An ugly truth, one that must never be spoken too loudly, is that most of the people designated "lower castes" by the "upper caste" Hindus, and others designated "tribals" (adivasis), follow a variety of ancient pagan personal "religions" (belief systems) that are "Hindu" in name only. They don't actually consider themselves "Brahminical Hindus", and are forced to identify (by the "Brahminical Hindus") as Hindu because that's the only choice available to them, in census forms, etc.

"Brahminical Hindus" is new concept I heard for the first time. From an academic perspective, I would more than likely challenge the word "hindu" being used as a religion name. Most religions are more defined/codified. At the end of the day its all a tool to manage power/people, boundaries or groups can be created with almost any data point. Your comment/observation just happens to define/declare one new type of boundary

"Brahminical Hindus" is typical of a phrase concocted by poorly informed western professors like Dr. Audrey Truschke, PhD, to sell books.

And what about their traditions makes their religion not Hindu but makes the “Brahmanical Hindu” traditions Hindu?

The claim that there aren’t other religions is not true because a lot of lower caste folks have explicitly converted to Christianity and or Dalit Buddhism as promoted by Ambedkar who was the driving force behind rights for lower castes in India.

From what I know, religions except Christianity and Islam are generally grouped under Hinduism for most things(marriage law for instance) and by default you're considered a Hindu(you can't be officially an atheist).

What do you mean by "Brahminical Hindus"?

Google is your friend. Also AI.

  1. Modi is considered Other Backward Class which is a low caste. 
  2. Hindutva ideology according to Savarkar, who came up with the term, is that Hindu is a national identity not a religious one. Sindu became Hindu in Persian, and Indus in Greek. And the Sindu was a river. So the Hindutva ideology is in reference to the people on the other side of the Sindu river. This is why Hindutva literally translates to Hinduness. I understand that this doesn't always translate into religious tolerance of Muslims (yes, I say specifically Muslims) but that is because the RSS was formed to counter attacks on Hindus by Muslims in the 1920s. Hedgewar (Founder of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh): A Definitive Biography by Sachin Nandha was a super informative deep dive into the BJP/RSS.
  3. Modi has a 70%+ approval rate even after more than 10 years in power. So his government is popular and the results of the BJP's power are hard to ignore in terms of the infrastructure and India now being the 4th largest economy.

Speaking specifically to this law I think the government is just setting up a back doors of sorts with the recent bomb attack in Delhi and the terror networks founds in India.

> that is because the RSS was formed to counter attacks on Hindus by Muslims in the 1920s.

> Founded on 27 September 1925,[18] the initial impetus of the organisation was to provide character training and instil "Hindu discipline" in order to unite the Hindu community and establish a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu nation).

> ....After reading Vinayak Damodar Savarkar's ideological pamphlet, Essentials of Hindutva, published in Nagpur in 1923, and meeting Savarkar in the Ratnagiri prison in 1925, Hedgewar was extremely influenced by him, and he founded the RSS with the objective of "strengthening" Hindu society.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sangh

Please stop spreading baseless opinions as fact when you yourself know no better. And for matters involving communal issues, I would much rather trust a crowd-sourced knowledge base rather than the opinions of a half-assed biography.

I do have a degree in History with a focus on India and British Empire from Berkeley. So no I don’t think I am being baseless. Hindutva is complex, the 20s were a difficult time in India as all the revolutionaries from the different factions were trying to imagine a future independent India. The Islam/Hindu divide was a creation of the British for divide and rule. And while Gandhi imagined a nonviolent basically traditional hierarchical Hindu society, Hedgewar wanted an organization that removed the bonds of caste and creed so that Hindus can function as a single unified front.

I do think Hedgewar won and Gandhi lost. Also please do understand all sources have biases including Wikipedia.

You will find many different interpretations of Hindutva - look at Hindu websites not political websites.

Hindu Nationalist

You're getting down voted, but I think your point was to clarify that it's not simply nationalist, but particularly Hindu nationalist.

You are correct, of course: it is.

Of course; it is not.

As i pointed out in my other comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46120239 you are just a "troll" trying to misdirect in a totally irrelevant direction.

Ah, nice, now you're stalking me in the comment section.

Well done, totally normal behavior.

I am simply pointing out your nefarious agenda for others to judge.

The last para of your comment is inflammatory, biased, agenda driven and totally irrelevant to the topic under discussion.

I note that you are posting under an anonymous id.

Modibhakting much?

I mean, it's one thing to parrot stuff like "inflammatory, biased, agenda driven and totally irrelevant", and another thing to state your point of contention.

After all, is it "inflammatory" to underscore discrimination and call it out?

And, yes, I am posting under an anonymous I'd - and so are you, as far as anyone is concerned. I came to the internet in the era of nicknames, not of full PII social networks, and I like it that way more.

Would it make the RSS and the BJP less far right if I posted under a real name?

Caught your BS and triggered you, have i ?

All that you have posted are totally irrelevant to the topic under discussion. The only possible reason for it is if you have a personal instigatory agenda so as to try and steer the discussion in another totally negative direction.

As Slashdot named it, you are just a "Anonymous Coward" (i.e. Someone too cowardly to post their real name next to what they write) and a troll.

> The only possible reason for it is if you have a personal instigatory agenda

Here's another possible reason: I actively dislike totalitarianism.

If you're able to make a substantiated comment beyond the trope of "totally irrelevant", I'd be happy to entertain your opinion.

> As Slashdot named it, you are just a "Anonymous Coward" [...] and a troll.

Again, resorting to name calling and equating anonymity with trolling doesn't promote your opinion, it doesn't even elucidate it, it just puts you up as someone who'd rather go for ad hominems rather than genuine dialogue.

I mean, are you pro-Modi and BJP? Do you even have a reasoning for it that manages to elide all their shortcomings, or is it just fitting in with the crowd?

Keep digging the hole; it lets people see and realize your agenda.

To repeat myself;

All that you have posted are totally irrelevant to the topic under discussion. The only possible reason for it is if you have a personal instigatory agenda ...

That is exactly what a "troll"/anonymous coward" does. It is the accepted nomenclature in the Interwebs for such behaviour.

Yeah, just repeat a generic, vapid comment that adds nothing; my comments stand unchallenged.

I don't think you have an actual personal opinion, you just feel the need to tow a line (you know, due to some personal agenda probably), but don't have the data to back it up.

"No, my side is right and yours wrong" isn't a counter-argument, it's just boring.

My comments are quite specific to your attempts at instigatory and provocative misdirections.

None of your comments have anything to do with the topic under discussion i.e. you are just "trolling".

Your own comment here is proof of that - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46120134

I always LOL when the midwit lefty Americans on this board trot out the whole "America's left wing is akshually center right by global standards" routine.

Meanwhile, here on planet earth, India (by far the worlds largest democracy) is run by out and out ethno-nationalists.