❖ The Deceptive Liberal Image of Hinduism
✿ The Misconception of Hinduism's Liberal Identity
It is commonly claimed that Hinduism lacks a fixed definition or structured creed. Statements like the following are frequently propagated:
◈ "Whoever identifies as a Hindu is a Hindu."
◈ Whether one believes in one god, 330 million deities, or none at all, all are accepted.
◈ Hinduism does not bind its adherents to any specific scripture or doctrine.
Indian politician Shashi Tharoor, in his book Why I Am a Hindu, reiterates these notions. He presents Hinduism as a “liberal” faith that imposes no belief system and permits every individual to hold any worldview. According to Tharoor, this inclusivity enabled Hinduism to absorb almost every religion within India—except Islam and Christianity.
❖ Why Could Islam and Christianity Not Be Absorbed?
Shashi Tharoor avoids addressing the critical question:
If Hinduism is truly inclusive of all beliefs, why can’t Muslims and Christians be considered Hindus?
The reason lies in the exclusive truth claims of Islam and Christianity:
"Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam... And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam—it will never be accepted from him... And believe in what has been sent down to Muhammad—it is the truth from their Lord."
(Qur’an)
Moreover, both religions see propagation of truth as their mission:
"Say: O mankind! Verily, I am the Messenger of Allah to you all."
(Qur’an)
✿ The Real Condition of Hindu Identity: Liberalism or Specific Doctrine?
Claims such as “anyone who says they’re Hindu is a Hindu” are not entirely truthful. In reality, Hinduism has underlying doctrinal conditions, and denial of certain beliefs excludes one from the Hindu fold.
This means the so-called “liberal image” of Hinduism collapses once its ideological boundaries are acknowledged.
❖ Why Is Judaism Ignored in the Comparison?
Judaism does not actively seek converts beyond the Children of Israel. Therefore, Shashi Tharoor ignores it in his discourse. However, unlike Islam and Christianity, Judaism’s insular nature makes it less relevant when comparing religious universality with Hinduism.
✿ Karen Armstrong’s Critique of Monotheism
Karen Armstrong, a prominent public scholar on religion, blames monotheistic faiths (Islam, Christianity, Judaism) for their supposed lack of tolerance, claiming polytheistic religions are more accommodating.
However, this assertion contradicts historical facts:
◈ The persecutions by pagan Arabs against the Prophet ﷺ and his companions — were these signs of tolerance?
◈ The atrocities by Hindu extremists against Muslims in India — what do they reflect?
Such incidents expose the myth of tolerance in polytheistic religions.
❖ The True Nature of "Tolerance" in Polytheism
Polytheistic systems may accept new deities — but only under two conditions:
① Their own gods are not criticized.
② Their supremacy is not challenged.
The moment a monotheistic religion challenges their false doctrines, their "tolerance" turns into hostility.
The same contradiction is seen in modern liberalism:
It claims to uphold freedom of thought, but when its core values are questioned, it reveals intolerance.
✔ Conclusion
The claim of tolerance in Hinduism and liberalism is nothing but a deceptive illusion.
In reality, whether it is polytheistic religions or modern liberal ideologies, tolerance only lasts until their foundational beliefs are challenged.
