Secular State and the ‘Religious Left’: Navayana Buddhism and Dr Ambedkar’s Vision for the Future of Democracy in South Asia

2021 ◽  
pp. 239448112199595
Author(s):  
Kalinga Tudor Silva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
South Asia ◽  
Religious Faith ◽  
Religious Right ◽  
Social Philosophy ◽  
European Origin ◽  
Buddhist Tradition ◽  
Democratic Change ◽  
Religious Left ◽  
Secular State

In the light of ongoing debates about secular state and religious right in India, Sri Lanka and Myanmar, this article examines the intellectual contribution of Dr B. R. Ambedkar towards sustaining democracy in South Asia. His critical contributions included non-violent mobilisation of Dalits and adivasis around their human rights, identity, citizenship and religious faith. Most importantly, he argued that democratic values of equality, liberty and fraternity are not only of European origin but also have roots in South Asia, particularly within the Buddhist tradition. The article reflects on Ambedkar’s politics, social philosophy and contribution to the formation of ‘religious left’ and the process of progressive democratic change via Navayana Buddhism.

Development, Ethnicity and Human Rights in South Asia

1999 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 452
Author(s):  
Barbara R. Joshi ◽  
Ross Mallick
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
South Asia

Modern Day Moabites: The Bible and the Debate About Same-Sex Marriage

2008 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 442-475
Author(s):  
Lesleigh Cushing Stahlberg
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Intimate Relationship ◽  
Religious Right ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Biblical Law ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
King David ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Religious Left ◽  
To Come

AbstractWith the debate about same-sex marriage raging in the United States, this paper asks whether the canonical scriptures of Judaism and Christianity offer any justification for blessing same-sex unions. It looks to the ways that the Bible is used by proponents and opponents of same-sex marriage. It analyzes the hermeneutics of the religious left and the religious right, particularly as they grapple with the "clobber texts" of Lev. 18:22 and 20:13. It then turns to the biblical book of Ruth, which critic J. Hillis Miller describes as having "been alienated from itself, translated from itself" through new uses. The paper puts the book of Ruth to yet another new use/misprision, using it as a prooftext to support same-sex marriage. The book has already been upheld by lesbian readers of scripture because of the intimate relationship between the protagonists, Ruth and Naomi, but this paper "misreads" the text differently. Ruth describes how a marriage made between an Israelite and a Moabite brings about the line of King David, one of the most important figures in the Bible and the man from whose line the Messiah is expected to come. The biblical law, however, is unequivocal: Moabites are not permitted to enter into the community of Israel. Juxtaposing the levitical laws (ostensibly) prohibiting homosexuality with those banning Moabites from Israel, this paper argues that the religious left could hold up the book of Ruth as a biblical model for allowing marriage that seems explicitly forbidden by biblical law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document