Afhalen na 1 uur in een winkel met voorraad
Gratis thuislevering in België vanaf € 30
Ruim aanbod met 7 miljoen producten

Afhalen na 1 uur in een winkel met voorraad
Gratis thuislevering in België vanaf € 30
Ruim aanbod met 7 miljoen producten

Winkels

Verlanglijstje

Winkels

Verlanglijstje

Zoeken

Volg ons op

140 winkels

Wist je dat er in Vlaanderen voor iedereen een Standaard Boekhandel is binnen een straal van 7 km?

Vind hier een winkel

Lees een stukje uit het boek

€ 2,99

+ 2 punten

Onmiddellijk beschikbaar

Eenvoudig bestellen

Veilig betalen

Onmiddellijk geleverd via e-mail

Omschrijving

From Shirur Mutt to Javari Temple – FAITH ON TRIAL: How India's Judiciary Undermined Hinduism and Hindu Identity in India

For over seventy years, India's judiciary has claimed the role of interpreter of faith. In landmark judgments — from the Shirur Mutt case of 1954 to the recent Javari Temple verdict — the courts have not merely applied the law, but redefined Hinduism itself.

This book is a bold examination of how the doctrine of "essential religious practices" has allowed judges to decide what is Hindu, what is essential, and what can be discarded. From state control of temples to restrictions on festivals, from priestly rights to questions of worship, judicial rulings have steadily chipped away at Hindu autonomy.

While minority religions enjoy the freedom to govern their places of worship, Hindu temples have been turned into instruments of state power and their traditions reshaped by courtroom diktats. The result is not justice, but a systemic undermining of Hindu identity in its own homeland.

From Shirur Mutt to Javari Temple – FAITH ON TRIAL is more than a legal analysis — it is a civilizational narrative. Drawing from constitutional debates, landmark cases, and contemporary controversies, it reveals how India's judiciary, in the name of secularism, has entrenched a deep imbalance that threatens the very ethos of pluralism.

At once historical and urgent, scholarly yet accessible, this book challenges readers to confront a critical question: Who should define Hinduism — the faithful or the courts?