(4) Was that sect founded by a man who was born a Hindu and who did not formally join any of the foreign religions ?
If with reference to a sect an affirmative answer to even one of the questions given above be made, then there is no reason for classing that sect as non-Hindu at present.
The Position of the Animists
A distinction is drawn by Europeans between Hindus and Animists. But Hindus themselves do not make any such distinction. The reason for this difference is due to the difference between the attitude of the European and of the Hindu towards the definition of a "Hindu" and “Hinduism." A European understands by the word “Hindu" a man who has certain kinds of notions and customs which are found among, and approved of by, the Hindus. Hindus define a Hindu as a man who has not fallen from Hinduism, that is, taken up the membership of any community like Christian or Mohamedan, which is not considered as a Hindu community.
The distinction between the Hindus and the Animists is thus based only on ignorance.
I may also add here that the distinction drawn between a Hindu and non-Hindu is merely a provisional one. It may change at any time. Hinduism may, in future, include Christians, Mohamedans, and Buddhists. Hinduism is an ever-changing society, which may expand and take in races and peoples irrespective of their religious beliefs. (What societies it will absorb depends almost entirely on the circumstances, which cannot possibly be dwelt upon in this place.
