Abstract

This paper is an attempt to critically discuss the various formulations of religious plurality of the neo-Hindu standpoint and the various understandings these formulations have generated, and if possible, to identify the formulation and the understanding thereof, which seems to reflect the neo-Hindu position in the best possible manner. A distinct approach to religious plurality has been associated with Hinduism ever since the appearance of Swami Vivekananda at the ‘World Parliament of Religions’ in Chicago in 1893. The Hindu approach to religious plurality has been variously described as accommodating, catholic, universal, open, assimilative, hospitable, liberal, syncretistic and tolerant. Just as the Hindu position on religious plurality has been described in several ways; it has also been formulated in several ways. For the sake of clarity and precision, I shall divide the whole discussion in four separate sections on the basis of the four statements of the Hindu position bearing on the subject. These are that all religions are: equal, one, true and same. On the basis of a detailed discussion, I have arrived at the conclusion that, the neo-Hindu position is not that all religions are equal or true or one or the same, but rather they are all valid. But that all religions are valid never means that all religions are of the same value for all people, at all times. Nor need recognition of the validity of all religions necessarily imply their approval. The fact that one tolerates something does not automatically mean that one approves of it. In this context, religious tolerance does mean that the validity of the right of the other person is accepted, even while one is debating its value.