Does Hinduism Need a Religious Leadership?

Reform must not be perceived as a goal to change the basic premise of Hinduism or introduce strict orthodoxy in its practice akin to other religions.

- VIVEK GUMASTE

Hindus have always prided themselves on not having a rigid matrix to their religion; there is no one earthly supreme leader in Hinduism belting out fatwas or diktats and neither do local priests carry any authority to enforce any rigid strictures. The fact that Hinduism even has a place for non-believers says it all.

Shashi Tharoor, in his book, "Why I am a Hindu," accurately captures the ethos of Hinduism: "It (Hinduism) embraces an eclectic range of doctrines and practices, from pantheism to agnosticism and from faith in reincarnation to belief in the caste system. But none of these constitutes an obligatory credo for a Hindu: there are none. We have no compulsory dogmas. There are simply no binding requirements to being a Hindu. Not even a belief in God. I am more comfortable with the tenets of Hinduism than I would be with those of the other faiths of which I know. I have long thought of myself as liberal, not merely in the political sense of the term, or even in relation to principles of economics, but as an attitude to life. To accept people as one finds them, to allow them to be and become what they choose, and to encourage them to do whatever they like (so long as it does not harm others) is my natural instinct."

People have argued that this very lack of administrative hierarchy, this very lack of a strict code of conduct and this non-judgemental inclusiveness is the beauty of Hinduism and one which imbues it with a resilience that has sustained it over the ages.