Revision as of 05:00, 13 February 2022 editNederlandse Leeuw (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users61,684 editsNo edit summaryTag: Reverted← Previous edit |
Revision as of 05:03, 13 February 2022 edit undoTrangaBellam (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,563 edits Restored revision 1071208418 by Mako001 (talk): How does Ilaiah's views matter? Polemicist etc. Please gain a consensus at talk-page, thanks.Tags: Twinkle UndoNext edit → |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Short description|Critical review and debates against Hinduism and its practices}} |
|
{{Short description|Critical review and debates against Hinduism and its practices}} |
|
{{Short description|Religion}} |
|
{{Short description|Religion}} |
|
{{Use dmy dates|date=February 2022}}{{use British English|date=February 2022}} |
|
|
{{Criticism of religion sidebar}} |
|
{{Criticism of religion sidebar}} |
|
|
|
|
Line 18: |
Line 17: |
|
=== Early opposition === |
|
=== Early opposition === |
|
Some of the earliest criticism of Brahminical texts, including the ] and especially the ], comes from the ] (or renunciate) traditions, including ] and ]. Sramana scholars viewed Brahminical philosophy as "heretical." In particular Sramanas denied the ''sruti'' (divine) nature of the Vedas and opposed sacrificial rituals which were at the heart of Brahminical philosophy at the time.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Thapar|first=Romila|date=1989|title=Imagined Religious Communities? Ancient History and the Modern Search for a Hindu Identity|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/312738|journal=Modern Asian Studies|volume=23|issue=2|pages=209–231|issn=0026-749X}}</ref> |
|
Some of the earliest criticism of Brahminical texts, including the ] and especially the ], comes from the ] (or renunciate) traditions, including ] and ]. Sramana scholars viewed Brahminical philosophy as "heretical." In particular Sramanas denied the ''sruti'' (divine) nature of the Vedas and opposed sacrificial rituals which were at the heart of Brahminical philosophy at the time.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Thapar|first=Romila|date=1989|title=Imagined Religious Communities? Ancient History and the Modern Search for a Hindu Identity|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/312738|journal=Modern Asian Studies|volume=23|issue=2|pages=209–231|issn=0026-749X}}</ref> |
|
|
|
⚫ |
== Caste system == |
|
⚫ |
<!-- How is the caste-system a defining feature of Hinduism, and not of South Asian society? Criticisms by Buddhists, Bhakti traditions, Islam, British rulers & evangelists, contemporary Dalit activists and international NGO's. --> |
|
⚫ |
{{Main|Caste system in India}} |
|
|
{{See also|Anti-Brahminism}} |
|
|
According to Indian political theorist and writer ] (2009), the 'caste-based cultural system that Hinduism has constructed and nurtured for centuries' has empowered three castes (the ]s, ]s, and ]s/], who constitute about 10–12% of the populations of ] and ]) to oppresses the ']–]' castes (also known as the ]), creating enormous ], and stifling ] and socio-economic ].{{sfn|Ilaiah|2009|p=ix, xii}} He blamed medieval ] for developing the 'anti-scientific and anti-egalitarian' '']]'' system in which the Brahmins (priestly caste) would hold supreme power in society, and adopting the word ''Hinduism'' (from the term ''Hind'' taken from Muslim scholars, especially ]'s 1017 ''Tārīkh al-Hind'') as the name for this 'cast-ridden, primitivist, superstitious and barbaric religion'.{{sfn|Ilaiah|2009|p=xiii}} Next, the Brahmins imposed this religion on the rest of the population (now known as the Dalit–Bahujan castes), who were given a ''Hindu'' identity.{{sfn|Ilaiah|2009|p=xiii}} In his 1996 book ''Why I Am Not a Hindu'', Ilaiah argued that most Dalit–Bahujan people had local religious traditions, gods and goddesses, festivals and practices; they had generally not self-identified as 'Hindus' until the late 20th century, when the modern ] movement 'suddenly' started claiming that every Indian who was not a Muslim, a Christian, a Sikh or a ] was a Hindu by default, and regularly pressured them to identify as such.{{sfn|Ilaiah|2019|p=14–18}} Ilaiah hypothesised that the inequality caused by the caste system, as opposed to 'spiritually democratic religions' (such as Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism), would eventually lead to the demise of Hinduism, as the ] of the world that was fuelling the emancipation of the Dalit–Bahujan population would over time end (either through civil war, or a non-violent transformation of society) the hegemony of the three upper castes, and with it Hinduism as a cultural and a spiritual system.{{sfn|Ilaiah|2009|p=ix–x, xiv}} |
|
|
|
|
⚫ |
] describes the caste system as a "discriminatory and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment"<ref name="hidden apartheid"/> of over 165 million people in India. The justification of the act on the basis of ], which according to HRW, "a defining feature of Hinduism,"<ref name="hrw"/> has repeatedly been noticed and described by the United Nations and HRW, along with criticism of other ] worldwide.<ref name="hrw">{{Cite web|title=CASTE DISCRIMINATION:|url=https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/globalcaste/caste0801-03.htm|access-date=2021-01-09|website=www.hrw.org}}</ref><ref name="hidden apartheid">{{Cite web|date=2007-02-12|title=Hidden Apartheid|url=https://www.hrw.org/report/2007/02/12/hidden-apartheid/caste-discrimination-against-indias-untouchables|access-date=2021-01-09|website=Human Rights Watch|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=OHCHR {{!}} Caste systems violate human rights and dignity of millions worldwide – New UN expert report|url=https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=18497&LangID=E|access-date=2021-01-09|website=www.ohchr.org}}</ref><ref>"". CBC News. 2 March 2007.</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Hierarchism == |
|
|
Ilaiah (1996, 2019) stated that, aside from the inequality between castes, Hinduism also upholds various other forms of hierarchy, such as inside families. 'Gils must obey boys, children must obey elders.'{{sfn|Ilaiah|2019|p=25}} Aside from a ] on talking about ] (a taboo Ilaiah claimed does not exist amongst Dalit–Bahujans), it is not possible in Hindu (Brahmin or Baniya) families to discuss ].{{sfn|Ilaiah|2019|p=25}} 'In Hindu families the father can abuse the mother, but the mother is not supposed to retort. A wife is supposed to put up with all the atrocities that a husband commits against her; the more a wife puts up with the husband's atrocities the more she is appreciated.'{{sfn|Ilaiah|2019|p=25}} Unlike the localised religious practices of Dalit–Bahujans, wherein anyone can worship or talk to the gods and goddesses in their native language, Hinduism requires a ] to talk to deities in ] on behalf of ].{{sfn|Ilaiah|2019|p=24–25}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Hindutva == |
|
|
{{Main|Hindutva#Criticism and apologetics}} |
|
|
The phenomenon of ], particulary in its modern ] form, has been criticised by many individuals and groups, especially for stimulating discrimination and hostility against non-Hindus.{{sfn|Ilaiah|2019|p=14–18}} There is no consensus on whether Hindutva is an inherent part of Hinduism, or a political corruption or abuse of Hinduism. The answer to this question determines whether any criticism of Hindutva is thereby also criticism of Hinduism as a whole, or not. |
|
|
|
|
|
=== Cow vigilante violence === |
|
|
{{Main|Cow vigilante violence in India}} |
|
|
{{See also|Cow protection movement|Cattle slaughter in India}} |
|
|
One example in which Hindu nationalism has been having a negative effect, especially after the Hindu nationalist ]'s electoral victory in 2014, is the rise in ]:<ref name="Biswas"/> in the name of "]", who are widely considered to be sacred animals in modern Hinduism (from whence the English expression "]" stems), Hindu mobs have attacked and killed a lot of Muslims rumoured of having harmed cattle, or having slaughtered them for food (]).<ref name="Biswas">{{Cite news |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34513185 |title=Why the humble cow is India's most polarising animal |author=Soutik Biswas |work=BBC News |date=15 October 2015 |access-date=12 February 2022}}</ref> There is ongoing debate about whether ] and beef consumption has always been forbidden within Hinduism and its ], or is a modern prohibition, partially stimulated by ]'s veneration of the cow in the 20th century.<ref name="Biswas"/> While Hindutva groups claim that cattle slaughter did not exist in South Asia until Muslims arrived in the Subcontinent, Indian historian ] (2002) has cited religious scriptures and ancient texts to show that Vedic believers did consume beef in ].<ref name="Biswas"/> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Sati == |
|
== Sati == |
Line 50: |
Line 29: |
|
|
|
|
|
With the onset of the British Raj, opposition against sati grew. The principal campaigners against Sati were ] and ] reformers such as ] and ].{{sfn|Sharma|2001|pp=6–7}}<ref name="marshman">{{cite book|last=Marshman|first=John Clark|title=History of India from the earliest period to the close of the East India Company's government |publisher= Edinburgh: W. Blackwood |year=1876|page=374|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tbmT_Tv-VGUC&pg=PA357|isbn=9781108021043}}</ref> In 1829 Lord Bentinck issued Regulation XVII declaring ''Sati'' to be illegal and punishable in criminal courts.<ref>Sharma pp. 7–8.</ref> On 2 February 1830 this law was extended to ] and ].<ref name=hist>{{cite book|last=Rai|first=Raghunath|title=History |page=137|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Z4-8Z0gqBkoC&q=RAM+MOHAN+ROY+SATI+PRACTICE&pg=PA137|isbn=9788187139690}}</ref> The ban was challenged by a petition signed by “several thousand… Hindoo inhabitants of Bihar, Bengal, Orissa etc”<ref>Dodwell 1932 p. 141.</ref> and the matter went to the ] in London. Along with British supporters, Ram Mohan Roy presented counter-petitions to parliament in support of ending Sati. The Privy Council rejected the petition in 1832, and the ban on ''Sati'' was upheld.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Kulkarni|first1=A.R.|last2=Feldhaus|first2=Anne|page=192|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1YSU9Qp9w0MC&pg=PA192|title=Images of Women in Maharashtrian Literature and Religion|chapter=Sati in the Maratha Country|publisher=SUNY Press|year=1996|location=Albany, NY|isbn=978-0791428382}}</ref> |
|
With the onset of the British Raj, opposition against sati grew. The principal campaigners against Sati were ] and ] reformers such as ] and ].{{sfn|Sharma|2001|pp=6–7}}<ref name="marshman">{{cite book|last=Marshman|first=John Clark|title=History of India from the earliest period to the close of the East India Company's government |publisher= Edinburgh: W. Blackwood |year=1876|page=374|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tbmT_Tv-VGUC&pg=PA357|isbn=9781108021043}}</ref> In 1829 Lord Bentinck issued Regulation XVII declaring ''Sati'' to be illegal and punishable in criminal courts.<ref>Sharma pp. 7–8.</ref> On 2 February 1830 this law was extended to ] and ].<ref name=hist>{{cite book|last=Rai|first=Raghunath|title=History |page=137|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Z4-8Z0gqBkoC&q=RAM+MOHAN+ROY+SATI+PRACTICE&pg=PA137|isbn=9788187139690}}</ref> The ban was challenged by a petition signed by “several thousand… Hindoo inhabitants of Bihar, Bengal, Orissa etc”<ref>Dodwell 1932 p. 141.</ref> and the matter went to the ] in London. Along with British supporters, Ram Mohan Roy presented counter-petitions to parliament in support of ending Sati. The Privy Council rejected the petition in 1832, and the ban on ''Sati'' was upheld.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Kulkarni|first1=A.R.|last2=Feldhaus|first2=Anne|page=192|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1YSU9Qp9w0MC&pg=PA192|title=Images of Women in Maharashtrian Literature and Religion|chapter=Sati in the Maratha Country|publisher=SUNY Press|year=1996|location=Albany, NY|isbn=978-0791428382}}</ref> |
|
|
|
|
⚫ |
== Caste system == |
|
⚫ |
<!-- How is the caste-system a defining feature of Hinduism, and not of South Asian society? Criticisms by Buddhists, Bhakti traditions, Islam, British rulers & evangelists, contemporary Dalit activists and international NGO's. --> |
|
⚫ |
{{Main|Caste system in India}} |
|
⚫ |
] describes the caste system as a "discriminatory and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment"<ref name="hidden apartheid"/> of over 165 million people in India. The justification of the act on the basis of ], which according to HRW, "a defining feature of Hinduism,"<ref name="hrw"/> has repeatedly been noticed and described by the United Nations and HRW, along with criticism of other ] worldwide.<ref name="hrw">{{Cite web|title=CASTE DISCRIMINATION:|url=https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/globalcaste/caste0801-03.htm|access-date=2021-01-09|website=www.hrw.org}}</ref><ref name="hidden apartheid">{{Cite web|date=2007-02-12|title=Hidden Apartheid|url=https://www.hrw.org/report/2007/02/12/hidden-apartheid/caste-discrimination-against-indias-untouchables|access-date=2021-01-09|website=Human Rights Watch|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=OHCHR {{!}} Caste systems violate human rights and dignity of millions worldwide – New UN expert report|url=https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=18497&LangID=E|access-date=2021-01-09|website=www.ohchr.org}}</ref><ref>"". CBC News. 2 March 2007.</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==See also== |
|
==See also== |
Line 65: |
Line 49: |
|
<!-- D --> |
|
<!-- D --> |
|
* {{Citation | last =Dehejia | first =Vidya | year =1994 | chapter =Comment: A Broader Landscape | editor-last =Hawley | editor-first =John Stratton | title =Sati, the Blessing and the Curse | publisher =Oxford University Press | isbn =978-0195077742}} |
|
* {{Citation | last =Dehejia | first =Vidya | year =1994 | chapter =Comment: A Broader Landscape | editor-last =Hawley | editor-first =John Stratton | title =Sati, the Blessing and the Curse | publisher =Oxford University Press | isbn =978-0195077742}} |
|
<!-- I --> |
|
|
* {{Cite book |last=Ilaiah |first=Kancha |date=2009 |title=Post-Hindu India: A Discourse in Dalit-Bahujan, Socio-Spiritual and Scientific Revolution |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DpSHAwAAQBAJ |location=New Delhi |publisher=SAGE Publications India |pp=340 |isbn=9788132104339 |access-date=12 February 2022}} |
|
|
* {{Cite book |last=Ilaiah |first=Kancha |date=2019 |title=Why I Am Not a Hindu: A Sudra Critique of Hindutva Philosophy, Culture and Political Economy (2nd edition) |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Znt8DwAAQBAJ&pg=PT14 |location=New Delhi |publisher=SAGE Publications India |pp=192 |isbn=9789353282639 |access-date=12 February 2022}} (originally published in 1996) |
|
|
<!-- S --> |
|
<!-- S --> |
|
* {{cite book|last= Sharma|first=Arvind|title=Sati: Historical and Phenomenological Essays|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UJmWgz2mv5oC|year=2001|publisher=Motilal Banarsidass |isbn=978-81-208-0464-7}} |
|
* {{cite book|last= Sharma|first=Arvind|title=Sati: Historical and Phenomenological Essays|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UJmWgz2mv5oC|year=2001|publisher=Motilal Banarsidass |isbn=978-81-208-0464-7}} |
With the onset of the British Raj, opposition against sati grew. The principal campaigners against Sati were Christian and Hindu reformers such as William Carey and Ram Mohan Roy. In 1829 Lord Bentinck issued Regulation XVII declaring Sati to be illegal and punishable in criminal courts. On 2 February 1830 this law was extended to Madras and Bombay. The ban was challenged by a petition signed by “several thousand… Hindoo inhabitants of Bihar, Bengal, Orissa etc” and the matter went to the Privy Council in London. Along with British supporters, Ram Mohan Roy presented counter-petitions to parliament in support of ending Sati. The Privy Council rejected the petition in 1832, and the ban on Sati was upheld.