Since then, the term has been consciously used to create an illusion of Sanatanism among some Hindus. During British rule, censuses attempted to fragment Hindu society by separately categorising Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs (though Sikhism can be considered a Vaishnava sect).
The 14th-15th century Shri (Ramavat) Sampraday or Ramanandi tradition in North India represents the next phase in resolving religious conflicts. By then, various Vaishnava philosophical views—Advaita, Dvaita, Dvaitadvaita, Shuddhadvaita, Vishishtadvaita—along with concepts of Saguna and Nirguna worship and devotion to Vishnu and his avatars, were competing for supremacy. Ramanand established coordination among these views, arguing that Vishnu, Shiva, Rama, and Krishna were all manifestations of Brahma, making questions of superiority irrelevant. With slogans like “Jaat-Paat Puchhe Nahin Koi, Hari Ko Bhajai So Hari Ka Hoi“ (No one asks about caste or creed; whoever worships Hari belongs to Hari), he campaigned against feudal values, untouchability, and caste discrimination, gaining popularity across North India.
The Ramanandi Sampraday emerged from the Vishishtadvait Vaishnava Bhakti tradition started by Ramanuja. South India’s Alvar saint movement, dating back a millennium, included Shudras and women among its 12 main saints and rejected caste discrimination. When Ramanand’s guru faced discrimination, it inspired Ramanand to start his movement, continuing the tradition of religious resistance.
Islam and the Sultanate period
After the Delhi Sultanate’s establishment in the 13th century, India entered the cultural sphere of the Islamic world. The Gulam, Khilji, Tuluk, Sayyid, and Lodhi dynasties governed until the Mughals gained power in the early 16th century. Islam became the state religion during the Sultanate period, imposed forcibly on some populations. While some Hindus converted under compulsion and others for privileges, many Shudras accepted Islam to escape caste-based hardships. Islamic ideas had already spread to Sindh by the 7th century and parts of North India by the 9th century.
Sufis significantly influenced Islam’s spread, emphasising Tariqat (spiritual path) over Shariat (law). Sufi orders—Chishti, Suhrawardi, Qadriya, Naqshbandi, Rasul-Shahi, Madaria—adopted liberal values such as tolerance, brotherhood, love, and peace. Many followers of declining Buddhism converted to Islam. Ulemas played crucial roles in Sultanate governance. Vaishnav Ani Akhadas formed during this period, reportedly to address potential communal conflicts between Shaivite and Vaishnavite ascetics during Sikander Lodhi’s reign.
Mughal era and religious policy
The Mughal ascension in the 16th century shifted Muslim rulers’ approach. To expand their power base, Mughals implemented religious reforms and respected Hindu sentiments to gain loyalty. This liberal policy displeased narrow-minded Ulemas, who occasionally rebelled. Emperor Akbar provided financial and land assistance to the Ramanandi sect and Nanak Panth, significantly promoting Ram Bhakti by funding Ramlila performances, issuing coins decorated with Rama and Sita, and supporting Swami Narharidas and Goswami Tulsidas.
Later Mughals, including Aurangzeb, maintained this liberal policy initially. However, after 11 years, Aurangzeb yielded to pressure from orthodox Ulemas, demolishing temples that supported his brother Dara or opposed his increasingly narrow policies. Nevertheless, Aurangzeb continued supporting some temples, perhaps those aligned with his politics.
Industrial revolution, colonial interpretations
India’s religious landscape transformed again after the Industrial Revolution. Under Auguste Comte’s positivist influence, early industrial revolution thinking equated religion with superstition. Comte’s three-stage theory of social development divided human history into religious, philosophical, and positive stages. He argued humanity first understood creation through divine imagination (without scientific basis), then evaluated beliefs through philosophical questioning, and finally tested facts scientifically—the most appropriate approach.
In his “Religion of Humanity,” Comte labelled religious thinking as superstition while acknowledging its moral utility. This perspective aligned with emerging capitalist structures, suggesting society would transition from muscle power to trade-based systems—supposedly liberating for humanity. Comte’s arguments facilitated hyper-materialism’s spread, supporting profit-centred ideals under democracy’s name. British rule gradually introduced capitalism to India, though its expansion remained limited until Independence, with feudal relations influencing public life for decades afterward.
Early Indology studies portrayed Indian society as barbaric, citing practices such as sati, child marriage, prohibitions on widow remarriage, and caste discrimination. Two major viewpoints emerged: Orientalism and Utilitarianism. Max Müller pioneered Orientalism, while James Mill and Pastor Charles Grant advanced Utilitarianism.
Orientalists depicted India as a land of philosophers immersed in spiritual thinking, detached from material concerns. Conversely, Utilitarians blamed Hinduism for social ills like caste discrimination, untouchability, sati, and child marriage. Pastor Grant’s interpretation likely aimed to promote Christianity in India. Although Christianity arrived in India by the mid-1st century CE, it showed no communal behaviour for 1,800 years until becoming identified with colonial rulers.
The effects of colonial prejudices appear in assessments of two religious reform movements from colonial India: Arya Samaj and Brahmo Samaj. These movements arguably represented the Hindu elite’s attempt to rehabilitate their image and gain British favour.
Ram Vilas Sharma, in San Santavan Ki Rajya Kranti, documents Swami Dayanand Saraswati’s pre-1857 revolutionary activities. According to Dayanand Verma’s research, Swami Dayanand, along with his guru Swami Birjanand, grand-guru Swami Purnanand, and two Maulvis, travelled through western Uttar Pradesh preparing for the 1857 revolt (led by Muslim emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar). However, after the revolt’s defeat, Dayanand pivoted to lead the cow protection movement, founding Arya Samaj in 1857 for religious and social reform. His growing anti-Muslim rhetoric aimed to secure the Hindu elite a share in British governance. Accepting only the Vedas‘ spiritual authority, Dayanand criticised Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism, Shaivism, Vaishnavism, and Shakta traditions.
Sepoys in Delhi during the Indian rebellion of 1857. Before the 1857 revolt, Hindu-Muslim elites were united in their confidence to expel the British. | Photo Credit: Getty Images
Before the 1857 revolt, Hindu-Muslim elites were united in their confidence to expel the British. Their defeat shattered this unity, with Hindu elites subsequently serving British interests while Muslims, having lost power to the British, took half a century to adopt English education. The British exploited this gap to foster Hindu-Muslim rivalry, implementing their “divide and rule” policy.
Raja Ram Mohan Roy initiated a similar movement in Bengal decades earlier. A modern monotheist strongly opposed to polytheism and idol worship, Roy established Atmiya Sabha in 1815, renamed Brahmo Samaj in 1828. This organisation campaigned against social evils like sati, child marriage, and purdah, influencing the Special Marriage Act of 1872.
These reform movements, despite their apparent social goals, primarily sought power-sharing arrangements with colonial rulers. Such reforms were needed before British rule and remained necessary after independence, when the “divide and rule” policy continued through religiously and caste-inspired conflicts. Both movements developed alternative forms of Hinduism to present Hindu society as civilised to British rulers, serving Hindu elite interests.
Alternative Perspectives and Modern Developments
Swami Ramakrishna Paramhansa offered a contrasting viewpoint to Roy and Dayanand. A genuine spiritual seeker who transcended discrimination to reach the Paramhansa state, he proclaimed “Yato mat, tato path“ (as many views as there are paths). He practised Islamic and Christian worship to reinforce this belief and made no distinctions between religious groups. The Hindu elite, uninterested in authentic religious practice, largely ignored Paramhansa and his followers. Consequently, Swami क struggled for support, eventually establishing his reputation at the Chicago Parliament of Religions without an invitation. This illustrates the hypocrisy of Hindu-Muslim elites battling in religion’s name while having no genuine religious commitment.
By the late 20th century, capitalism had divorced itself from democratic values. The emergence of crony capitalism promoted religious fanaticism and identity-based conflicts. Religious practices became disconnected from their conceptual foundations, while corrupt religious leaders received honour and protection. Global religious conflicts stem from political self-interest rather than genuine religious concerns.
Conclusion
Albert Einstein noted that religion comprehends conscience’s activities, while science explores the physical world’s mysteries. Science explains what something is and why, but only religion addresses what should be.
Historically, religion has influenced humanity in two ways: providing ideological direction (developing literature, music, dance, health sciences, mathematics, astrology, and chemistry) and creating balance through welfare activities. Ancient ashrams, universities such as Nalanda and Takshashila, and texts such as the Ramayana-Mahabharata exemplify these contributions.
Human life flows between spiritual and material thinking. No alternative system regulates conscience’s activities—without religion, humans become destructive to all living beings. Eroding moral values has produced hyper-materialism (uncontrolled selfishness) and hyper-spiritualism (superstition from concept-ritual disconnection), disrupting humanity’s smooth progression. Post-industrial revolution, spiritual thinking has been demolished, trapping humanity in spiritual anarchy.
Embracing hyper-materialism as life’s ideal has established uncontrolled exploitation. Natural resources have been depleted 23 times more in the last century alone, prompting Stephen Hawking’s prediction that Earth will become uninhabitable within 200 years.
Identity-based conflicts never truly connected to religion. The 9th-10th century Buddhist-Shaiva conflict involved state-patronised faiths. Similarly, Muslim rulers during the Sultanate period, Christian British rulers, and contemporary religious identity conflicts represent ruling classes implementing “divide and rule” policies to expand dominance.
In the current situation, profit-seeking without production and resource capture has generated comprador capitalism. Crony capitalism now attempts to create an “Obedient Society.” Hegemony has spread sorrow, now manifesting as alienation. We must therefore examine religion’s historical dynamics to foster belongingness rather than alienation. Unfortunately, due to prevailing prejudices, religious resistance forces are now absent.
Purushottam, a journalist based in Patna, is presently writing a book on the dynamics of the history of religion.
Courtesy: Frontline
https://frontline.thehindu.com/society/history-religion-society-hegemony-resistance/article69277751.ece
No comments:
Post a Comment