Indian 'Untouchables' convert to Buddhism to protest discrimination.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by aneeshm
I see nothing wrong with that . Do you ?

Well, it does imply that the state knows about your religion, and thus that your beliefs aren't solely a personal matter, but also an administrative one.

I have a problem with that. And before you tell me that some western countries do so as well (to the point that religion appeared on Greek IDs until very recently), let me point out that I have a problem with that as well.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Well, it does imply that the state knows about your religion, and thus that your beliefs aren't solely a personal matter, but also an administrative one.

I have a problem with that. And before you tell me that some western countries do so as well (to the point that religion appeared on Greek IDs until very recently), let me point out that I have a problem with that as well.

well think of how useful that would be in France, you could tell if a student wearing a headscarf was making a public display of religion (banned in the "laic" schools) or was a just a non-muslim having a bad hair day.

[Arrian]

Oof.

[Cort Haus]

Spiff, did 'bad hair days' come up in the debate about headscarfs?

[Drake Tungsten]

So the Buddhists reject all the Hindu gods

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

So the Buddhists reject all the Hindu gods

The Buddhism that the Indian converts are joining include a list of rather anti-Hindu vows:

1) I shall have no faith in Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh nor shall I worship them.
2) I shall have no faith in Rama and Krishna who are believed to be incarnation of God nor shall I worship them.
3) I shall have no faith in ‘Gauri’, Ganapati and other gods and goddesses of Hindus nor shall I worship them.
4) I do not believe in the incarnation of God.
5) I do not and shall not believe that Lord Buddha was the incarnation of Vishnu. I believe this to be sheer madness and false propaganda.
6) I shall not perform ‘Shraddha’ nor shall I give ‘pind-dan’.
7) I shall not act in a manner violating the principles and teachings of the Buddha.
8) I shall not allow any ceremonies to be performed by Brahmins.
9) I shall believe in the equality of man.
10) I shall endeavor to establish equality.
11) I shall follow the ‘noble eightfold path’ of the Buddha.
12) I shall follow the ten ‘paramitas’ prescribed by the Buddha.
13) I shall have compassion and loving kindness for all living beings and protect them.
14) I shall not steal.
15) I shall not tell lies.
16) I shall not commit carnal sins.
17) I shall not take intoxicants like liquor, drugs etc.
18) I shall endeavor to follow the noble eightfold path and practice compassion and loving kindness in every day life.
19) I renounce Hinduism, which is harmful for humanity and impedes the advancement and development of humanity because it is based on inequality, and adopt Buddhism as my religion.
20) I firmly believe the Dhamma of the Buddha is the only true religion.
21) I believe that I am having a re-birth.
22) I solemnly declare and affirm that I shall hereafter lead my life according to the principles and teachings of the Buddha and his Dhamma.

[Arrian]

I renounce Hinduism, which is harmful for humanity...

Of course you realize, this means war! [/Bugs Bunny]



-Arrian

[Drake Tungsten]

The Buddhism that the Indian converts are joining include a list of rather anti-Hindu vows:

Must be a rather odd form of Buddhism, then; Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism are chock-full of Hindu gods. Maybe it's related to Theravada Buddhism; I'm not really sure how they view Hindu deities.

[snoopy369]

It's probably AntiHindu buddhism ...

I'd actually like to know more about why religion is important here: more specifically, why DOES the government care which religion people are? Does the fact that someone is hindu give them more or less power/rights in Indian society, and does the fact that someone is lower caste hindu versus instantly converting to buddhism mean that they have more or less rights?

Why does one state believe that preventing conversions will prevent the "erosion of support for the BJP"? In fact the way I read that, if they make Buddhism a branch of Hinduism, it looks to me that it would *ease* the conversions (as they don't have to be registered)?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I'd actually like to know more about why religion is important here: more specifically, why DOES the government care which religion people are? Does the fact that someone is hindu give them more or less power/rights in Indian society, and does the fact that someone is lower caste hindu versus instantly converting to buddhism mean that they have more or less rights?

It's rather complicated, actually. Religion does play a public role in many aspects - for instance, x% of seats in universities, government jobs, etc. are reserved for lower castes and tribals. Also, the Indian justice system recognises something called "personal law" which governs things like inheritance laws, marriage laws, etc. that can be different for different religions. This is mostly due to the wishes of the minority religions, who fear that if matters like these are left to legislation, they would have Hindu customs imposed on them. I support a Uniform Civil Code (i.e. everyone subject to the same personal law), but unfortunately, so does the BJP.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I'd actually like to know more about why religion is important here: more specifically, why DOES the government care which religion people are? Does the fact that someone is hindu give them more or less power/rights in Indian society, and does the fact that someone is lower caste hindu versus instantly converting to buddhism mean that they have more or less rights?

Dalits are considered to be below the traditional caste system. Perhaps non-Hindus are simply considered to be outside the traditional caste system?

[snoopy369]

But why does the government care that they left hinduism?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by snoopy369
But why does the government care that they left hinduism?

The government, in the case, was elected by, and consists of, conservative Hindus.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
well think of how useful that would be in France, you could tell if a student wearing a headscarf was making a public display of religion (banned in the "laic" schools) or was a just a non-muslim having a bad hair day.

Remind me, when did we decide to keep administrative tabs on our residents' religion?

The ban is against all public displays of religion, and is not only geared to the Muslims. Besides, people don't get "registered" as belonging to one religion or other - there is no administrative trail.

Quite a bit of difference with, say, the Israeli system, where religion used to show on ID cards until 2002, and on which it is still possible to assess whether the carrier is Jewish or not (though the explicit "nationality" line has disappeared).

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Remind me, when did we decide to keep administrative tabs on our residents' religion?

The ban is against all public displays of religion, and is not only geared to the Muslims. Besides, people don't get "registered" as belonging to one religion or other - there is no administrative trail.

You seem to have misread my post - i did not suggest that France does keep such tabs, but that it would be useful to do so. Since France bans public displays of religion in state schools, it might help determine whether an otherwise unobjectionable act was in fact a public display of religion. After all if an atheist wears a headscarf, on a bad hair day, it would hardly be an expression of religion, right? Similarly a non-Jew might wear a skull cap, simply to hide premature baldness.


OTOH, I suppose French people dont have bad hair days. Ergo, not a major issue.