The first recorded usage of the suffix ism as a separate word in its own right was in 1680. By the 19th century it was being used by Thomas Carlyle to signify a pre-packaged ideology.
And as I explained you from 7/n-9/n, do you believe that “Hindu” idea is non-mainstream or just a radical social reform?
We mustn’t confuse “dharma” with”religion.”
Dharma signifies behaviours that are considered to be in accord with Ṛta, the order that makes life and universe possible.
means King’s Duty not Religion.
For Bhartiya understanding, Shaivism, Vaishnavism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity are various Panth which means denominations.
Most fail to get it.
1)”Hindu”is anethno-geographic connotation & not religious at all.
2)Hinduism is an oxymoron though we use it for popularity.Often addition of-ism degrades the great “values”.
Hindutva is formed by adding -tva suffix (Pratyay) to Hindu. Now, what do you understand by -tva? In plain language adding -tva (ness) to a noun means :in state of being that noun. Eg. Naritva.
So @ShashiTharoor sir, can you please explain how the ‘state of being “Hindu(Indian)”be wrong at all.
Who are we to interpret “Hindu”per comfort if Darius-I,the first one to use word had defined it other way.
The persecution was falling like brick bats on the Parsis.
“Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices
By Mary Boyce P 147-50”
You may read this book in more detail should you wish to understand.
1)Introduction to Hinduism by Gavin Flood,P 6.
2) The Origins of Religious Violence: An Asian Perspective
By Nicholas F. Gier
So @ShashiTharoor point 2 also demolished.
How absurd to say “Hinduism does not have one but many central texts.” Centre is always one, you don’t have multiple centres. 🤦🏻♂️
& you know,how contradictory you are with this comparison?
It’s like saying water is not in “state of being water” though it’s flowing.
How many oxymorons? 🤔