This is bad and I fear that the next thing they are going to do is remove socialist and secular from Preamble which was added in the 42nd amendment in 1976
India was partitioned on the basis of religion, so how did we end up with one (now two) Islamic countries and one secular. Regardless how you look at it, Hindus got the short end of the stick.
I'm simply stating that things are never as simple as they seem.
A Tamilian sacrifices Goat to his God. But this is not accepted by the Brahminic Hinduism as a way of worship in their temples. But all of these are merged into a false identity of "Hindu".
Who is a hindu according to Indian law ? One who is not Muslim or Christian or Jain. Because there is nothing else that commonly unites them. Hindu is a western term for the land beyond Indus and it is not a religion for all these years (until the politicians decided to use it to suit their purposes). Saivam, Vaishnavism, etc. were the original religions of this land. Not this abomination called Hindutva.
Hindutva is simply a way for a group of people to power grab by forging "us vs them" bugs in human nature.
Let's not confuse religion with culture. By the above logic:
An average Pakistani has more in common with Hindu/Sikh Punjabi. A Bangladeshi had more in common with Hindu Bengali. Indonesian Muslims have more in common with Malay. Central Asians with watch other than Arabs, Africans with each other. Yet, there is singular Islam. Same goes for every other religion.
Absolutely not. Tamil Sithar songs, Kannada Lingayata principles all oppose caste systems and make fun of vedic practices. Sanatan Dharm is all about discriminating people based on birth/caste.
This is a common new-age trout. Hinduism is the oldest religion in the world, with an extensive set of scriptures, rituals, rules, and culture.
It's like a banyan tree with many roots. Just because it doesn't enforce a particular branch (sect) with the rigor that other religions do, it doesn't mean the tree doesn't exist. It exists old and strong.