There is much discussion about Hindu civilisation, or as some prefer to call it, Indian civilisation. The fact is that everyone feels their culture is unique and different from others. Therefore, there is something chauvinistic about such ideas. However, when one steps back and looks at large trends in human history, one can see that to the west and east of India are two very distinct ideas, neither of which inform Indian ways of thinking. In that regard, Indian thought may be considered unique.

Let us first consider the more familiar western ideas. To the west of India is the Middle East, Central Asia and beyond that, Europe and America. The great ideas which emerged from this region are Christianity, Islam, and later, science, secularism and democracy. All these ideas seek to be universal and apply to all human beings, hence the obsession with converting people to a particular monotheistic religion or educating people in a particular way of thinking, such as science, rationality and critical thinking.

Western thought values universalism. It also values authority, which splits into two groups. One group gives authority to a human being, which we can call the fascist way of thinking. The other group believes authority should be given not to an individual, but to an institution based on some kind of universal principles, which may be religious or secular. Hence, the institutional model emerges. We have people, those who consider themselves woke, who are trying to universalise the idea of gender fluidity despite its cultural origins.

Now let’s turn to the east: China, Korea, Japan, and to a degree, Vietnam. All these countries are famous for their walled cities, such as the Great Wall of China, which eventually became the firewall of China in modern times. All of them have a history of isolation, not letting foreigners enter their land and becoming what are called sealed hermit kingdoms.

Across these eastern and western zones, the belief is that you live only once. In the west, you are dominated by the desire to do right, which is governed by a judicial system. In the east, you are asked not to disrespect your ancestors and bring shame to them, making saving face a very important idea. Neither of these regions has the idea of rebirth, and it is this concept of rebirth that is unique to India.

Indian thought’s primary idea, shaped in the religions of Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism, is rebirth. Stories of rebirth began circulating around 2,500 years ago in different forms, and rebirth is closely linked with an accounting model of debit and credit. The idea is that fortune comes when you have credit, misfortune when you have debit, and freedom when you have neither debit nor credit.

This model of thinking presupposes that there is no climax in life, no end goal, and it doesn’t seek to be universal; it is highly contextual. In this regard, Indian thought is unique.

Eastern cultures simply shut their doors to western universalism. Indians do not. But Indians resist homogeneity. There is love for dynamic diversity. There are pockets of organisation. But not an overarching standardised system of governance. Far eastern nations are very openly xenophobic. In India, xenophobia manifests through caste practices, through ideas of ritual purity, even pride in not eating in other people’s homes.

In a world that assumes equality and justice are universal, we must remind people that these are western not rational ideas. And these ideas have failed to stop the rise of mainstream conservative religions like Islam and Christianity. which also claim to believe in justice and equality, and prescribed by a higher religious authority, who is answerable to no one. India does not follow universalism. Nor does it seal itself like the hermit kingdoms of the east. Its uniqueness lies in working with new ideas and continuously shape-shifting with times. That is why Buddhism has so many varieties, Hinduism has so many varieties, Jainism has so many schools, and no one seeks to impose one thought despite much rivalry.