My "Hindu Nationalism", stems from critics who wish to divide, and rule, not from critics who attempt to unite and prosper.
Hinduism cannot be united anymore than the hypothetical religion 'Abrahamism' can be united, because Hinduism is religious classification which attempts to unite disparate belief systems. Just as Islam, Christianity and Judaism cannot be united, nor can Puranic Hinduism, Brahmanical Hinduism, Vedantic Hinduism and Shamanic/Tribal Hinduism be united. They should be recognized as separate religions.
I also say with reservation that the the parts of Puranic Hinduism: Consisting of Vaishnavism, Shiavism and Shaktism can be united. They can be united if we regard Puranic Hinduism as henothestic, but there are still problems. Vaishnavism is very much like its own religion, and its closest parallel is probably Christianity. As it essential a personality worshipping religion, like Christianity is and has similar doctrines like the lord incarnating on Earth to bring righteousness/right religion. It is based on its own canon of scriptures the Bhagvad Gita, Vaishnava Puranas and Bhakti Sutras.
Shivaism and Shaktism are very different, for they are not really personality worshiping religions, they worship Shiva or Nature as supreme principles and are strongly based on Advaitic like philosophy. In fact they have their own philosophical system of Tantra and their own canon of scriptures the Tantra and Agamas and consider their Agamas as superior authority to the Vedas. They share very little in common with the Vaishnavas.
Hence a softer case can be made for considering Vaishnavism, Shiavism and Shaktism as separate religions. On the other hand, a very strong case can be made to consider Puranic Hinduism, Vedantic Hinduism, Brahmanical Hinduism and Tribal/Shamanic Hinduism different religions. It is unfair for Hindus like me to be associated with these types of Hinduism, when I have barely anything in common with them.
Do you know that the History of India did not start when the British invaded, nor did it start when the Moguls invaded, prior to these two great invasions there is little to suggest that India was not united, the name Bharatvarsha and Aryavarta says it all.
The nation state of India did not exist until the British united it under the British Raj. This is clearly a fact and nobody can deny this. Prior to that the entity known as 'India' throughout its known history from the janapradas to the Mughal and Maratha empire, India has mainly existed as a collection of different kingdoms, with different kings and queens, which have constantly been at war with each other. For very brief periods certain Indian kingdoms have established empires which have united large tracts of Indian land, the largest of which were the Mauraya empire and the Maratha empire.
The sad fact is that India never really stabilized as a single geographic body or political entity like many European countries did(under the influence of Christianity) or many Arabic countries did(under the influence of Islam) or entire China did(under the influence of Confucianism) and Hinduism can indeed be squarely blamed for this for no single comprehensive religion originated in India that could unite India, and hence why India existed as a fragmented entity.
You are sounding more and more like any Missionary, who state that all of Indians problems are Hinduism, and they must rid Hinduism to "Save", the Indians.
No, on the contrary I am saying to save 'Hinduism' we must get rid of India's association with it, else Hinduism will be regarded, as it is by many in the world as the religion of a poor third world country. This is why I propose that we emphasis Vedantic(Advaita) Hinduism as true Hinduism and use that to unite all Hindus in the world. Vedantic Hinduism is a religion that is compatible with a 21st century scientific world, as many scientists and philosophers in modern times have demonstrated by appreciating it. Vedantic Hinduism does have common doctrines which can unify it:
1) Brahman
2) Atman
3) Maya
4) Karma and Samsara
5) Yoga(Meditation)
Vedantic Hinduism is a clear and comprehensive religion like any other religions, whereas 'Hinduism' is not. We can clearly answer the important questions that define a religion with Vedantic Hinduism
1) When and who founded the religion? Vedantic Hiduism was founded by the Risis of the Upanishads in 1000BCE and then developed in the Jnana tradition that developed from it where all the core concepts were formulated.
2) Who is the god of the religion? There is no God per se, but rather what is called God is the result of ignorance by superimposing the qualities of the Self/Atman Brahman on Maya. The supreme principle is Brahman/Self which is an impersonal absolute reality, not God.
3) How did creation happen? There is in fact no creation, what we perceive to be creation is mere empirical reality of name and form, whose substratum is the Maya, a field of consciousness. It is due to our ignorance or perceptual error that we perceive this empirical reality.
4) What is the cause of suffering? Suffering is the result of the misidentification of consciousness with the products of Maya(matter) resulting in consciousness become bound(bondage) and and projected into the empirical world as a local finite consciousness(jiva) who falsely believes it is the intellect, mind, body and hence experiences its pain and pleasures.
5) How does one attain salvation/liberation? Liberation is attained when the consciousness attains discriminative knowledge of the distinction between consciousness and maya(matter) and this ceases the machinations of the mind(chit-vrittis)
6) How does one practice this religion? The practice of meditation is done to purify the mind(chitta suddhi) ceasing the chitt-vrittis. This is best achieved through the Yoga of Ashtanga Kriya Yoga which systematically purifies every aspect of the mind-body complex and enables maximum spiritual development.
Vedantic Hinduism gives a highly coherent, logical, evidence-based and scientific religion which is purely based on the values of spiritual development and enlightenment. It is suited to the mindset of the 21st century. If all Hindus practiced this religion Hindus would have a highly scientific and advanced civilization and be prosperous(much more than the West today) Just as they were during the times of the Upanishads, before Puranic Hinduism kicked in and Hindus fragmented into gazillions of divisions and then were invaded left, right and center by foreigners and Hindu civilization fell.
Hinduism on the other gives a mess and cannot answer a single question definitively.
Ahh, kill the eastern tradition to adopt the western one, great idea.
Modern civilization is not just Western, it is based on the cultural steams and flows of all cultures in the world. In fact in the 21st century of globalization(an idea in-line with ancient Vedic thought of Vasudeva kutumbukum) nation-states are becoming an obsolete idea. The only ideologists that cling to nation-states are nationalists.
Thats your POV, I consider Swami dayananda, Vivekananda, Aurobindo more Hindu then them.
Taking Vedantic Hinduism as the true definition of Hinduism, because it is the only form of Hinduism which is Santana dharma, I would say Swami Dayananda is the least Hindu because he lends to a highly geographical and nationalist Hinduism which is not Santana. Aurobindo is more Hindu because he recognizes that Hinduism should be global and spiritual(strongly inspired by Vivekananda) but he is also nationalist at the same time and attempts to reinterpret the Vedas spiritually to save pride, and Swami Vivekananda the most Hindu because he falsified geographical Hinduism and presented Vedantic Hinduism as the future religion of all of humanity.
Many reformist have tried, but you have also criticised them.
Most reformists end up creating their own religion: Buddha(Buddhism) Mahavira(Jainism) and Guru Nanak(Sikhism) which basically suggests that 'Hinduism' is a lost cause and perhaps it is simply better to get rid of it and separate Hinduism out into separate religions, or to attempt the greatest reform of all history of religion, getting Hindus to agree to accept Vedantic(Advaita, not the Puranic forgeries of Dvaita etc)Hinduism as the one and ONLY Hinduism.
That why its called Universal Righteousness, Sanatana Darma.
To each is own, that is Sanatana Dharma.
No, that is called postmodernism, another word for mess. Postmodernism is not anymore a region than Hinduism is. To tell everyone that everybody just has an interpretation of the truth, to each his own, is a cop-out and it cannot unify anybody. This is Western civilization is in crisis today, because its caught up in the mess of postmodernism and has fragmented just like Hinduism is. This reflects in the newest movement in religion in the West - new-age religion.
And im calling a Christian a Christian.
And what doctrine will that be...the bible or Koran.
It's clear I am not Christian, so please stop calling me Christian. I reject that religion as much as I reject Puranic Hinduism.(don't call me Muslim either, as I think even less of Islam than I do of Christianity) If it helps to assuage your paranoia, I consider Puranic Hinduism one level better than Christianity, but only JUST.
Sanatana is individualism, if we take that away its not Sanatana.
Why is individualism eternal?
These are the people we're talking about.
It is silly to make such overgeneralizing statements that a tantric who wanders in the graveyard knows more about Hinduism than anybody. I met such tantriks when I was in India, and some of them were scoundarals and criminals and in a developed country would be considered substance-abusers. In fact one of them attempted to entice me by trying to sell me drugs, and then pretended he had selected me as his disciple for giving me secret tantric knowledge, and then tried to get me to meet him in early hours of morning in a secluded place......(I shiver as to what his intentions were)