In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court stated last week that Hinduism has no real boundaries, but represents “collective wisdom and inspiration of the centuries”. It cannot be narrowed down to a particular belief or doctrine, as it “incorporates all forms of belief without mandating the selection or elimination of any one single belief ”. While the judgment came in a case involving appointment of priests to temples, it carries much wider resonance at a time when intolerance in the name of Hinduism is gaining ground.

Hinduism has no single founder or scripture or ‘truth’ to uphold but is an eclectic body of realisations; it is more comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty than Semitic religions are. With today’s political interpretations of Hinduism lending it an intolerant edge, it’s worth emphasising to what degree a Hinduism that is defined by bans and blasphemy destroys its fundamental nature. In that sense, ‘orthodox Hinduism’ is an oxymoron. Some say that the Bhagwad Gita is the core of Hinduism, forgetting that it is part of a vaster, sprawling epic: the Mahabharata. And both Mahabharata and Ramayana are oral epics, which means there is no single, printed, authoritative version. Some say the caste system defines the core of Hinduism – but the bhakti movement, among many others, eloquently opposed caste.

The writer Amit Chaudhuri has characterised Hindutva as “Wahhabi Hinduism”, since it remoulds Hinduism in the image of hardline versions of Islam. However Hinduism’s eclectic, openended character makes it uniquely suited to the 21st century, which emphasises personal choice. The effort to inject fundamentalism into Hindu belief could end up destroying not just India as a nationstate but Hinduism too. And upholding the liberal and pluralist character of Hinduism, as the Supreme Court judgment has done, will preserve both the essence of the religion and the integrity of India. The choice is ours.