Religious Freedom in Hindu Traditions Dr. Brainerd Prince Research Tutor – Strategic Initiatives, OCMS, Oxford In our modern world, speaking of religious freedom is always in the context of the secular State that grants or not the freedom to practice one’s religion. So then, what would it mean to talk about religious freedom in religious traditions such as the Hindu traditions? Of course, it would be absurd to ask if religious traditions grant freedom to their own believers to practice their religion. However, if there is an Islamic or Hindu State, then the religious ideology that feeds and resources statecraft in these States would be the Islamic or Hindu traditions respectively. Then, the question of religious freedom in these religious traditions become crucial, not necessarily for their own adherents, but particularly for those who do not belong to these traditions, the seemingly ‘other’ who have to live within the State, probably even as a minority. As the conception of religious freedom within these traditions would inform the policies relevant to the practice of religion within the State, it would determine how the many ‘others’ would live in the religiously-inspired State. We could extend this thinking to say that, socio-geographically if there are pockets in the State that are dominated by a particular religion, then even if the State is secular, in these particular neighbourhoods how the ‘minority other’ lives would be constrained by the vision of religious freedom possessed by the dominant religious community of that locale. It is in this context that we can talk about religious freedom in Hindu traditions, particularly in the Indo-Nepal context where these traditions are dominant. While a survey of the theme of religious freedom within Hindu traditions as a whole 1 would be beyond the scope of this piece, we can attempt to briefly respond to three questions: first, what is the general understanding of ‘freedom’ in Hindu traditions? 2 Here I would like to propose that the idea of ‘moksha as personal freedom’ is the dominant understanding of freedom within Hindu traditions. Secondly, how does Hindu understanding of ‘freedom’ extend to ‘others’, who are not Hindus? Here I propose that the practice of ‘samvada as dialogical freedom’ enabled the flourishing of plurality. Finally, how do Hindu traditions respond to freedom to convert? Here I argue that ‘parivartanam as conversional freedom’ could possibly exist, albeit, a minority Hindu voice. 1 A good resource that addresses this theme thoroughly is Sara Singha, Hinduism and Religious Freedom: A Sourcebook of Scriptural, Theological and Legal Texts [eBook], edited by Timothy Shah (Georgetown University: Berkley Centre for Religion, Peace & World Affairs, 2017). Available at: https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/publications/hinduism-and-religious-freedom-a-sourcebook-of- scriptural-theological-and-legal-texts [Accessed: 4th April, 2018]. 2 It must be pointed out that to talk about ‘Hinduism’ in any unified sense is to but talk about a mythical category. So then, how should we speak? I take refuge in Wittgenstein’s understanding of ‘family resemblance’ and in my understanding, its appropriation by the Cambridge scholar of Hinduism, Professor Julius Lipner, in formulating the ‘polycentric’ nature of Hindu traditions following the model of ‘The Great Banyan’ tree found in the Indian Botanic Garden in Howrah, near Kolkata.