Hinduism major religion in SE Asia countries?

As many adherents as Hinduism has, it isn't really a dominant nation beyond India except in Nepal. However, it did have much influence in Southeast Asia. How could it have spread there so it was a major religion in some (not necessarily all) countries there?

Oh wait I guess you don't even need to change religious patterns. All you had to do was to make Bali an independent nation of its own.
 
Hinduism was the dominant religion in all of Southeast Asia until Buddhism (and then in some cases later Islam) displaced it. If Buddhism could somehow be made not to become dominant - perhaps Asoka never converts, or never sends out missionaries - then Hinduism would presumably have remained. In fact, a Hindu Malaysia and Indonesia may have been more resistant to Islam, as it would likely have been propped more heavily by the government.
 
Maybe, a more powerful kingdom of Champa could resist to Buddhist influence and extended Hindu also in Annam and in Cambodia in the early period of the Khmers... so we could have an Hindu Indochina.
 
Last edited:

GTAmario

Banned
Maybe, a more powerful kingdom of Champa could resist to Buddhist influence and extended Induism also in Annam and in Cambodia in the early period of the Khmers... so we could have an Induist Indochina.

Its Hindu not Induist
 
The ruling Khmer dynasties used to be Hindu, despite the majority of its population having converted to Buddhism. Maybe a backlash on part of the royals could help spread Hinduism there?

There's also the Bali (IIRC) people who are still Hindu to this day, despite being surrounded by hardcore Muslims. Maybe look at the situation there and what made the religion survive in that part of the world (even if their flavour of Hinduism is heavily influenced and syncretic with Islam), see if they can be applied elsewhere?
 
Sorry... I must blame my poor English skills! :p


It's okay You are actually doing a lot better with grammer and punctuation then I am (and I am a native english speaker!)

Maybe if bhuddism migrates towards the west rather than the east we could see a stronger hindu influence on south east asia... I bet if hinduism was more centralized it would help
 
iirc than Buddhism does not need to override the native religions it could be like in japan and just work as a "reform" to all ready strong Hindu locals
 
iirc than Buddhism does not need to override the native religions it could be like in japan and just work as a "reform" to all ready strong Hindu locals

If Buddhism did that in regards to Hinduism it would just be Hinduism. The core philosophies of Buddhism are all present in Hindu beliefs.
 
Is Hinduism a religion that seeks converts? I believed it didn't. And yet, Bali is Hinduist, and so was once most of South east Asia. So, how does it work?

Also, another posibility would be to have Hinduist immigrants in South East Asia comming as workers or traders and becomming the majority of the population (or a significant minority), as it happened in Singapur.
 
Is Hinduism a religion that seeks converts? I believed it didn't. And yet, Bali is Hinduist, and so was once most of South east Asia. So, how does it work?

IIRC, Hinduism spread through trade ties around the year 0 by Gregorian calender. Also note that today's Hinduism was not the Hinduism of yesteryear. It's possible that Hinduism used to proselytize more, or that a few prominent Hindu princes pushed it really hard, or...
 
IIRC, Hinduism spread through trade ties around the year 0 by Gregorian calender. Also note that today's Hinduism was not the Hinduism of yesteryear. It's possible that Hinduism used to proselytize more, or that a few prominent Hindu princes pushed it really hard, or...

Wait, there's no year zero.

just as Protestantism is to Christianity that was some what my point

No it isn't. There's more appreciable differences in core theology.
 
No it isn't. There's more appreciable differences in core theology.

martin Luther didn't want to break a way form the Catholic church but reform it my understanding is that Buddha didn't care about breaking away from Hinduism but rather away to reach nirvana yes they are very different but not mutuality exclusive. can't we all coexist:p but please tell me if i'm wrong i know more about Hinduism than Buddhism
 

Cook

Banned
There's also the Bali (IIRC) people who are still Hindu to this day, despite being surrounded by hardcore Muslims. Maybe look at the situation there and what made the religion survive in that part of the world (even if their flavour of Hinduism is heavily influenced and syncretic with Islam), see if they can be applied elsewhere?

Hardcore Muslims isn’t really a very accurate descriptive term for Islam in Indonesia historically. Islam arrived in the archipelago via traders and was always far more accommodating of other beliefs than in other parts of the world. The militancy seen recently in Java and Ambon does not have a historic precedent.
 
Is Hinduism a religion that seeks converts? I believed it didn't. And yet, Bali is Hinduist, and so was once most of South east Asia. So, how does it work?

Also, another posibility would be to have Hinduist immigrants in South East Asia comming as workers or traders and becomming the majority of the population (or a significant minority), as it happened in Singapur.

Hindus believe that all people are Hindus because they live their lives as Hindus, even if they are not aware of this fact.

On a more practical level, it is correct that Hinduism does not proselytize. However, Hindus welcome converts like any other religion; they simply do not seek them.

That is very definitely a possibility. Hindus make up about 25% percent of the population in countries like Malaysia, the UAE, and Guyana, where they came as workers and stayed.
 
I have a small request to the Indian members not to call the religion as Hinduism and its followers as Hindus but use the true name i.e, Sanatan Dharma and call its followers as Sanatani. The word Hindu is not mentioned in any of the sacred texts but the word Sanatan Dharma is mentioned.
Hindu means any person who is a citizen of Hindustan. It was a name coined by the people og Iran and the Middle East, not by the people of Bharatvarsh.
 

GTAmario

Banned
I have a small request to the Indian members not to call the religion as Hinduism and its followers as Hindus but use the true name i.e, Sanatan Dharma and call its followers as Sanatani. The word Hindu is not mentioned in any of the sacred texts but the word Sanatan Dharma is mentioned.

Only the most orthodox say that. Most others call themselves Hindu, as in practitioners of Hinduism. Besides, the word Hindu derives from the Sanskrit word Sindhu (सिन्धु) meaning "east of the Indus" (इन्दुस नदी)

Hindu means any person who is a citizen of Hindustan. It was a name coined by the people og Iran and the Middle East, not by the people of Bharatvarsh.

It is interesting to see that you are using the term India instead of the correct term Bharat (भारत). Hindustan (हिंदुस्तान) was a later word than Hindu (see above). The locals called themselves Hindu, so the Persians called the place Hindustan (هندوستان), just like the Thar desert is called Registan (रेगिस्तान)
 
@GTAmario

The word Hindu is derived from the Sanskrit word Sindhu, the historic local appellation for the Indus River in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent.[13] and is first mentioned in the Rig Veda[14] The usage of the word Hindu was further popularized by the Arabic term al-Hind referring to the land of the people who live across river Indus.[15] and the Persian term Hindū referring to all Indians. By the 13th century, Hindustān emerged as a popular alternative name of India, meaning the "land of Hindus".[16]
Originally, Hindu was a secular term which was used to describe all inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent (or Hindustan) irrespective of their religious affiliation. It occurs sporadically in Sanskrit texts such as the later Rajataranginis of Kashmir (Hinduka, c. 1450), some 16th-18th century Bengali Gaudiya Vaishnava texts, including Chaitanya Charitamrita and Chaitanya Bhagavata, usually to contrast Hindus with Yavanas or Mlecchas.[17] It was only towards the end of the 18th century that the European merchants and colonists referred collectively to the followers of Indian religions as Hindus. Eventually, it came to define a precisely religious identity that includes any person of Indian origin who neither practiced Abrahamic religions nor non-Vedic Indian religions, such as Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism, or tribal (Adivasi) religions, thereby encompassing a wide range of religious beliefs and practices related to Sanātana Dharma.[18][19]

Source: Wikipedia
 
Top