tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6963544998904363625.post927426441757284420..comments2023-11-23T02:47:55.684-08:00Comments on SANSKRIT: WHO IS HINDU? (PART-1)iksusarahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03965726015750069072noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6963544998904363625.post-84134386981613540432015-02-08T07:14:04.976-08:002015-02-08T07:14:04.976-08:00Namaste!
Thank you so much for writing this post....Namaste!<br /><br />Thank you so much for writing this post. I had some thoughts on the legal points. I am an amateur student of law and could be wrong about these. Your comments would be helpful :<br /><br />Constitution definition<br /><br />Indeed Explanation II of Article 25 states that the term ”Hindus” would include those who are Sikh, Jaina and Buddhist by religion<br /><br />However in Punjab Rao vs D. P. Meshram, the Supreme Court ruled that “the definition of ‘Hindu' contained in the Explanation to Article 25 is expanded; but that is only for the purposes of sub-cl. (2) of cl. (2) of that Article and for no other”. In the aforementioned case, a member of a Schedule Caste had converted to Buddhism. Accordingly, he was deemed as “no longer being a Hindu” and hence could not avail of the reservation so granted by law. Hence, the definition of ‘Hindu’ excluded Buddhism when it came to reservations. This shows that the definition of ‘Hindus’ in Article 25 must be seen only for that Article and should not be used elsewhere<br /><br />The intent of using a wider term for Hindus in Article 25 was to throw open the doors of religious institutions. The Article focuses on temple entry and aims at ending discrimination with respect to temple access. It does not imply that the three religions are sub-sects of Hinduism<br /><br />ii) Definition under Hindu Marriage Act/Hindu Personal Laws<br /><br />Indeed Sec 2 of HMA includes Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs in the definition of Sikhs. However, it is important to note the construction of Sec 2 of HMA<br /><br />Clause (a) includes the “forms and developments” of Hinduism i.e.: Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj. This clause brings all of them under the umbrella of Hinduism<br /><br />Clause (b), often called the inclusionary clause, expands the term Hindu to a Buddhist, Sikh and Jain. It does not call these religions as sub-sects or forms or developments of Hinduism (unlike the previous clause). If that was the intention, then they would have been included in Clause (a) itself. There would not have been any need for Clause (b). Interestingly, this clause calls these three faiths as “religions”<br /><br />Probably, the term Hindus was expanded because of the “lack of large dissimilarities” between these religions. In specific, Muslim and Christian personal law is very different from Hindu law and thus needs to be accounted for separately. Perhaps, the same is not true for Buddhists, Hindus, Jains and Sikhs. But that does not imply that they are same in theology or that they are under one umbrella<br /><br />In 2012, a SLP was filed in the Supreme Court of India regarding this (see Birendra Kaur vs Union of India). The Court, while admitting the plea, said “Issue notice on the question as to whether the inclusion of people professing the Sikh, Jain or Buddhist faiths could be included in the enactments relating exclusively to persons professing the Hindu religion, within the ambit of Explanation II to Article 25(2) of the Constitution”<br /><br />In 2014, Jains were declared a minority in India. If Jains are a sub-sect of Hinduism (and hence ‘Hindus’), how can they be awarded the status of a ‘national minority’? Additionally, we have ‘The Anand Marriage Act’ which aims to remove doubts as to the validity of the marriage ceremony among Sikhs. If Sikhs were also Hindus, then this law too would be irrelevant (as they would be governed by HMA)<br /><br />Sources :<br />http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1802243/<br />http://www.ebc-india.com/lawyer/articles/705.htm<br />http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/bitstream/10603/1936/10/10_chapter%205.pdf<br />http://indiacode.nic.in/amendmentacts2012/The%20Anand%20Marriage%20Act.pdf<br />http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Can-Hindu-law-cover-Sikhs-Jains-asks-SC/articleshow/17201306.cms<br />http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/jains-granted-minority-status/article5598368.ece<br />Rohan Chawlahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14908107561360771267noreply@blogger.com