The Inconsistency Value of Hindu Values in India

The inconsistency value of Hindu Values in India

There is some inconsistency value in Hindu value. The core problem of the inconsistency value is there is other belief such as Western enters India and absorb by Indian. These Western values will assimilate with Indian values unintentionally. Then this new assimilation belief will be implemented by the major society and it will change from the core belief of Indian

.

a. Tolerance in Hindu

Hindu teaches that they should do the good things in their life in order to get a better life in the next life since there is a reincarnation. Hindu also belief in karma and samsara that require their people not do the sin since there is karma will follow them until the next life. Hindu also teaches about ahimsa or non-injury to living things. This is the core moral value of Hinduism, the protection of all life (which is ultimately divine). If Hindu require their people not injure the living things including animal, Hindu also require people to respect with other people. Therefore, Hindu people also have to pay respect to the other people including tolerance in terms of the religion differences.

On the other hand, in the past the India kingdom also has stated the tolerance with another religion, we can see from the plural nature of the society in India was encapsulated in an inscription of Asoka:

"King Piyadasi (Asoka) dear to the Gods, honors all sects, the ascetics (hermits) or those who dwell at home, he honors them with charity and in other ways. But the King, dear to the Gods, attributes less importance to this charity and these honors than to the vow of seeing the reign of virtues, which constitutes the essential part of them. For all these virtues there is a common source, modesty of speech. That is to say, one must not exalt one’s creed discrediting all others, nor must one degrade these others without legitimate reasons. One must, on the contrary, render to other creeds the honor befitting them.”

India government already stated some law to respect the religion. The Indian constitution's preamble states that India is a secular state. Freedom of religion is a fundamental right guaranteed by the constitution. Every citizen of India has a right to practice and promote their religions peacefully. Moreover, India also has many leaders in their government that have religion other than Hindu such as a Muslim President Dr. Abdul Kalam and a Sikh Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh. The powerful leader of the Congress Partry Sonia Gandhi is a Christian, while the leader of the opposition is Adani, a Hindu. India had a prominent former Defence Minister George Fernandes, a Christian and a Hindu minister controlling foreign affairs. India has had a Jewish Navy Chief. P.C. Sethi, a Jain, has served as a central minister and a chief minister of Madhya Pradesh. Therefore, both of them can be a supported data that India really has been generally stated and implemented their statement to have religious tolerance and people of different faiths can equally practice their religion publicly.

Unfortunately, the India people implement the tolerance value wrongly. However there have been many incidence of religious intolerance which resulted in riots, although the issues which caused these riots have been investigated and dealt with such as

• Hindu nationalism versus Islamic Fundamentalism and Islamism prevalent in certain sections of the population. Notable incidents of communal violence include the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots, the 1992 Bombay Riots following the demolition of Babri Mosque as a result of the Ayodhya debate, and the 2002 Gujarat violence following the Godhra Train Burning. Terrorist activities such as the 2005 Ram Janmabhoomi attack in Ayodhya, the 2006 Varanasi bombings, and the 2006 Jama Masjid explosions

• The BJP government of Gujarat siding against the Muslims during recent riots against Muslims in Gujarat, triggered by the event above and of not assisting in persecution of the guilty (for details see 2002 Gujarat violence).

After getting the fact, we can analyze and conclude that the reason behind this wrong implementation is Upper caste Hindu groups such as the BJP fear that Christians may try to convert large numbers of lower-caste Hindus. As this could destroy the rigid caste hierarchy, the BJP has targeted Christians with a vengeance. In March 2003, the Parliament of Gujarat state passed a law banning religious conversion through “coercion or material inducement” and requiring prior district magistrate permission for anyone wishing to convert from one religion to another.

The upper caste afraid of that because they do not want to lose their power of the lower caste since they have already get the benefit from lower caste a lot such as the cheap labor. That is why, upper caste afraid that there will be a desertion from their worker who is lower caste.

b. Caste system

If we see the caste system in India we will see that there is discrimination between the lower caste and upper caste. Lower-caste communities are almost invariably indistinguishable in physical appearance from higher-caste communities. This is not, as some would say, a black and white issue. For most outsiders then, the visual cues that otherwise accompany race or ethnicity are often completely lacking. Big economic disparities between low and high-caste communities also get buried under a seemingly homogenous landscape of poverty. Poverty can be quite deceptive. It makes one conclude that all suffer from it equally. A closer look reveals the discrimination inherent in the allocation of jobs, land, basic resources and amenities, and even physical security. A closer look at victims of violence, bonded labor, and other severe abuses also reveals disproportionate membership in the lowest ranking in the caste order. A perpetual state of economic dependency also allows for abuses to go unpunished, while biased state machinery looks the other way, or worse, becomes complicit in the abuse.

The language used to describe low and high-caste community characteristics in the examples that follow are striking in their similarity, despite the variation in geographic origin, with ideas of pollution and purity, and filth and cleanliness prevalent. In turn, these designations are used to justify the physical and social segregation of low-caste communities from the rest of society, their exclusion from certain occupations, and their involuntary monopoly over “unclean” occupations and tasks. The exploitation of low-caste laborers and the rigid assignment of demeaning occupations on the basis of caste keep