Hindu wank

Make Hinduism as strong as possible maybe even try to create a United Hindu empire analogous to the first Muslim caliphates. I'm new here and I haven't seen much talk about Hinduism and I'm wondering what a Hindu wanking could look like.
 
SE Asia is the main place where Hinduism could be plausibly strengthened, as it was present there for centuries. Beyond that, you’d need a Hindu ruler to invade somewhere they didn’t IOTL, as Hinduism doesn’t really proselytize.
 
Somethong worth noting is that Hinduism isn't a single religion, but rather a family of religions that often share gods and believers, while varying hugely on a philosophical level. Add to that, it syncretises quite happily with other polytheistic religions where they overlap, as can be seen in South East Asia, where pre-Hindu deities continue to be worshipped using Hindu rituals, while most of the worshippers are themselves Buddhist.
 
Central Asia, I will note, had some Hindu influences such as that Shiva was very popular there, with a form of him known as "Oesho" apparently being a major god in the pantheon of the Central Asia-India straddling Kushan Empire. I guess the fact that Shiva is a mountain god was very appealing to them. Assuming that an empire straddling the Central Asia-India frontier exists for centuries, you could easily get Shiva and other Hindu gods as major Central Asian gods.

as Hinduism doesn’t really proselytize.

Some forms of Hinduism did indeed proselytize, though most of those forms of Hinduism emerged later. For instance, Chaitanya Vaishnavism converted people through wandering ascetics (vairagis), as I've noted before. And even later than that, in the late nineteenth century, the Vedic revivalist sect of Arya Samaj was also big on conversion. What these movements have in common is that they were organized sects, unlike traditionalist Hinduism which is hardly organized.

So, what you really need is a rather organized form of Hinduism to emerge (maybe out of Bhakti Hinduism, as many such sects did emerge) and then spread its new "fundamental truth" across the world.

Somethong worth noting is that Hinduism isn't a single religion, but rather a family of religions that often share gods and believers, while varying hugely on a philosophical level.

I think what differentiates (traditional) Hinduism from Abrahamic religions is that it isn't a very organized religion. It has many, many, holy texts and hymns, some of which contradict one another, whereas the Abrahamic religions have a single holy text. Hinduism itself is the syncretism of the Aryan religion brought after the migration of Aryan peoples with the native religion of the Indians, and then the further syncretism of these syncretisms, which is why (for instance) Shiva's wife has the extremely different forms of Parvati, Kali, and Durga or that Shiva is simultaneously the lord of animals, a mountain god, and a dancing god. This has resulted in Hinduism being extremely flexible to an extent that other religions are not.
 
Indonesian Hinduism might have more chance of being a universal religion, as it lacks an untouchable class.

I don’t think that caste (note that caste is very different from class; most members of every caste were and are poor farmers) is as much of an issue for conversion as you seem to think. Plenty of forms of Hinduism, going as far back as Bhakti Hinduism, have eschewed caste as unimportant or even attacked casteism as a whole (like Lingayatism).
 
Central Asia, I will note, had some Hindu influences such as that Shiva was very popular there, with a form of him known as "Oesho" apparently being a major god in the pantheon of the Central Asia-India straddling Kushan Empire. I guess the fact that Shiva is a mountain god was very appealing to them. Assuming that an empire straddling the Central Asia-India frontier exists for centuries, you could easily get Shiva and other Hindu gods as major Central Asian gods.



Some forms of Hinduism did indeed proselytize, though most of those forms of Hinduism emerged later. For instance, Chaitanya Vaishnavism converted people through wandering ascetics (vairagis), as I've noted before. And even later than that, in the late nineteenth century, the Vedic revivalist sect of Arya Samaj was also big on conversion. What these movements have in common is that they were organized sects, unlike traditionalist Hinduism which is hardly organized.

So, what you really need is a rather organized form of Hinduism to emerge (maybe out of Bhakti Hinduism, as many such sects did emerge) and then spread its new "fundamental truth" across the world.



I think what differentiates (traditional) Hinduism from Abrahamic religions is that it isn't a very organized religion. It has many, many, holy texts and hymns, some of which contradict one another, whereas the Abrahamic religions have a single holy text. Hinduism itself is the syncretism of the Aryan religion brought after the migration of Aryan peoples with the native religion of the Indians, and then the further syncretism of these syncretisms, which is why (for instance) Shiva's wife has the extremely different forms of Parvati, Kali, and Durga or that Shiva is simultaneously the lord of animals, a mountain god, and a dancing god. This has resulted in Hinduism being extremely flexible to an extent that other religions are not.
Shiva as lord of the animals is a new one, unless you’re referring to the belief that Prajapati has also been applied to him
 
The idea of Hinduism would be seen as we do the "abrahamic Religions" an over arching thing that connects the various religions, but with each one definitively different. This assumes that the label isn't imposed by a colonial power, nor any hindu power can effectively impose their own version on the rest
 
Well I know that the dharmic religions didn't really quarrel with each other so maybe there's no need for there to be one brand of Hinduism in this hypothetical empire but rather it's just a multi religious empire which can all be put under the blanket of Hinduism?
 
I don’t think that caste (note that caste is very different from class; most members of every caste were and are poor farmers) is as much of an issue for conversion as you seem to think. Plenty of forms of Hinduism, going as far back as Bhakti Hinduism, have eschewed caste as unimportant or even attacked casteism as a whole (like Lingayatism).

Thank you for enlightening me.

But I deliberately avoided using the the world “caste”, as I knew the India “caste” system in its formalized and codified form was made by the British Raj. The “warna” concept prior to that was a more flexible system.

Perhaps “class” isn’t a suitable term, but I believe there must be a “class” of “unclean” people before prejudices against them gets justified by a religious concept.
 
Obviuously, you would need to stop the spread of Islam into areas where Hinduism were already strong. A Hindu-wank does not only imply spreading it to new areas, but also avoiding decline in areas where it was already strong. Besides conquest, high birth rates among Hindus in areas where they migrate to could also be a possibility.
 
But I deliberately avoided using the the world “caste”, as I knew the India “caste” system in its formalized and codified form was made by the British Raj. The “warna” concept prior to that was a more flexible system.

That’s true, but personally, I view “caste” as nothing more than the English translation of “varna”.

Perhaps “class” isn’t a suitable term, but I believe there must be a “class” of “unclean” people before prejudices against them gets justified by a religious concept.

The main way Dalits were “created” was by being rejected by their village assembly, typically on the advice of local priests, and thus thrown out of the community. Such an act cursed them and their descendants, unless they were voted back into the community (though after a few generations their status was permanent).
 
What about the Hindus kicking the Spanish in Luzon/Selurong in the 17th century aside from wanking the hindus in indonesia, since in the first half of the Spanish rule the spanish only held the coastal area of Northern Luzon..
 
The caste system is a very complex matter and it has undergone several changes through the history. It started as something similar to the guild system that exishasted in Europe, I think. A group of people practicing same profession living as a community under a leader. In the absence of formal training schools the children were trained by their parents in their own profession. In the course of time these communities received social and religious sanction. In the initial period they were flexible and members might have changed their profession at will. Later the walls separating the castes became stronger and the caste structure took a vertical form, with some castes at the top and others at the bottom. The caste system also had some positive effects. I think that the system helped Hinduism to defend itself against the onslaught of Islam. Despite ruling over most of the subcontinent for more than five and more centuries Islam failed to convert more than one third of the population. Compare it to what happened in Iran, Central Asia, South East Asia and North Africa, where Islam conquered.
Children following the path of their parents in profession is widely practiced in India and her neighbors. It is observed in all fields. The politicians want their children to inherit their positions in parties and leadership. From Nehru down to the local leaders of all parties have tried to pull their children up to their seats or higher positions. Industrialists like Tata,Birla, Ambani, etc. have all tried to keep the control in the family. The film stars and other film personalities have promoted only their children. The doctors want their children to become doctors, the engineers want their children to become engineers, the lawyers want their children to become lawyers and so on. This is a general pattern in all walks of life.
The democracy has strengthened the caste system as never before, as the politicians have made the castes their votebanks. If you cultivate the leaders of a particular caste you can capture the votes of the majority members of that caste without much effort. After the independence the lifestyle of the lower castes have vastly improved, but the competition between the castes for political and economic loaves have also increased. All politicians publicly speak against the caste system but secretly support and nurture it.
 
Last edited:
Top