The Ruler's religion

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Sunak is an intelligent, modern sophisticate. I doubt that he believes much of traditional Hinduism. Anyway, as far as abelief in reincarnation making you care less about life is concerned, one could say the same about Christianity's belief in heaven.

Christianity though has a belief in hell with no second or third or fourth chances.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The caste system continues to exist to the shame of most hindus. It's not a religious or philosophical principle, but a form of political control that is now discredited and, at least on paper, discrimination on the basis of caste is illegal in India. In fact there are many affirmative action schemes in place to correct or compensate for inequalities resulting from past injustices - a form of "levelling up".

Still not seeing how this relates to Hindu politicians in the UK unless you know how they interpret their religious inheritance and apply it to political issues here.

 

As maybe as all this is we're unlikely to know until discussions on the subject are had.

[Udayana]

As maybe as all this is we're unlikely to know until discussions on the subject are had.

hmm .. you can speculate and discuss as much as you like but you won't know unless you ask the man in question.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

hmm .. you can speculate and discuss as much as you like but you won't know unless you ask the man in question.

And now the man in question is in power and he seems to be a committed member of the Hindu faith.
The last time the religious commitment of a party leader became known and controversial leading to downfall whose evangelical Christian faith cost him the leadership was Tim Farron
Will Sunak's belief in Karma cost him as christianity cost Blair and May to a lesser extent and Tim Farron who paid with his job?

[Anchorman]

Some points have been raised here regarding Chairlie Windsor's fait.
When he stays at Dumfries House, he usually attends local churches in the Cumnock area; mainly, but not exclusively, CofS (He has attended a Congregational Church once, where Kieir Hardie was a seacon). These visits are informal and unannounced.
One Sunday, the worship team in my local Kirk was conducting, and I was in the pulpit.
What I will say is that the man had great knowledge of the Scriptures, and we talked for ten minutes after the service. I made no bones about my lposition on monarchy; he respected that, and that did not affect our discussion.

[jeremyp]

And now the man in question is in power and he seems to be a committed member of the Hindu faith.
The last time the religious commitment of a party leader became known and controversial leading to downfall whose evangelical Christian faith cost him the leadership was Tim Farron
Will Sunak's belief in Karma cost him as christianity cost Blair and May to a lesser extent and Tim Farron who paid with his job?

How did Christianity cost Blair?

[ProfessorDavey]

How did Christianity cost Blair?

It didn't, but that is because Blair (quite rightly) recognised that it would be an error to bring his faith overtly into the job of being PM. While his faith, I'm sure, was a major motivational factor he never appeared to be making decisions overtly based on some aspect of christian doctrine.

I don't think May's religion cost her either. I doubt many people knew, nor cared, about her religion. And interesting that Vlad fails to mention Brown who is arguably more religious than either Blair or May - but again I don't think his religion was an issue.

Farron is different - because unlike the others, he overtly brought his religious beliefs into conflict with his job as a politician. That's what cost him, the conflict, not the belief of and in itself.

From what I've seen of Sunak, he seems much more like Blair, May, Brown etc - seems to be a practicing member of a religion but does not bring that overtly into his public role as PM. I think he will take a view on the PR value of his Hindu belief - on the one hand valuable in garnering support from a specific group in society balanced again the potential downside amongst certain racist elements for which this will cement a view of 'otherness'.

[SteveH]

On the contrary, it's not having faith that costs you as a politician. Even people who have no faith themselves want their representatives to have it.

[ProfessorDavey]

On the contrary, it's not having faith that costs you as a politician. Even people who have no faith themselves want their representatives to have it.

I think that's right, or rather that's what politicians seem to think. As far as I can recall the only leader of a major party who has clearly indicated that he wasn't religious was Nick Clegg. Other seem genuinely to be religious (Blair, Brown, May) or feel the need to pretend to be (Cameron, Johnson).

However, realistically I don't think the electorate really give a damn whether someone is religious or not - what I think does grate is when an individual's ability to do their job as a politician is being directly affected by their religious belief (or I guess their lack of religious belief, although I suspect that is far less likely). I also think that the electorate can sniff out falseness - someone pretending to be religious when they aren't.

[Nearly Sane]

On the contrary, it's not having faith that costs you as a politician. Even people who have no faith themselves want their representatives to have it.

Does it cost politicians in the UK? What;is your reasoning for that claim?

[ProfessorDavey]

Does it cost politicians in the UK? What;is your reasoning for that claim?

As I indicated in my last post, I don't really see evidence for Steve's claim that people, even if they aren't religious, want to be led by someone that is.

Frankly I don't see it and it is really difficult to 'do the experiment' as there are always lots of reasons why people may, or may not, vote for a particular politician.

And just because politicians may feel the need to be seen to be religious doesn't mean it actually makes any difference to the electorate at all.

[Udayana]

And now the man in question is in power and he seems to be a committed member of the Hindu faith.
The last time the religious commitment of a party leader became known and controversial leading to downfall whose evangelical Christian faith cost him the leadership was Tim Farron
Will Sunak's belief in Karma cost him as christianity cost Blair and May to a lesser extent and Tim Farron who paid with his job?

He follows Hindu customs and rituals, part of his cultural background and identity, but it is wrong to class "hinduism" as faith and to think that Hindus believe (or not) in "karma" as if it sets out a rule book to be followed.

As a Hindu Sunak should consider the ethics and effects of his actions carefully and aim for the best outcomes. But it is possible that he just follows the customs without religious ideas affecting his personal and political objectives or decisions.
     

[Gordon]

On the contrary, it's not having faith that costs you as a politician. Even people who have no faith themselves want their representatives to have it.

I don't want that!

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't want that!

Me neither, but nor do I particularly crave an atheist PM.

I just want a PM who makes decisions I approve of and their religion or otherwise tends to be pretty irrelevant in that regard.

My most preferred PM from the point where I noticed these things was, by a considerable margin, Blair. He was a committed christian, I'm not - but most of the decisions he made I approved of. I have no idea whether his faith led him to bring in minimum wage, invest heavily in schools/hospitals, supported devolution, allowed gay people to have civil partnerships etc etc, but frankly I don't really care. These were things I supported too even if we might have come to these points of view from different starting points. In reality I suspect we didn't as I image the key drivers were political beliefs, not religious beliefs.

[Spud]

Joe Biden does not let his catholic religion govern his attitude to Roe v. Wade, in fact he seems to be a doughty champion of it.
If Rishi Sunak becomes Prime minister, how far will he let his religion dictate policy particularly in the areas of Karma. Will he see the unfortunate as hostages to their own Karma, likewise the Rich (or should that be the rish?).

Similarly, his final attitude to death which has occurred on an industrial scale under the Tories...Will this matter since in hindu philosophy we are all supposed to be recycled?

I'm hoping Rishi will preach a good sermon - he looks like Steve Chalke!

[ProfessorDavey]

he looks like Steve Chalke!

Who?

[Sriram]

If you want to understand Rishi Sunak better you can try this video. It is a short (4 minutes) version of  'Why I am a Hindu' by Shashi Tharoor who is currently a MP in India. He was formerly the Under Secretary General of the United Nations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=330hPz8iLi4

[SteveH]

Does it cost politicians in the UK? What is your reasoning for that claim?

The fact that nearly all senior politicians feel the need to pretend to be religious if they aren't really, with the honourable exception of Clegg. Even he had to pretend to be a regretful atheist, who'd like to believe but couldn't.

[SteveH]

And now the man in question is in power and he seems to be a committed member of the Hindu faith.
The last time the religious commitment of a party leader became known and controversial leading to downfall whose evangelical Christian faith cost him the leadership was Tim Farron
Will Sunak's belief in Karma cost him as Christianity cost Blair and May to a lesser extent and Tim Farron who paid with his job?

I doubt that Sunak believes much, if anything, of Hinduism, at least not as traditionally presented. He's probably a cultural Hindu, who follows the practices for reasons of solidarity with his community, like secular Jews who follow a kosher diet, or non-believing Christians who go to church at Christmas and Easter and for hatching, matching and despatching purposes.

[Sriram]

I doubt that Sunak believes much, if anything, of Hinduism, at least not as traditionally presented. He's probably a cultural Hindu, who follows the practices for reasons of solidarity with his community, like secular Jews who follow a kosher diet, or non-believing Christians who go to church at Christmas and Easter and for hatching, matching and despatching purposes.

Yes....I doubt he knows much about Hindu literature or philosophy. Just the basics perhaps....like most Hindus.

Actually, you can believe anything you want and you could find some Hindu text somewhere that advocates it.....

[Udayana]

If you want to understand Rishi Sunak better you can try this video. It is a short (4 minutes) version of  'Why I am a Hindu' by Shashi Tharoor who is currently a MP in India. He was formerly the Under Secretary General of the United Nations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=330hPz8iLi4

Good clip, but not sure it tells us anything about Sunak, who is nothing like the kind of man Tharoor is.

[ProfessorDavey]

Good clip, but not sure it tells us anything about Sunak, who is nothing like the kind of man Tharoor is.

I agree, it is an interesting clip, but also agree that we cannot conclude that it tells us much about Sunak. Not least because Tharoor and Sunak's cultural upbringing will have been so radically different. Presumably Tharoor brought up within a culture and community where hinduism was mainstream. Sunak, by contrast was brought up in 1980s and 1990s Britain where hinduism would have been a highly minority faith and also within specific cultures - e.g. attending an elite boarding school where I would imagine he would have been one of precious few students with his belief and background.

Back to the video - interesting as it is on his beliefs, his description of other beliefs is simplistic and caricatured. So there are plenty of jewish people who see it as ethnic not religious - hence to bring this back to UK politics I think Ed Miliband describes himself as an atheist jew and sees not contradiction. Also for many religions there is a disconnect between the taught dogma and actual belief amongst people who claim adherence to that religion. The example I see most commonly is catholicism (due to this being my in laws religion) - I doubt any of those that are practicing catholics of my age believe in immaculate conception, nor virgin birth nor the importance of celibate priests. Yet they defined themselves as catholic (not always catholic, never christian). It is a cultural and upbringing thing first and foremost, a belief thing secondarily.

[SteveH]

Actually, you can believe anything you want and you could find some Hindu text somewhere that advocates it.....

Indeed - I remember reading someone's description of Hinduism as "a shoreless sea". Not sure whether that's a strength or a weakness - maybe both.

[Udayana]

...
Back to the video - interesting as it is on his beliefs, his description of other beliefs is simplistic and caricatured. So there are plenty of jewish people who see it as ethnic not religious - hence to bring this back to UK politics I think Ed Miliband describes himself as an atheist jew and sees not contradiction. Also for many religions there is a disconnect between the taught dogma and actual belief amongst people who claim adherence to that religion. The example I see most commonly is catholicism (due to this being my in laws religion) - I doubt any of those that are practicing catholics of my age believe in immaculate conception, nor virgin birth nor the importance of celibate priests. Yet they defined themselves as catholic (not always catholic, never christian). It is a cultural and upbringing thing first and foremost, a belief thing secondarily.

In general I agree ... but in both Christianity and Islam you are "saved" only through your belief - either faith in Jesus or through the Shahadah; belief is required by the religion.

In most systems adopted by humans, it doesn't matter what you believe - it is how you act that counts for anything.

[Sriram]

Indeed - I remember reading someone's description of Hinduism as "a shoreless sea". Not sure whether that's a strength or a weakness - maybe both.

Actually, it is a collection of different religions, philosophies and practices. We have to thank the British for assigning it a label called 'Hinduism'.