The Puranic period of Hinduism was con temporaneous with Buddhism. Before the rise of Buddha the religion consisted either of elaborate sacrificial rites or pure philosophic speculation. Buddha found that the masses were ignored, and his teachings were prac tically protestant Hinduism. The populace saw a new light and went en masse to Buddhism, especially as the votaries of the religion in cluded such eminent monarchs as Asoka. There was something mellow in the new faith which appealed to popular imagination. The Brahmins found that their hold was being wrenched from them. They did the best they could, and succeeded in driving Buddhism out of India. They incorporated all that was best in the latter religion into their own faith; in other words, they killed Buddhism by adopting it. In this process, the religion had two new accretions. One is the doctrine of metempsy chosis. The doctrine of the transmigration of souls was not altogether new to the seers of the Vedas. But they did not emphasize it. The emphasis laid by Buddha proved a soothing balm to the masses, because they felt that they had always a chance to attain salvation so long as they had a series of lives to achieve it in. The next accretion was that of Divine Mercy. Humanity has ever been noted for its weak ness in as much as it is easily tempted away from the right path. But for the Divine guid ance and mercy there is little for man to place his hopes on. The exaltation of mercy again appealed to the popular imagination. But Hinduism never accepted the doctrine of vica rious punishment. Every individual soul was meted out its due desserts. There was no re ward for virtue or punishment for vice; each act had a certain result which must inevitably follow. But the Divine Mercy held a light, as it were, for the soul not to stray from the right path.
The doctrine of right was also developed during this period. Hinduism considers all life relative, and hence there is no cut and dried line of demarcation between vice and virtue. The code of morals is just the same as in all religions. But in the philosophic dis cussion of it, the religion holds that as the Divine is in all and is all, the distinction of right and wrong is purely one inevitable in the world of limitations, and is purely subjective.
Hinduism is, in the popular European con ception, identified with idolatory. The mistake arises out of not understanding the Hindu mind and the chain of circumstances that brought about the worship of idols. Before the spread of Buddhism there were no idols or temples in India. But votaries of Buddha set up his image in different parts and made obeisance to it. When, however, Buddhism was incorporated into Brahminism, the latter took over the temples and allowed the masses to use idols of their particular deities. The
idols were only symbols, a form which makes the worship of the Divine convenient and easy for the average men and women. Later, of course, there was a degeneration in that the masses began to believe that there was special virtue in the idols.
Such in brief are the tenets of Hinduism and the history of that religion up to the date of the Mahommedan conquest of India. Since the 13th century the religion has, for all prac tical purposes, stagnated. Much that is alien to the faith crept in, and the leaders had to incorporate customs and manners that were repugnant to them. The caste system, which was elastic up to that period, became petrified and fossilized, much to the detriment of the real interests and growth of the country. The Purdah system was then introduced in order to protect the honor of their womankind from the unscrupulous foreign hordes that ravaged the country from time to time. The schools and universities that flourished in India either degenerated or were closed. The populace had little or no guidance in molding its religious thought, which gradually descended into the grossest mysticism, meaningless rites and un savory practices. Occasionally reformers like Kabir, Tulsi Das, Ramanuja and Ramananda attempted to correct the evils. Little, however, was done.
The establishment of British rule brought with it a vigorous proselytizing activity on the part of Christian missionaries. The newly ac quired knowledge and a wider conception of world affairs put new life into the religious thought of India. Ardent reformers arose by the score and strove for the purification of the religion of their ancestors, and a proper dis semination of religious knowledge both to their own people and the rest of the world. The two most important movements that have achieved some results are the Brahmo Samaj and the Arya Samaj. The Brahmo Samaj owes its existence to Rajah Ram Mohun Roy, and was vigorously preached by the famous re former Keshub Chunder Sen. The movement was ambitious and proposed to create a uni versal faith, although it immediately occupied itself with the purification of the Hindu faith. The movement never had more than a handful of followers; but it had an important effect on orthodox thought and practises, not only in Bengal, which was its birthplace, but also in all parts of The AryaSamaj owes its origin to Dayanand Saraswati, in Punjab. He proposed to go back to the faith of his an cestors and would not accept any other text but the Vedas as authority. The movement has succeeded extraordinarily well. It has broken the backbone of the caste system in many parts of the country and has a large number of ad herents.