PHILOSOPHY OF HINDUISM 17
“It was impossible for an individual to change his religion without changing his nationality, and a whole community could hardly change its religion at all without being absorbed into another stock or nation. Religions like political ties were transmitted from father to son; for a man could not choose a new God at will; the Gods of his fathers were the only deities on whom he could count as friendly and ready to accept his homage, unless he forswore his own kindred and was received into a new circle of civil as well as religious life.”
How change of religion was a condition precedent to a Social fusion is well illustrated by the dialogue between Naomi and Ruth in the Old Testament.
“Thy Sister” says Naomi to Ruth, “is gone back unto her people and unto her Gods” ; and Ruth replies, “Thy people shall be my people and thy God my God.”
It is quite clear that in the ancient world a change of nationality involved a change of cult. Social fusion meant religious fusion.
In modern society abandonment of religion or acceptance of another is not necessary for social fusion. This is best illustrated by what is in modern terminology and naturalization, whereby the citizen of one state abandons his citizenship of the state and becomes a citizen of a new state. In this process of naturalization religion has no place. One can have a social fusion—which is another name for naturalization—without undergoing a religious fusion.
To distinguish modern society from antique society it is not enough to say that Modern Society consists of men only. It must be added that it consists of men who are worshippers of different Gods.
The fifth point of difference relates to the necessity of knowledge as to the nature of God as part of religion.
“From the antique point of view, indeed the question what the Gods are in themselves is not a religious but a speculative one; what is requisite to religion is a practical acquaintance with the rules on which the deity acts and on which he expects his worshippers to frame their conduct—what in 2 Kings xvii. 26 is called the “manner” or rather the “customary law” (misphat) of the God of the land. This is true even of the religion of Israel. When the prophets speak of the knowledge of the laws and principles of His government in Israel, and a summary expression for religion as a whole is “the knowledge and fear of Jehovah,” i.e. the knowledge of what Jehovah prescribes, combined with a reverent obedience. An extreme scepticism towards all religious speculation is recommended in the Book of Ecclesiastes as the proper attitude of