Answers to "What do the terms 'Atheism', 'Religion', etc mean for Bharateeyas?"

The answers to the questions here -> http://prashanth-vaidyaraj.blogspot.in/2013/08/what-do-terms-atheism-religion-etc-mean.html IMHO emerge when we try to understand the origin of each of those terms like 'Religion', 'Atheism', 'God', etc. The subject matter is too vast hence I will try to be specific to the questions raised in this post. 

The factors that make a 'Religion' are a 'God', his messenger, a single authoritative book and a structure to assemble its followers. This 'God' is a male who has created the universe and everything in it, including the evil. 'God' is all powerful and can get angry and can punish you when one does not adhere to his commands. His messenger is to whom 'God' has 'revealed' his 'message' in form of 'commandments' and 'Book'. If one follows the dictums as mentioned in the 'Book' it is deemed as 'Good' else it is deemed 'Bad'. Now, to keep the society away from this 'Bad' and 'help' everyone do 'Good' as per the 'Book', a organization is required which will control people and take the 'message' forward. There's a catch here! The organization or its members cannot talk to the 'God' as they are 'sinners' and only the 'son of god' or the 'divine messenger' has conversed with this 'God' and his message is in the 'Book'.

As you can clearly see, only the 3 Abrahamic establishments (Judaism, Christianity & Islam) can be called as 'Religions'. They have a 'God' (Yahweh/Jehovah, Christ, Allah), a messenger/prophet or son of god (Abraham, Jesus, Prophet Mohammed), one single 'Book' (Torah, Bible & Quran) and a organization to 'guide' the society such as the Church and the Ulemas, etc. A person who adheres to one of these 3 faiths and goes by the 'Book' will be a 'Theist'. The term 'Theism' derives from the Greek theos meaning "god". Hence a person who is born in one of these 3 faiths BUT does not believe in existence of 'God' or his 'messenger' will be an 'Atheist'. No one else in any other traditions or faiths of the world can be a 'Theist' or an 'Atheist'.

The origin of the terms 'Theism' and 'Atheism' is very recent, in the 17th century, and were freely used to distinguish between believers and non-believers of their 'God', as the colonial world spread. As my friend, KP Ganesh rightly says, an Atheist is not a Naastika, they have nothing in common. A naastika is one who does not accept the authority of the Vedas and does not conform to either of the 6 astika schools. This is in no way same as 'not believing' in 'God'. A person born in other traditions can become a believer in 'God' only if he undergoes the process of conversion and is baptized as a Christian or a Muslim and is initiated into the Church or the Ummah. Only later can he choose to not believe in 'God' and claim to be an 'Atheist'. No one else can.

Unfortunately 'Religion' has been translated to 'Dharma' which has caused the greatest harm to us and our nation. In modern sense, we are still unclear as to what 'Dharma' means while there are several definitions, like cosmic order, code of ethics for society & person, etc. But in no way its related to 'Religion'.

When there are no 'Religions' in Bharateeya traditions, there is no question of categorizing any of our actions as 'Religious' or otherwise. But in Bharateeya traditions, one who adheres to Carvaka, Ajivika, Jaina or Buddhist traditions can certainly have their own temples (though in different names) and still visit them. For e.g the Ajivikas consider Shiva and Vishnu purely as forces of nature but do not perform any 'pooja'.

Sadly, 'God' has been translated to 'Deva', 'Bhagwan', etc. Deva/Devaru is not same as 'God' as you can see from the above definition. 'Worship' and 'Pooja' are not same either. In our tradition, we are free to choose our Deva/Devaru including a personal Deva/Devaru apart from what Vedas and other revered texts mention as Deva/Devis. Hence you see hundreds of local deva/devi's all over Bharat like Yellamma, Kabbalamma, etc. Those who believe in such deva/devi's can belong to both Astika or Nastika traditions or even the Tantrik traditions.

So to make it clear, our Siddaramaiah cannot claim to an 'Atheist' but can be a Nastika and certainly visit a temple of his tradition.

As you are already aware, such translated terms were imported into our country during the colonial times and gradually found its way into our vocabulary and school syllabi. The translations into regional languages too were done mostly by the initial colonial writers or those from Europe who called themselves 'indologists', for eg. Robert De Nobili in Tamil, Telugu & Samskrut or Ferdinand Kittel in Kannada, who were actually missionaries. All of them were Christians and therefore their worldview was essentially Christian. How and why did this Christian worldview got framed is a huge subject again. As you will see, each of these terms is a result of this Christian worldview.

We live in the times when 'Colonial Consciousness' is still all pervasive and kept aflame through our school syllabus, media, politics, government legislations, constitution obviously influenced by this 'colonial consciousness' and continued exposure to Christian parts of the globe. Hence it is our prerogative and duty to educate ourselves first about the myriad manifestations of this 'colonial consciousness' and then educate others too. Best way to start this is with 'non-translatables' like those mentioned in this post. Unless we are out of this 'Colonial Consciousness', there's no end to our travails and Siddu's of our nation will continue to claim their 'Atheism' and 'Religions' will continue to thrive at the cost of Dharma!