Misplaced Pages

Talk:Hindus: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 06:00, 12 June 2006 editAupmanyav (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,829 editsm →Origin of the word 'Hindu'← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:22, 20 October 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,303,189 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 5 WikiProject templates. The article is listed in the level 5 page: Concepts.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
(984 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{WikiProject Hinduism}}
{{WikiProject banner shell |class=B|collapsed=y|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Hinduism |importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Indian caste system|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject India |importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Nepal |importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=Low}}
}}
{{Indian English}}{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archive = Talk:Hindus/Archive %(counter)d
|algo = old(30d)
|counter = 3
|maxarchivesize = 900K
|minthreadsleft = 5
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
}}


== Infobox image ==
*]: July 2005 - Feb 2006.


There seems to be a repeated effort to replace the present infobox image of this article - That of Durga Puja - over the past year, with various editors presenting the argument that it is not representative of Hindus as a whole. An editor recently replaced it with an image of a Hindu bridegroom without discussing the change on this talkpage with other editors, and seems to have performed this same action this time last year. I have reverted this edit, both due to the lack of consensus, and because it is only representative of a northern Indian Hindu. if anyone wishes to replace the present image in the future, please discuss it on this talkpage, build a consensus, and then proceed. Personally, I would recommend that if you do nominate a new picture here, let it be as pan-Hindu and pan-Indian as possible without accounting for region-specific representations of Hindus. Thank you. ] (]) 09:07, 27 November 2022 (UTC)


== Requested move 22 March 2023 ==
== Submissions requested on forgiveness article ==
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a ] after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.''


The result of the move request was: '''not moved'''. Closed early per ]. <small>(])</small> ] (]) 17:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
I have been working on the ] article. Would someone be willing to take a stab at adding to the Hinduism stub under the "Formal religions and forgiveness" heading in that article and trying to concisely state the Hindu view on forgiveness? Any help would be appreciated. --] 03:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
----
] → {{no redirect|Hindu}} – Right word&#32;] (]) 03:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC) <small>''This is a contested technical request'' (]). <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">''']&nbsp;]'''</span> 05:25, 22 March 2023 (UTC)</small>
*] specifically calls out this example as an exception to the naming convention of using the singular form of a word as an article title in listing the exception that we pluralize groups of people. <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">''']&nbsp;]'''</span> 05:25, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per ]. ] (]) 06:17, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
*'''Procedural close''' "Right name" is an incoherent argument for a move. With no rationale, there is nothing to debate. ] (]) 06:47, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
*'''Oppose move.''' This is an obvious plural subject. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 07:30, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
*'''Oppose'''. Clearly should be in the plural per ]. -- ] (]) 11:08, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - Per ], ], ], ], etc. ] (]) 15:47, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from ] -->
</div><div style="clear:both;"></div>


== Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2024 (numbers inflation) ==
:Is the following an appropriate quote for the Hindu view on forgiveness?
:Forgiveness is a great power
:From The Mahabharata
:Udyoga Parva Section XXXIII
:Translated by Sri Kisari Mohan Ganguli


{{edit semi-protected|Hindus|answered=yes}}
:Addressing Dhritarashtra
Greetins there seems to be an overestimation of the number of Hindus in many countries.


When we have the official censuses numbers why rely on religious organizations that *always* exagerate the numbers ?
:Vidura said: There is one only defect in forgiving persons, and not another; that defect is that people take a forgiving person to be weak. That defect, however, should not be taken into consideration, for forgiveness is a great power. Forgiveness is a virtue of the weak, and an ornament of the strong. Forgiveness subdues (all) in this world; what is there that forgiveness cannot achieve? What can a wicked person do unto him who carries the sabre of forgiveness in his hand? Fire falling on the grassless ground is extinguished of itself. And unforgiving individual defiles himself with many enormities. Righteousness is the one highest good; and forgiveness is the one supreme peace; knowledge is one supreme contentment; and benevolence, one sole happiness.


I mean here the exageration is not even adding 100 000 but literally doubling even sometimes tripling the numbers.
== Who were the first people to call us 'hindus' ==


So why not just stick to the official numbers provided by government, considering that the controversies surrounding the numebrs are always highlightened in the articles anyway ?
I had included the following paragraph trying to show who might be the first people to call us 'hindus': 'Probably the first people to call Indians as 'Hindu' were a brother branch of Aryans, who migrated from India to Iran because of heat and fever (Avesta, India is mentioned as the fifteenth home of Aryans) before 2,000 B.C.E.'


My changes :
This was removed by Shavez with the following comment: 'Aryans came from Europe, then why will they go back to Iran?'


{{Infobox religious group
To say Aryans came from Europe is laughable. Could Shavez give any reference? The only authentic reference to Aryan migration is from Avesta and is given below:
| group = Hindus
| population = '''1.2 billion''' worldwide (2022) {{increase}}<ref name="deccanherald.com">{{cite web | url=https://www.deccanherald.com/national/can-muslims-surpass-hindus-in-population-numbers-experts-say-practically-not-possible-1103547.html | title=Can Muslims surpass Hindus in population numbers? Experts say practically not possible | date=24 April 2022 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|year=2021|title=Hindu Countries 2021|url=https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hindu-countries|access-date=5 July 2021|website=World Population Review|language=en-US}}</ref><ref name="JDB">{{cite web|url=http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projection-table/2010/number/all/|title=The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections, 2010–2050|date=1 January 2020|publisher=Pew Research Center|access-date=22 February 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=http://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/20170222214102/http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projection-table/2010/number/all/|archive-date=22 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pewforum.org/global-religious-landscape-hindu.aspx|title=The Global Religious Landscape – Hinduism|date=18 December 2012|work=A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Major Religious Groups as of 2010| publisher= Pew Research Foundation|access-date=31 March 2013}}</ref><ref name ="gordonconwell.edu">{{cite web|url=http://www.gordonconwell.edu/resources/documents/1IBMR2015.pdf|title=Christianity 2015: Religious Diversity and Personal Contact|website=gordonconwell.edu|date=January 2015|access-date=29 May 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170525141543/http://www.gordonconwell.edu/resources/documents/1IBMR2015.pdf|archive-date=25 May 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref><br /> (15% of the global's population)
| image = Durga Puja, 1809 watercolour painting in Patna Style.jpg
| caption = 1809 painting of ] celebrations in India
|region1 = {{flag|India}}
| pop1 = ]
| ref1 = <ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/08/13/asia-pacific/india-75-religion/#:~:text=Hindus%20make%20up%20the%20overwhelming,as%20a%20secular%2C%20multicultural%20state. | title=India at 75: Dreams of a Hindu nation leave minorities worried | date=13 August 2022 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/09/21/population-growth-and-religious-composition/ | title=1. Population growth and religious composition | date=21 September 2021 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|year=2021|title=Hindu Countries 2021|url=https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hindu-countries|access-date=5 July 2021|website=World Population Review|language=en-US}}</ref><ref name="deccanherald.com">{{cite web | url=https://www.deccanherald.com/national/can-muslims-surpass-hindus-in-population-numbers-experts-say-practically-not-possible-1103547.html | title=Can Muslims surpass Hindus in population numbers? Experts say practically not possible | date=24 April 2022 }}</ref><ref name="JDB" /><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nepszamlalas.hu/eng/volumes/26/tables/load4_1_1.html |title=Központi Statisztikai Hivatal |publisher=Nepszamlalas.hu |access-date=2 October 2013}}</ref>
| region2 = {{flag|Nepal}}
| pop2 = ]
| ref2 =<ref name="JDB" /><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/nepal/|title=The World Factbook|website=], ]|year=2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://2001-2009.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/71442.htm|title=Nepal| website=US Department of State}}</ref>
| region3 = {{flag|Bangladesh}}
| pop3 = ] (])
| ref3 = <ref>https://www.telegraphindia.com/west-bengal/bangla-minister-underscores-hindu-safety/cid/1895007 {{bare URL inline|date=April 2023}}</ref>
|region4={{flag|Indonesia}}
|pop4=]
|ref4=<ref>{{cite web | url=https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hindu-countries | title=Hindu Countries 2022 }}</ref>
|region5={{flag|Pakistan}}
|pop5=] (])
|ref5=<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/hindu-population-in-pakistan-has-grown-at-a-faster-pace-than-in-india-119032600520_1.html | title=Hindu population in Pakistan has grown at a faster pace than in India | date=26 March 2019 }}</ref>
}}


:Just to clarify, all you've changed here is the total number, correct? How have you made the updated calculation? I can't seem to find either the old or your suggested value in any of the sources or by adding all the numbers together (unless I've made a mistake or missed something obvious, which could 100% be the case). ] (]) 02:25, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
"I, Ahura Mazda, created as the first best region, Airyanam Vaejo, of the good creation. Then Angra Mainyu, the destroyer, formed in opposition to it, a great serpent (glacier?) and winter, the creation of Daevas. There are these ten months of winter and two of summer." 2. I, Ahura Mazda, created as the second best region, Gau (plains) in which Sughdha (Sogdiana?) is situated. Thereupon, in opposition to it, Angra Mainyu, the death-dealing, created a wasp which is death to cattle and fields. 3. I, etc., created as the third best region, Mouru (Margiana, Merv), the mighty, the holy. 4. I, etc., created as the fourth best region, the fortunate Bakhdhi (Bactria?), with the lofty banner. 5. I, etc., created as the fifth best region, Nisaya (situated between Mouru and Bakhdhi). 6. I, etc., created as the sixth best region, Haroyu (Herat), abounding in the houses (or water). 7. I, etc., created as the seventh best region, Vaekerata, where Dujak is situated (according to Darmesteter, of evil shadows). In opposition to it, Angra Mainyu, the destroyer, created the Pairika Khnathaiti, who clung to Keresaspa. 8. I, etc., created the eighth best region, Urva, full of pastures. 9. I, etc., created as the ninth best region, Khnenta (a river) in Vehrkana (Balkh? Valhika?). 10. I, etc., created the tenth best region, the fortunate Harahvaiti (Saraswati). 11. I, etc., created the eleventh best region, Haetumant, the rich and shining. 12. I, etc., created the twelveth best region, Ragha, with three fortresses (or races). 13. I, etc., created the thirteenth best region, Chakhra, the strong. 14. I, etc., created the fourteenth best region, Varena, with four corners; to which was born Thraetaona, who slew Azi Dahaka. 15. I, etc., created the fifteenth best country, Hapta Hendu (from the eastern to the western Hendu). In opposition, Angra Mainyu created untimely evils, and pernicious heat (or fever). 16. I, etc., created the sixteenth and best, the people who live without a head on the floods of Rangha (according to Haug 'on the seashore')."


:Greetings oh yes sorry I meant to take out the maximal numbers and their references, I did it for Pak but for example not for Bangladesh (where I have to take out "20,149,351"), basically there are sensationalist numbers pushed by religious organizations that double and even sometimes triple the official numbers, thanks. ] (]) 11:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
B. G. Tilak places 'Airyanam Vaejo' in Sub-Arctic region because of a long night of two or three months mentioned in RigVeda (Ati Ratra - the greater night). There is no detail of their travels from that to Central Asia. The story warms up in Sogdiana, which is mentioned as the second region of Aryan habitation. After that, they seem to have lingered for a long time in the Central Asian region. One of their branches came to India and called the Punjab region as 'Sapta Sindhu'. Some of them left the Sapta Sindhu region because of 'pernicious heat'. They later moved to floods (seashore) of Rangha. That could be the southern Iranian coast or even the shores of Caspian Sea. That is where Avesta might have been written. Some Aryans might have gone straight from Central Asia to Iran.That this happened around 2,500-2,000 B.C.E. is indicated by the the compilation of and changes in Taittiriya Samhita of the RigVeda and the astronomical record.


:] '''Question:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> It appears that the numbers you have provided are already included in the infobox (as low estimates); are you suggesting the other estimates be removed entirely? If so, you'll need to provide some evidence of the unreliability of the sources you accuse of fabricating higher numbers. Simply stating that they are unreliable is not sufficient for that. ] (]) 13:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
These were the people who were familiar with the word 'Sindhu'. They would probably be the first to call us 'hindus'. I suppose my contention is not wrong. I am not editing the page this time, and would wait for inputs from Shavez and other contributors. ] 11:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
::Basically yes, as the "lower estimates" are in fact official govt censuses while the "higher estimates" are from religious organizations that provide no statistics/empirical backup to these claims.
::For instance Nepal's 2022 pop is estimated at 30 million et Hindus here apparently make 28,5 million which is impossible if you know that roughly 80% of Nepal is Hindu... so what's my solution ?
::You take the latest official govt census, for Nepal being 2021, that shows a population of 29,192,480, then you apply the official Hindu % (81) and you get 23,745,163 (instead of 28,600,000), and instead of all these references (often you can't verifiy or don't even give the same numbers), you put the following in the infobox "Nepal (])
::You can do the same for Bangladesh (13 million is based on 2022 census), Indonesia (4 million is based on the 2018 census) and Pakistan (4 million is based on the 2017 census.)
::These "lower estimates" are just the OFFICIAL governmental numbers, obviously religious organizations will always exagerate them for their own benefits (financing and political representation) but in the case of Indonesia these estimates are a ridicilous 4x times higher, so let's stick to the govt censuses ?
::Especially as the higher estimates are discussed in different articles pertaining to these questions, no need to push them into the infobox as some official numbers.
::Thanks. ] (]) 15:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


== Significance of Bharat ==


:] '''Not done for now:''' please establish a ] for this alteration ''']''' using the {{Tlx|Edit semi-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ESp --> - <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">] <small>(])</small></span> 19:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
The term Bharat has little to do with Hinduism and just don't see any reason for its inclusion. India is named as Bharat after the ancient kingdom of ]. What does that kingdom ha to do with Hinduism other than the fact that perhaps its founder, ], was a Hindu? --] 10:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}


== Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2023 ==
That was what makers of the Indian constitution decided. India was called as Bharatvarsha or Bharatkhanda in Hindu ceremonies. We do not know if Emperor Bharat is history or Mythology. This was perhaps a ploy to keep India a secular nation and ameliorate the feelings of hindus (Muslims had got their Pakistan at the same time). It can be changed by a 75% vote in the parliament. Indian constitution has been amended upteen number of times. Wanna try, have a go. ] 12:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


{{edit semi-protected|Hindus|answered=yes}}
==Lot of inaccuracies in this article==
Please remove flags from infoboxes per ], similar my edit ] (]) 22:24, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
To claim before the invasion of Babur there was no common religion is incorrect. All corners of India/Bharat/Hindustan have/had ancient temples of Shiva, Vishnu etc. Thus these people were following same religion and believing in same Gods.
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> --] (]) 02:55, 28 May 2023 (UTC)


== "Hindoo" considered derogatory? ==
The whole aryan thing is tenous too.


The texts quoted that consider "Hindoo" derogatory state that it was used "on the street" as a "slang word". I believe the source was stating that calling someone "Hindu/Hindoo" was considered derogatory, not any specific spelling. The difference in spelling cannot be heard in spoken speech. ] (]) 03:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Bharat has less to do with Hinduism but more to do with the name of the country.
:{{reply|DenverCoder19}} I believe that you are right. I have appended to the claim in the lead; retaining the ones that clearly refer to the "Hindoo" ''spelling'' while deleting the ones that appear to talk about "Hindu/Hindoo" being used as a ''verbal'' slur. Let me know if I missed or overdid something. Cheers. {{pb}}PS:Not too active at the moment so a ] would be appreciated if you or anyone else need a clarification/response.. ] (]) 04:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

::I've trimmed it further. The text doesn't say what the source says. The first source is a "dictionary of ethnic slurs" from an obscure publisher in Portland, Oregon that says "it is one that '''may lend itself''' to derogatory use (?)". The second source is a kind of vague statement that speculates that more sound-based spellings can be considered "lowly" in general, without actually saying that this is what the evidence bears out for Hindoo.
+] 07:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)+
::Cf. "Moslem" for "Muslim" or "Jews" (instead of "Jewish people"). Just because a phrase is used more often by one group of people, doesn't mean it is always derogatory. See ]

::Any Anglophone can tell you when someone says "The Jews" instead of "Jewish people", it quite likely means the speaker is prejudiced against Jewish people. But Misplaced Pages still happily uses the phrase "Jews" and does not label it as "derogatory", because it is not exclusively so. ] (]) ] (]) 20:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
:Well, I don't agree with you entirely. Before the arrival of Islam, Hindus (as people living in the Indian subcontinent were known as before) had varying religious beliefs which exists even today. Hinduism has more denominations than any other religion in the world. I would say that all Hindus don't have common beliefs. But yes, to say that Hindus didn't have a common religion is a bit inaccurate. Thanks --] 17:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

::What don't you agree with? Believing in a pantheon of Gods has always been the Hindu way. Arrival of Islam had no impact on hinduism whatsoever. Though modern historians are searching for "positive impact" of Islam on Hinduism and India. People all over India, North/South/East/West believe in the same set of Gods and Godesses. This is not new. It has been like this way before Buddha and Mahavira i.e 9th century B.C.
::Do you have some specifics you would like to discuss?
::+] 11:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)+

10,000 Thundering Typhoons - There is nothing tenous about the Aryans. These people were from Sub-Arctic Siberia (geographical conditions were different at that time and mammoths and other large mammals roamed in Tundra). These people were forced to leave their land 'Ariyanam Vaejo' by the advancing ice-age (20,000 B.C.). Their people percolated everywhere, in Central Asia where they remained for a long time, in India, in Iran, in Mesopotamia, Greece, Rome, Germany, and Scandinavia. Spartian - Hinduism has always been like that and perhaps always will be. It cannot be exclusive like the Abrahamaic religions. Aryan, Scythians, Parthians, Greeks, Kushans, Christianity, or Islam have had only marginal effect on Hinduism. Actually all the earlier immigrants accepted Hinduism. Indian religions (Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism) had more effect on Hinduism. ] 14:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

:First of all, I am not able to find this particular sentence in the article. Secondly, I would like to apologize for not getting your point. To say that before the arrival of Islam, Hindus didn't have a common religion and that after the Muslim invaders came, they had one is inaccurate. Thanks --] 19:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

::Here it is "Prior to successful invasion of Indian subcontinent by Babar from Uzbekistan and later by European colonialists, there was no distinct definition of religion in India.".
::+] 18:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)+

:That is not correct. The definition of Hinduism is very clear to intelligent people but not clear who would not like to understand. '''What is necessary for all Hindus is Dharma (Duty, right action)'''. That is necessary for upkeep of society and cannot be trifled with. Where Hinduism has given complete freedom to an individual is personal belief. You can have a hundred Gods, one or none. You can believe that the universe was created by Gods/God or you can believe that it was eternal, without beginning. You can believe that you will be born again as humans, or animals or be one with in substance of nature. You can believe in one scripture or disbelieve in it. You can believe in heaven or hell or disbelieve in it. These are known as 'Panths', the paths, the ways, and if arrived in good faith, they are all acceptable in Hinduism. Generally Hindus do believe in many forms of one God, do believe in Vedas and Geeta, do believe in rebirth, and do belive in heaven and hell; but all that is not always essential. ] 09:28, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

::Uh, that is like saying Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the same religion. If you are saying Hinduism is a family of religions sharing many commonolaties then I can agree with you there and even allow your call on Jainism and stretch it to include Buddhism, but then draw the line if you include Sikhism like some others I hear. Basic crux is when Shaivites say Shiva killed Vishnu and Vaishnavites say Vishnu defeated Shiva, this is schism deeper than Sunni and Shi'as and of the order of seperation of of the other Abrahamic religions (and history attests of an equally violent interaction) with their different prophets. Plus there is the distinction of those 'Panths' who ascribe to the caste system of Manu and then those who don't. If the cat has got stripes its a tiger and if it has a mane a lion and if it has a real short tail its a bob-cat they are the same but not really. The fact is today a Hindu is really who ever in India is not a Muslim/ Christian/ Buddhist and it is really a commonality of a historical experience and local traditions that has in the past 1000 years fused the disparate elements into a more cohesive conciousness. This more due to the fracturious human nature such that it always needs an "us" and a "them", when the chips are down the bloke over the ocean is part of us, when the chips are good even blood is a them.
:::It is nothing like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam being the same religion. Your premise is based perhaps on your unfamiliarity with Hinduism or unwillingness to accept Hinduism as one of the four major religions of the world. In Hinduism, a person not satisfied with available philosophies is free to search for his/her own answers to the riddle of life. All such answers if arrived in good faith are accepted. The famous RigVeda saying 'Eko sat, vipra bahudha vadanti' (truth is one, seers describe it variously) validates them all. That is why Hinduism includes all types of views, polytheism/monotheism/monism/atheism (Kanada's atomic Vaisheshika darshana). Draw your line, I would not insist on including Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism in the Hindu fold, though we do have a soft corner for them. Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma spats are fun in Hinduism and we do not mind them. Caste system has hardly anything to do with the scriptures, which describe 'Varna', i.e., the various inclinations of people. Even a 'shoodra' could have a brahmin 'varna' or a brahmin may have a 'vaishya' varna. It is decided by the position of stars at the time of child's birth, something ordained by God. Caste is a group of people who are endogamous to safeguard their language, tradition, etc. The caste structure is under revision in the present times, all things change. Yes, we all share a commonality of culture and history not for the past 1000 years but perhaps 10000 years. India was well-populated even during the mesolithic times. 'Us' and 'them' is a universal feature, why blame just the Hindus. ] 10:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't know you can have a hundered gods. Even the liberal Smartas recognize only six forms of God as different aspects of one Brahman. And Lord Krishna Himself said in the ] that those who worship lesser deities are of imperfect understanding instead of worshiping Him alone.
So reasonable people can differ.

Also if you are an atheist, that's may be Hindu in the broad sense in terms of culture, not religion. You may be following the Charvaka school which was known even at the time of the writing of Upanishads. Even in Lord Krishna's time, there were atheists. There's a specific verse, in the Gita which states that the demoniac think creation is a simply a creation of lust, instead of a supreme personal God. Gita:16:8: "According to them nothing is ultimately real in this world. It is Godless and without any moral basis. Being born of sexual union, what else but lust can be said to be its cause?"

] 11:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

The thirty of Aditi's brood are there, apart from the three main Gods and Goddesses (Brahmani and Saraswati may be considered two by some people), Ganesha, Hanuman, Bhairavas (Kshetrapalas), Gram devatas and devis, avataras of Shiva, avataras of Vishnu, avataras of Shakti, various Rishis who also are considered to be avataras of Gods and Sankara. Not everybody is a smarta. Tulsidas asked God to take up bow and arrow instead of the flute before he could bow and God had to do that. If you do not consider avataras separate, you may consider them as one. Advaitins would not even agree to the duality of God and men. I am not talking of demonic beings and their philosophies. Hinduism is a many splendoured thing. We should not belittle it by putting it in a straight jacket. Once you say 'Vipra bahudha vadanti', every thing is possible. Regards, ] 18:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


Tulsidas was a Smarta; for him, Rama was his ] and he recognized that Shiva and Vishnu are one; thus, I believe he said in his Ramayana version, that one who belittles Shiva cannot get Rama's grace. Who worships the thirty ] now? In my opinion, the fall of deva worship came when Krishna subdued ]'s pride when he lifted the Godhavarna mountain in order to show devotees that Sriman Narayana is supreme.

I agree with you that Advaitans do not agree to duality of God and man.

Just because many Hindus worship lesser deites, it does not mean they worship 100 gods. Christians venerate saints, which are lesser deities.

Even in Krishna's time, many people worship spirits but such worship was considered as tamasaic. He also said in the Gita that men who worship ] have limited fruits while those who worship Him does not return to this world. So the Gita itself supports a monotheistic standing. Smartas crafted their own alternative view.

] 00:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Tulsidas - 'one who belittles Shiva cannot get Rama's grace', that makes it belief in two. But when he was asked whether he worshipped 'Saguna' or 'Nirguna', he said he worshipped 'Nirguna' in mind and 'Saguna' in heart. Hinduism does not see any discripancy in this. Hinduism sees this as a gradation of worship, a school kid would worship 'Saguna', a doctoral student would worship 'Nirguna'. None is wrong. 'Vipra vadanti bahudha', till their reasons are good. ] 07:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

== How should we call India ==

In the introductory paragraph, first there was no mention of Bharat, secondly what was mentioned was Republic of India. Now what is the correct name? The constitution of India mentions it like this:

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
Preamble
WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly ..

PART I
THE UNION AND ITS TERRITORY
1. Name and territory of the Union.—(1) India, that is Bharat, shall be ..

This makes me think that instead of Republic of India, what should be mentioned is just ''''India''''. That it is a republic, or secular, or democratic, or socialist, are the qualities that the constitution makers looked forward to. I am sure this point has been discussed. Would anyone like to enlighten a new wikipedian?

:India is supposed to be a secular republic.--] 21:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
::Of course, the Preamble describes India as Soverign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic, Republic. ] 02:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

== no references ==

There's no references for this article.....--] 08:21, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

== Who is a dravid? ==

Of course, Captain of the Indian Cricket team. All South Indians (Other than Brahmins?)? All North Indians (other than Brahmins)? The word is floated around to divide Hindus. This is what my initial search tells me:
Padma Purana: Dakshin and Dravid are mentioned separately. (http://www.swaminarayanwales.org.uk/Articles/articledetails.asp?ArticleID=11)
The Dravida, Brihacharana and Pericharana are all immigrants from Tamilnadu, and the speak Tamil. (q=cache:byJVeblm7ugJ:www.lifescapesmemoirs.net/chatterjee/religion/religion.pdf+dravid%2Bdesh+scriptures&hl=en&gl=in&ct=clnk&cd=39)
The five Pancha Dravida tribes are Karnataka or Kannada, Andhra or Telugu, Dravida or Tamil, Maharashtra or Marathi, and Gurjara or Gujerati. (http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:NEeNBGRXT9sJ:www.hindunet.org/saraswati/civilization1.PDF+dravid%2Bdesh+scriptures&hl=en&gl=in&ct=clnk&cd=69)
But were not Gurjaras supposed to be of scythian descent? And what about fair skins of many Gujaratis, Marathis and others also, even Tamils. What about Rajasthanis, UPians, Madhya Pradeshis, Biharis, Bengalis and Oriyas, Jharkhandis, Chattisgarhis; does one certify them as Aryans? Or skin colour and nose-breadth are the identifying characterstics? Are you sure that Himachalis and Uttaranchalis are Aryans? Kashmiris, of course, would make the purest Aryans??
:Before anyone brands all Indians other than those who may be supposed to have Aryan blood as Dravidians in the way missionaries, muslims and Ambedkarites do it, let us get this straightened out. ] 05:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

== Iqbal's 'Hindosatan Hamara' ==

Would some one (if they consider it appropriate) please include these two links about Iqbal's 'Hindosatan Hamara'. I do not know the process. http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/dec2005-daily/06-12-2005/oped/o2.htm, http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_3-11-2003_pg3_4. ] 04:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

-------------
==newyear==

I have removed "and not very many people know what those rituals are" from the Death ritual paragraph as it is clearly a personal opinion.

The New year subsection need re-writing too.] 10:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

:B.G.Tilak opined that start of new year on Purnima or Amavasya relates to a calender change around 1,400 BCE when Vedanga Jyotishya was included. Some people retained the old system. ] 14:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

::ALL names of such "new year" s such as Vishu, Bihu etc should be mentiones . ] 14:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

== Nepal adopts a secular way ==

Nepal, the only Hindu Kingdom in the world, has now chosen to be a secular state by a unanimous vote in the parliament. Sorry, Hindutvavadis (though great news for christian missionaries). ] 10:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:I think this is a great development. Hindus in Nepal themselves wanted to get rid of that so called Hindu Kingdom. King in Nepal was considered as incarnation of Lord Vishnu which is something absurd and a great insult to belief of billion Hindus. His policies were against Hindu ideas, his son was a criminal. Secular nation status for Nepal is better than such dictators who use Hinduism for their personal agendas. Missionaries are already active in Nepal, just like Hindu denominations like ISKCON, Himalayan acadamy , Hindu Yoga wave etc. are active all over the world. Let Faiths interact peacefully, afterall Hindus don't want to become like Saudi Arabia. - ] <sup><span style="size:-1;"> ] </span></sup> ] 11:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

AFAIK, wikipedia is not the place to discuss these things.] 14:35, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:A correction was needed on the page because of the recent developments. ] 09:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

== Origin of the word 'Hindu' ==

Kindly refer to the article on 'Hinduism' where the origins of the word 'Hindu' are explained succintly. I did not remove the last paragraph on the express wish of Cygnus-Hansa, otherwise that also is not necessary in my view. Then, look up in the description on this page, which is trash. What is the use of mentioning what the British did in 1930's, they left India 58 years ago. The point that Hindus are only those who go by Vedic traditions has been rejected by courts in India. In the latest judgement, the Kerala High Court desisted from defining a Hindu. Wikipedians contrubuting to 'Hindu-Hinduism' pages should realise that Hinduism '''accepts ALL''' philosophical conclusions that its adherents arrive at in good faith (Vipra bahudha vadanti) and '''rejects NONE''', not even Tantra and Aghorapanth. Please do not foist your personal views as Hinduism. The information should be short and relevant. It should also be presented in an attractive form. Wiki-Hindu is a window for non-Hindus to Hinduism. Thanks. ] 13:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:22, 20 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hindus article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
WikiProject iconHinduism Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIndian caste system Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Indian caste system, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Caste system in India, DBA experiences, narratives and movements on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indian caste systemWikipedia:WikiProject Indian caste systemTemplate:WikiProject Indian caste systemIndian caste system
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Indian caste system to do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconIndia High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconNepal High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and add your name to the member's list.NepalWikipedia:WikiProject NepalTemplate:WikiProject NepalNepal
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconReligion Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Infobox image

There seems to be a repeated effort to replace the present infobox image of this article - That of Durga Puja - over the past year, with various editors presenting the argument that it is not representative of Hindus as a whole. An editor recently replaced it with an image of a Hindu bridegroom without discussing the change on this talkpage with other editors, and seems to have performed this same action this time last year. I have reverted this edit, both due to the lack of consensus, and because it is only representative of a northern Indian Hindu. if anyone wishes to replace the present image in the future, please discuss it on this talkpage, build a consensus, and then proceed. Personally, I would recommend that if you do nominate a new picture here, let it be as pan-Hindu and pan-Indian as possible without accounting for region-specific representations of Hindus. Thank you. Chronikhiles (talk) 09:07, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 22 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Closed early per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 17:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Hindus → Hindu – Right word Karsan Chanda (talk) 03:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Imzadi 1979 → 05:25, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2024 (numbers inflation)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Greetins there seems to be an overestimation of the number of Hindus in many countries.

When we have the official censuses numbers why rely on religious organizations that *always* exagerate the numbers ?

I mean here the exageration is not even adding 100 000 but literally doubling even sometimes tripling the numbers.

So why not just stick to the official numbers provided by government, considering that the controversies surrounding the numebrs are always highlightened in the articles anyway ?

My changes :

Hindus
1809 painting of Durga Puja celebrations in India
Total population
1.2 billion worldwide (2022) Increase
(15% of the global's population)
Regions with significant populations
 India1,106,000,000
   Nepal28,600,000
 Bangladesh13,130,102-20,149,351 (2022 census)
 Indonesia4,646,357-18,000,000
 Pakistan4,444,870 (2017 census)
Just to clarify, all you've changed here is the total number, correct? How have you made the updated calculation? I can't seem to find either the old or your suggested value in any of the sources or by adding all the numbers together (unless I've made a mistake or missed something obvious, which could 100% be the case). Tollens (talk) 02:25, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Greetings oh yes sorry I meant to take out the maximal numbers and their references, I did it for Pak but for example not for Bangladesh (where I have to take out "20,149,351"), basically there are sensationalist numbers pushed by religious organizations that double and even sometimes triple the official numbers, thanks. 2A02:A03F:6504:1700:C1D4:25DD:8D1A:A3F (talk) 11:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 Question: It appears that the numbers you have provided are already included in the infobox (as low estimates); are you suggesting the other estimates be removed entirely? If so, you'll need to provide some evidence of the unreliability of the sources you accuse of fabricating higher numbers. Simply stating that they are unreliable is not sufficient for that. Actualcpscm (talk) 13:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Basically yes, as the "lower estimates" are in fact official govt censuses while the "higher estimates" are from religious organizations that provide no statistics/empirical backup to these claims.
For instance Nepal's 2022 pop is estimated at 30 million et Hindus here apparently make 28,5 million which is impossible if you know that roughly 80% of Nepal is Hindu... so what's my solution ?
You take the latest official govt census, for Nepal being 2021, that shows a population of 29,192,480, then you apply the official Hindu % (81) and you get 23,745,163 (instead of 28,600,000), and instead of all these references (often you can't verifiy or don't even give the same numbers), you put the following in the infobox "Nepal (2021 census)
You can do the same for Bangladesh (13 million is based on 2022 census), Indonesia (4 million is based on the 2018 census) and Pakistan (4 million is based on the 2017 census.)
These "lower estimates" are just the OFFICIAL governmental numbers, obviously religious organizations will always exagerate them for their own benefits (financing and political representation) but in the case of Indonesia these estimates are a ridicilous 4x times higher, so let's stick to the govt censuses ?
Especially as the higher estimates are discussed in different articles pertaining to these questions, no need to push them into the infobox as some official numbers.
Thanks. 2A02:A03F:6504:1700:E473:5BF8:E8F4:6B01 (talk) 15:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Can Muslims surpass Hindus in population numbers? Experts say practically not possible". 24 April 2022.
  2. "Hindu Countries 2021". World Population Review. 2021. Retrieved 5 July 2021.
  3. ^ "The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections, 2010–2050". Pew Research Center. 1 January 2020. Archived from the original on 22 February 2017. Retrieved 22 February 2017.
  4. "The Global Religious Landscape – Hinduism". A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Major Religious Groups as of 2010. Pew Research Foundation. 18 December 2012. Retrieved 31 March 2013.
  5. "Christianity 2015: Religious Diversity and Personal Contact" (PDF). gordonconwell.edu. January 2015. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 May 2017. Retrieved 29 May 2015.
  6. "India at 75: Dreams of a Hindu nation leave minorities worried". 13 August 2022.
  7. "1. Population growth and religious composition". 21 September 2021.
  8. "Hindu Countries 2021". World Population Review. 2021. Retrieved 5 July 2021.
  9. "Központi Statisztikai Hivatal". Nepszamlalas.hu. Retrieved 2 October 2013.
  10. "The World Factbook". CIA, United States. 2013.
  11. "Nepal". US Department of State.
  12. https://www.telegraphindia.com/west-bengal/bangla-minister-underscores-hindu-safety/cid/1895007
  13. "Hindu Countries 2022".
  14. "Hindu population in Pakistan has grown at a faster pace than in India". 26 March 2019.

Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please remove flags from infoboxes per MOS:INFOBOXFLAG, similar my edit 112.204.206.165 (talk) 22:24, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done --Pinchme123 (talk) 02:55, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

"Hindoo" considered derogatory?

The texts quoted that consider "Hindoo" derogatory state that it was used "on the street" as a "slang word". I believe the source was stating that calling someone "Hindu/Hindoo" was considered derogatory, not any specific spelling. The difference in spelling cannot be heard in spoken speech. DenverCoder19 (talk) 03:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@DenverCoder19: I believe that you are right. I have trimmed the citations appended to the claim in the lead; retaining the ones that clearly refer to the "Hindoo" spelling while deleting the ones that appear to talk about "Hindu/Hindoo" being used as a verbal slur. Let me know if I missed or overdid something. Cheers. PS:Not too active at the moment so a ping would be appreciated if you or anyone else need a clarification/response.. Abecedare (talk) 04:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
I've trimmed it further. The text doesn't say what the source says. The first source is a "dictionary of ethnic slurs" from an obscure publisher in Portland, Oregon that says "it is one that may lend itself to derogatory use (?)". The second source is a kind of vague statement that speculates that more sound-based spellings can be considered "lowly" in general, without actually saying that this is what the evidence bears out for Hindoo.
Cf. "Moslem" for "Muslim" or "Jews" (instead of "Jewish people"). Just because a phrase is used more often by one group of people, doesn't mean it is always derogatory. See Muslim#Etymology
Any Anglophone can tell you when someone says "The Jews" instead of "Jewish people", it quite likely means the speaker is prejudiced against Jewish people. But Misplaced Pages still happily uses the phrase "Jews" and does not label it as "derogatory", because it is not exclusively so. DenverCoder19 (talk) DenverCoder19 (talk) 20:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Categories: