At what point did the tribal drums of the Northeast, the masked deities of Odisha, the fierce mother goddesses of Tamil Nadu, the mystic Bauls of Bengal, and the tantric sages of Kashmir — all get herded under one umbrella called Hinduism?
More importantly, with whose permission was this done?
The honest answer is unsettling: no one’s.
And yet, somehow, everyone played a part.
Hinduism Was Never One Religion
Before the word Hinduism came into usage, there was no singular, codified faith. There was Sanatana Dharma, yes, but even that was not a religion in the Abrahamic sense. What existed was a chaotic, vibrant mosaic of beliefs:
• Vedic rituals and Brahmanical orthodoxy
• Worship of nature, trees, animals, rivers
• Shaivism, Vaishnavism, Shaktism – each with its own vast ecosystem
• Tribal, indigenous, and folk traditions with their own gods and creation myths
• Philosophical schools like Samkhya, Nyaya, and Mimamsa – some atheistic!
If anything, India was a spiritual democracy — confusing, contradictory, yet coexisting.
The British, however, had no patience for such nuance. To administer and classify, they lumped all non-Muslim, non-Christian belief systems into one convenient term: “Hindu”. A bureaucratic invention that became a civilizational label.
Sanskritization: The Silent Erosion of Identity
Sociologist M.N. Srinivas explained how communities across India tried to climb the social ladder by adopting customs of upper castes — a process called Sanskritization.
But what appeared like upward mobility was often cultural compromise. Tribal deities were renamed, festivals were Brahmanized, regional myths were re-scripted. Over time, the distinct became the indistinct — absorbed and rewritten to fit into the growing narrative of “Hindu dharma.”
This was not always enforced through violence — but through systemic incentives, shame, and survival pressures. It wasn’t religion. It was negotiated erasure.
The Rise of the “Hindu” Identity
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, thinkers like Swami Vivekananda, Dayanand Saraswati, and organizations like the Arya Samaj and RSS began pushing for a consolidated Hindu identity. This was in reaction to Islamic rulers of the past and the Christian colonial state.
What began as a cultural revival became a political strategy.
The idea of “unity in diversity” slowly morphed into uniformity in diversity. Cultural plurality was painted over with a single religious brush. Rituals, gods, customs, and philosophies were harmonized — or forcibly blended — to serve a nation-building agenda.
But what was lost in this grand editing?
• Indigenous voices
• Women-led traditions
• Oral histories
• Queer mythologies
• Food, dress, language, and even memory
What We Call “Hinduism” Today Is a Museum, Not a Monolith
Walk through India, and you’ll find Hinduism that looks nothing like its mainstream version.
• In Meghalaya, Hindu gods are unheard of.
• In Bastar, tribals worship Mahua trees and animal spirits.
• In Tamil Nadu, goddesses with bleeding wombs and fierce weapons are revered.
• In Bengal, Kali drinks blood but is also a mother.
• In Kashmir, Shaivism is philosophy, not temple ritual.
Yet, all of them are now expected to tick the same census box.
So, With Whose Permission?
With no one’s.
And yet, in some ways — with everyone’s.
It happened through conquest. Through assimilation. Through fear. Through politics. Through slow forgetting.
Hinduism is not a religion. It is a politically curated museum of a thousand cultures — stitched together without consent.
We may chant unity, but deep down, we all know: something wild, diverse, and beautiful was tamed — without asking.