AHC: European hinduism

[Chercha]

In India, Hinduism is very much a synthesis of various philosophical, mythological and theological points of view, which as far as I understand grew into a whole rather organically. It is also remarkably decentralised, with as many interpretations as there are people and without the more rigid structures we often see in other religions. It has proven to be very enduring, so much so that it is synonymous with India even today.

The possibility for such a synthesis of various philosophies and theological ideas existed in my opinion in the Roman Empire. Could the cross-pollination of ideas and the large amount of travel within the empire have led to an European analogue to hinduism? One that could become as synonymous with Europe as hinduism is with India? One that would survive the fall of Rome and spread north of the limes, where the mythology of Slavs and Germans did not differ all that much from that of Romans and Greeks? Perhaps hellenism is the vehicle for an unified European religious/philosophical framework I'm looking for? And how could such a framework be created?

 

[Zwide]

Personally, I feel like a Europe without Christianity would essentially have developed something akin to Hinduism.

If you think about it, both Indian and European civilization have a common root -- the Indo-Europeans migrating into both India and Europe, and creating syncretic cultures with the original inhabitants of both regions. Ancient Hinduism (Vedicism) is almost a word-for-word analogue to ancient European religions (Norse, Roman, Greek, etc). Modern Hinduism developed after Vedicism mixed with the aboriginal religions of India (possibly introducing concepts like reincarnation, worship of Shiva, religious ties to physical places within India). So it's not out of the realm of possibility that Europe could have developed a continent-wide belief system very similar to Hinduism. In fact, that's what seems to have been happening before the introduction of Christianity, though philosophical schools like Stoics and others didn't seem to have as religious a bent as Indian philosophical schools like the Ajivikas.

Christianity was easily what prevented this from happening, so a Europe without monotheistic religion certainly good have produced a Hinduism-analogue. Religion in the Roman empire -- balancing various Indo-European belief systems -- was essentially the first step in this process.

 

[Chercha]

Personally, I feel like a Europe without Christianity would essentially have developed something akin to Hinduism.

If you think about it, both Indian and European civilization have a common root -- the Indo-Europeans migrating into both India and Europe, and creating syncretic cultures with the original inhabitants of both regions. Ancient Hinduism (Vedicism) is almost a word-for-word analogue to ancient European religions (Norse, Roman, Greek, etc). Modern Hinduism developed after Vedicism mixed with the aboriginal religions of India (possibly introducing concepts like reincarnation, worship of Shiva, religious ties to physical places within India). So it's not out of the realm of possibility that Europe could have developed a continent-wide belief system very similar to Hinduism. In fact, that's what seems to have been happening before the introduction of Christianity, though philosophical schools like Stoics and others didn't seem to have as religious a bent as Indian philosophical schools like the Ajivikas.

Christianity was easily what prevented this from happening, so a Europe without monotheistic religion certainly good have produced a Hinduism-analogue. Religion in the Roman empire -- balancing various Indo-European belief systems -- was essentially the first step in this process.

So is there no way for such a developed European belief system to live alongside Christianity, for there to be a certain degree of mutual borrowing of concepts between the two without one snuffing the other out? I'd like to think that before Christianity becomes the official religion of the Empire convivencia is possible and even afterward, especially is Euopean polytheism (it needs a better name) is more cohesive and entrenched than it was IOTL. I'm essentially looking for a relationship akin to the one between Hinduism and Buddhism in India prior to the Islamic invasion here. Is it possible or is Christianity inherently too hegemoniacal for this to work?

 

[Socrates]

So is there no way for such a developed European belief system to live alongside Christianity, for there to be a certain degree of mutual borrowing of concepts between the two without one snuffing the other out? I'd like to think that before Christianity becomes the official religion of the Empire convivencia is possible and even afterward, especially is Euopean polytheism (it needs a better name) is more cohesive and entrenched than it was IOTL. I'm essentially looking for a relationship akin to the one between Hinduism and Buddhism in India prior to the Islamic invasion here. Is it possible or is Christianity inherently too hegemoniacal for this to work?

It's not necessarily too hegemonical, but it is too exclusive. Christanity at a fairly fundamental level, in line with Judaism and Islam, claims a monopoly on the Truth. If it existed as a minority religion it would be like Islam in India. Constantly present, potentially accepting rule by non-Christians, but with a defined belief system that isn't compromising.

 

[Zwide]

The thing is, Christianity in Europe essentially had a 1000 year head start over Islam in India. It also experienced a lot of relatively quick success (Constantine's vision, the Christianization of the Roman Empire). Proportionately speaking, Christianity spread over more of Europe in a shorter timeframe than Islam did in India. With the exception of Lithuania, Russia, and other remote parts of Eastern Europe, Europe was solidly Christian long before Muslims even conquered the Indo-Gangetic plain, let alone the entirety of the subcontinent.

Christianity could survive as a moderately successful minority religion, but in a dominant position, there is no way it would have allowed "European Hinduism" to develop. Just look at what happened to the Prussians.

I don't think it's possible for Abrahamic religions to have the same dynamic as different Dharmic religions have between each other. Jainism, Sikhism, and Buddhism are just more concentrated versions of baseline Hinduism -- they're the same fundamental belief system with minor alterations. They are more different philosophies than different belief systems. This explains why the history of violence between these groups is minimal, historically speaking.

 

[Jürgen]

Honestly I think we need the Greeks introduce Buddhism in Europe and European Hinduism rise to counter it.

 

[Jared]

Honestly I think we need the Greeks introduce Buddhism in Europe and European Hinduism rise to counter it.

One of my long-term projects is basically this. Some of the followers of Epicurus interact with Ashoka's Buddhist missionaries to develop a form of Buddhism somewhat like Mahayana Buddhism (but earlier than it developed in OTL) which spreads throughout the Greco-Roman world starting around the early second century BCE. This eventually becomes the official religion of the *Roman Empire, at least for a few emperors. Something like "Hinduism" emerges from that (though it could also be considered something like the situation in China where there's much interplay between different religious traditions.

The tale itself is told through the various philosophical and religious writings which emerge in this timeline. No narrative outside of that. That's the sort of thing which is enjoyable but slow to write, so it's taking a while to finish.

 

[Prince de Pringondani]

Isn't Christianity (before the Reformation) also a synthesis of various religions look just at Christian Holidays like Crismas Eastern and the worshipping of Saints and relics

 

[Philip]

Isn't Christianity (before the Reformation) also a synthesis of various religions

Nope. It is a development of (hellenized?) Judaism. It makes use of non-Christian language and symbolism but repurposed for its own needs.

look just at Christian Holidays like Crismas Eastern

Presumably you mean Christmas and Easter. Christmas seems to be a Christian celebration timed to be an alternative to non-Christian celebrations. It appropriated some practices, but presented them in a Christian setting.

Easter is a reinterpretion of Passover.

and the worshipping of Saints and

I know of no Christians who worship saints or relics.

 

[Prince de Pringondani]

According to Mark Miravalle the English word "worship" is equivocal, in that it has been used in Catholic writing, at any rate, to denote both adoration/latria and veneration/dulia, and in some cases even as a synonym for veneration as distinct from adoration:

 

[Thisisnotausername]

I know of no Christians who worship saints or relics.

Prayer to and veneration of the saints is a pretty big part of Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, and relics are similarly venerated to this day. This may not technically be worship, but functionally speaking there's not a whole lot of difference between praying to Neptune for a safe voyage and praying to St Brendan the Navigator for the same.

 

[Prince de Pringondani]

In my neighbourhood they praying to Saints to get good weather or even sacrifice sausages for good weather

 

[Philip]

Prayer to and veneration of the saints is a pretty big part of Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, and relics are similarly venerated to this day

As a practicing Orthodox Christian, I am well aware of the practice of veneration, and it is certainly not worship.

This may not technically be worship, but functionally speaking there's not a whole lot of difference between praying to Neptune for a safe voyage and praying to St Brendan the Navigator for the same.

You may not see a functional difference, but the practitioners do. Indeed, not seeing the fundamental difference between seeking the intercessions of St Brendan and praying to Neptune suggests a failure to understand at least one of the practices. It seems rather bold to equate practices that one doesn't understand.

According to Mark Miravalle the English word "worship" is equivocal, in that it has been used in Catholic writing, at any rate, to denote both adoration/latria and veneration/dulia, and in some cases even as a synonym for veneration as distinct from adoration:

And the British have been know to ascribe worship to judges, but that does not make it the dominant usage.