1467:
features in common, that you cannot find in the "Religions of the book" in this article called
Abrahamic religions. All of them believe in a cyclic time of long subcycles ending in the destructing of the cosmos followed by its reapperances (Sanskrit: Shristi and pralaya.) The goal of life is not salvation, but enlightenment/nirvana. In order to attain nirvana/enlightenment you have to purify yourself of the personal side of your being. The personal side is that that clings to the familiar, different desires and cravings, self-importance etc. Patanjali Yoga Sutras classifies the obstructions/klesas: Avidya, asmita, raga, dvesa and abhinivesa (Sanskrit) that is: Ignorance, me and mine, all that we consider our own and are attached to, desire for the pleasant, the enjoyable, disgust of anything, and as the last: fear of death. Reincarnation is also common in all of them, as is the belief of a common substratum of all human beings and the whole world, a metaphysical monism.
1714:
considered to belong to the ancient Middle East; (5) American religions, consisting of the beliefs and practices of the Indian peoples indigenous to the two
American continents; (6) Oceanic religions—i.e., the religious systems of the peoples of the Pacific islands, Australia, and New Zealand; (7) classical religions of ancient Greece and Rome and their Hellenistic descendants.
879:"It states that the phrase is used as a political ploy to indicate solidarity -and indeed, identity- between non-Semitic religions on the subcontinent by the VHP. I then looked at the talkpage of the article, which gave rise to further concern when viewed in that light. I need some more input on this soon, please." Hornplease 17:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
1608:
The question of whether the *title* of an article is "supported" in the academic world or not is rather moot. If that were the benchmark of all article titles, Knowledge would all but vanish. The question is whether the *subject* matter of that article is supported, and given that "Dharmic religions"
912:
and other dharmic traditions..... In many ways, labeling the other dharmic traditions as non-Hindu has a basis that derives more from politics than from philosophy. Indeed, greater differences of belief and practices lie within the broad family labeled as
Hinduism than distinguish Hinduism from other
894:" mentality. This is probably not true, but he should be careful how he says things, otherwise someone who doesn't look up his edits might mistaken him for such. Thirdly, the term exists and has a history, and all that can be said about the quote is that politicians are not always anti-intellectual.
848:
religions", or "wikipedia", but a widely used one). It may seem a clever idea to use Google Books as a argument in the AFD, but Google Books is not strong at all in
Indology books. (No Internet source is really strong in Indology books, but at least one or two are better than Google (I'd have to look
723:
I would add as a personal comment that in my own experience I do not recall ever seeing the term used in any academic text. I understand that my personal views of this sort are worthless as evidence, but nevertheless, it is the case. There is no question in my mind that this is a neologism that was
641:
My own response on that occasion was: "6 links for "Dharmic tradition" on
Scholar (1 on JSTOR), 18 on books, most of which talk about Gandhi, and only 4 of which use the phrase in the sense in which Encarta does." "No results on Lexis, less than 10 results for DR on Google News Archive from reliable
1197:
But none of the various discussions on the subject appear to have contributions from people who know the current academic literature on comparative religion (the most relevant subject). Everyone appears to be relying on the web. The phrase is clearly relatively recent; it does not bother me that it
424:
being only one of them, as they all emerged in a common intellectual and philosophical milieu. There have been comparativist studies of various aspects, but no academically well-known source has been cited. (Frawley and
Klostermeier are dilettantes, Guenon and Cousins are tangential, etc.) This
1470:
I don't know mutch about
Sikhism. It is a combination of Islam and Hinduism, and more practically oriented than Hinduism. Of course its Muslim roots ought to be included in the article. Lots of other small faults, like considering "Bhagavad Gita" a summary of the "Vedas". References should be more
1179:
with lead sections. the non-list sections are entirely OR in the sense that none of it is spoken of in the sources in the context of something called
Dharmic religions. there's no source to suggest that what's been so put together is what characterises Dharmic religions. it has also been suggested
1898:
The problem of what to call the concept is reflected in varying usages in academic texts that try to lump these issues together. Finding the perfect term to express the idea of "religions that originated in India and which may still have some things in common, but which may have diverged quite a
2178:
in
Encarta's Hinduism article is still the closest that I have seen to a reliable source. That perhaps justifies a redirect/disambiguation as suggested by dab, but not an article on its own or ubiquitous use of the terminology on wikipedia. Of course, the article content itself is notable and is
1713:
including early
Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Sikhism, and sometimes also Theravada Buddhism and the Hindu- and Buddhist-inspired religions of South and Southeast Asia; (4) African religions, or the cults of the tribal peoples of black Africa, but excluding ancient Egyptian religion, which is
1466:
The idea of this article is interesting, and worth to be worked on. (Its name may be worth changing). Dharma is an all round term, almost impossible to translate. It has the same diffuse status as Logos has in the West. The religions that have sprung forth on the Indian peninsula do have certain
1170:
demands. we haven't found a book, a chapter of a book, a section, or even a paragraph that talks about Dharmic religions as such. what we have are asides - a sentence each in various sources saying these four religions are sometimes grouped together under this name. other than this statement, we
2173:
that it was widely used outside wikipedia. However a reasonably thorough literature search has shown that the suspected usage is completely absent in academic literature and reliable secondary sources (as evidenced above). The term does show up in numerous (unreliable) website and blogs as seen
441:
It is difficult to believe that the commonality among these religions has not been discussed by academics - if this isn't the name for it, then there must be another similar name this could be filed under. Providing a taxonomy of related religions is a basic building block of the study of world
1533:
You are clearly coming at this from a particular sub-continental perspective. In the West the use of the term has no politicl connotations. Actually the web evidence for political use is as thin as it is for scholarly use - what is it? - about 1 1/2 web uses that treally fit your description?
928:
article. The third possibility is to move it to another title. The major reason for the apparent confusion among some editors is that there are many different terms for the same thing. Prior to 1950, Dharmic religions were usually called Aryan or Indo-Aryan religions in the West. After 1950,
933:
has also become less used). After 1950, in the West, alternative terms like Dharmic tradition or "dharmic beliefs" or more scientifically "Indic religion" are used. Dharmic religions is probably not the most scientific term, more scientific is Indic religions. We could move the article to
516:
as per Sfacets, we use "Abrahamic religions" and don't consider it an "obscure neologism". Just seeing the term "Dharmic religions" used in a text made instant sense to me as a religious student. Also, bad "idea" to remove the term from the articles which use it, and then nominate it for
2255:
Comment, I think that contributors who say that the article must be kept should mention reliable sources with which the article can move beyond the list or stub, copied contents that it is now. Otherwise proponents of the article demand the impossible from other contributors.
689:
If this article is kept, I am rewriting it in line with the only reliable source reference for it, which is about the political use of the term. It might become six lines, and open to PROD-ding by the next person who happens by, but at least it won't be original research.
658:. I am now convinced." This was in mid-June. I have waited this long for any major further information; none has come to light. Let it be clear: there is absolutely no justification for perpetrating the hoax that there is reliable research linking these religions
1899:
bit, and spread to other countries" need not be solved here in order to prove that "Dharmic Religions" is a neologism. Thus the finding of a replacement term is not essential to this AfD. Buddhism as practiced in Japan is quite different from the Indian roots.
986:
Thanks for this remark. AfD is not a vote, so your comments are certainly not unwelcome. I have no opinion on Indic religions, and will look into that possibility. I myself proposed 'Religions of Indian origin', which seems to be fairly common and is a neutral
1816:
any proposal to retain the article title overlooks that the term "Dharmic religions" was coined as a propaganda term, and no matter how "handy" the term may be on an intellectual plane (see #1), any use of it to do what it was coined to do gives the neologism
1484:
interesting, except to support political ideology. From an academic point of view, the sum total content is the commonplace that the religions emerged in a common religio-philosophical milieu, and as a result, have substantial overlap in concerns and
1705:(1) Middle Eastern religions, including Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, and a variety of ancient cults; (2) Far Eastern religions, comprising the religious communities of China, Japan, and Korea, and consisting of Confucianism, Taoism,
1067:
They are most certainly not available online. Surely you have noticed that only out-of-copyright books are all available - a very different matter. Actually hardly any of the books one actually needs on a particular subject aere available.
885:
First, the book that User:Hornplease describes seems to use the term "dharmic religions" itself for the dharmic religions. Secondly, Hornplease's statements reads like that of a nationalist who is upset when he hears that Christianity is a
266:
If you do not believe Frawley is fringe, take it up at the fringe noticeboard. I certainly intend to remove him as a reference from any article not in his specific area of expertise, which is the teaching if yoga, unless I am wrong.
254:
Frawley is not Fringe, except if you think that Hinduism is fringe and not worth discussing. Frawley's books are popularizations and introductions of Ayurveda and Hinduism. Would you call the "Idiots Guide to Hinduism" also fringe?
1254:
hits. If you can suggest alternate academic databases that are worth looking into, I can give them a try too. Incidentally, and not surprisingly, all these indexes give thousands of hits for the search-word "dharma" itself.
1310:(in summary the article compares the attitudes towards world religions like Hinduism, Buddhism and Catholicism to conceptualization of "primitive" religions like Nuer and Lugbara; Jainism and Sikhism are not even mentioned)
1871:" includes "early Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Sikhism, and sometimes also Theravada Buddhism and the Hindu- and Buddhist-inspired religions of South and Southeast Asia". This is clearly what we are looking for. "
2031:
1509:
in the individual terms. "Dharmic religions" has about as much validity as "karmic religions", "samsaric religions" or "moksic religions" -- all of them nothing but politically motivated tendentious neologisms.
1793:
This is irrelevant to this AFD because the premise - is it possible/necessary to have a collective name for those four? - has to be addressed first. It is in any case perhaps more worthy of discussion over at
1605:
with Dharma and redirect to there. Dharma has pretty much the same material but a lot less politicking. Editors who prefer the term "Dharmic religion" can continue to do so with no loss of comfort for the
1337:
Thanks. Note that JSTOR contains but a very small subset of articles on religion. I am not familiar with the American Theological Library Association. I will ask an expert on the subject and report back.
662:. Obviously comparative studies have been done, but implying that Dharma means the same thing across these religions, that this is their main point of correspondence, etc. etc.... all original research.
714:
Of the list he used, only Radhakrishnan and Moore, I think, is not indexed full-text by Google books; if they contained the term, it would have shown up in the search. (And R&M is a sourcebook.)
1505:, etc -- but the definitions differ considerably. That's why rather than trying to "unify" all of them under some common (generally useless) rubric, the bulk of academic effort has been to clarify
1231:
I have searched the following academic article indexes (which AFAIK are the largest and most comprehensive for humanities, social sciences and religion studies) for the phrase "dharmic religion":
1013:. Google books contains the entire contents of (at least) the Harvard University library system, which contains a very large Indology section and is the largest academic library in the world.
642:
sources. One throwaway Encarta reference is insufficient for an entire article title. Meanwhile, the article itself is merely a collection of stubs about Jainism, Buddhism and Hinduism, with
473:
2197:
and/or rename to "Dharma in Religions." The term Dharmic religion is used, but not in the way this article is written. As it is, this entire article is OR. Knowledge is better then that.
990:
My objection to 'dharmic religions' was primarily that it is a neologism overused on WP, and only tangentially that it may be a neologism created to push a particular POV, so we must be
1180:
that sources have not been found because we've not looked in the right place for them (or that there's a synonym we've missed). again, possible but saying so (as opposed to finding it)
1016:
I have no opinion on 'Abrahamic', which seems marginal; I definitely think 'Taoic' needs investigation. (Oh, and, no fervour of any sort, nationalistic or otherwise, motivates me on WP.
197:
544:
a bad idea to remove a neologism from an article that uses it. It may have 'made sense' to you as a student of religions, but we cannot guarantee it would make sense to everyone, and
1043:
Google books may possibly contain the entire list titles of books in the Harvard Library system; it does not contain their contents by any stretch of the imagination - if only!.
1095:
You're surely not basing your claim on that 20%? simply put, the onus is then on you to demonstrate that the term is used in several mainstream studies of comparative religion.
157:
182:
96:
99:
where it appears that the AFD was in favor before an individual opened all 3---and based upon that discussion (which is being rehashed here), I would agree it is a nelogism.
1625:
followed by re-create protect. Trusting soul that I am, :) I hadn't realized that it was a VHP propaganda phrase. I'm almost surprised they didn't use "Aryan religion." --
2025:
994:
careful. As I said above, I was aware of the Encarta reference; it was considered perhaps not enough on which to hang this article given the paucity of any other sources.
908:, and Sikhism share with Hinduism the concept of dharma along with other key concepts, and the four religions may be said to belong to the dharmic tradition. ...between
868:
is a database for legal documents and legal research. I don't know, you can search there maybe for a million years for religious terms without success. Why not try the
1383:@Jossi: religion is reasonably well covered on JSTOR. Just to give you an idea: "Vedic religion" returns 285, "Dharma" 5024, "Karma" 4014, "Dharmic" 187, "Karmic" 894.
1764:
there is no point of a disambig. Irrespective of how one slices it, there is only one meaning of "Dharmic religion": religions that have "Dharma" as a principle. --
164:
obscure neologism, though the subject of Buddhism and Hinduism is well researched, hardly results for google books. The main source for this article seems to be
568:
on the Hinduism noticeboard "...its absence from a sampling of well-known works suggests to me that it is not widely used. I did not find it in the indexes of:
340:
976:(I think I cannot vote, thats why I'm only commenting on this, although I am not completely new (I once had an account, I lost it and had left Knowledge)) --
1138:
Not every term used in a book is also listed in the index, and the book could also use a synonym. Does it use Semitic/Abrahamic religion in the index? --
742:- Per my comments above. I am now more convinced than ever that the term is a neologism and that unless salted it probably will be put back into use.
1646:. I am surprised to find the term is not in widespread use, but I have to recognize the evidence presented. The question presents itself, then, what
1819:
That does not preclude that "Dharmic religions" cannot redirect to "Dharmic religions (propaganda term)" and which is fleshed out along those lines.
676:(the term is now removed) and I will seek dispute resolution for some other cases if I am reverted. Using this obscure neologism in the article
1215:
I am not relying on the web. Please review the results of book index checking which I gave above, plus my personal experience with reading
130:
125:
134:
1851:... because JSTOR finds 10 hits for "Abrahamic religion" and 48 for "Abrahamic religions" (not overwhelming, but infinitely more than
672:
No, removal of the term from many articles should go on even if this article is kept. I have sought dispute resolution in the case of
1619:
ps: The notion that JSTOR doesn't cover religion-related subjects is not correct, a search for "Vedic religion" turns up quite a bit.
117:
1032:
1650:
the umbrella term for "non-Abrahamic world religions" or "Hinduism+Shramana"? Clearly, when categorizing world religions, these
17:
2046:
1297:
1126:
840:. With such many results, I am more than surprised that Hornplease calls it a "neologism" (which of course it is, like also "
778:
2013:
1129:, so these phraces are most probably not used in the book and not extensively treated. Does anyone have access to the book?
724:
devised primarily to acheive certain political objectives. It is not in general use to refer to any group of religions.
1738:. The "Dharmic religions" have a certain common cultural background, while theologically, they are as diverse as can be.
527:
also pointed out your "personal crusade" and told you to stop trying to remove the term from every article that uses it.
1175:
from reliable sources, instead the article pulls together general information about the individual religions - it's a
800:
1001:, which is why I linked Google scholar results; Google per se includes a large number of sources that do not meet
880:
2277:
2007:
1422:. Let me know if you learn of any more comprehensive databases and I can check if I have access to them. Cheers.
36:
945:
2276:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
2106:
per rudra. Or move to something like "Non-abrahamic indic religions" or some such. Anything but a neologism.
1910:
420:. "Dharmic religion" is a neologism. The religions discussed have multiple points of contact, the concept of
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
2260:
2250:
2233:
2215:
2201:
2187:
2161:
2142:
2128:
2110:
2098:
2075:
1982:
1968:
1950:
1903:
1892:
1861:
1845:
1828:
1768:
1747:
1691:
1678:
1663:
1629:
1615:
1574:
1538:
1514:
1475:
1426:
1399:
1390:
1347:
1332:
1275:
1259:
1223:
1210:
1188:
1142:
1133:
1099:
1090:
1072:
1058:
1047:
1038:
980:
823:
794:
785:
746:
728:
718:
709:
694:
684:
666:
552:
531:
508:
484:
458:
446:
433:
412:
384:
371:
359:
347:
305:
292:
271:
259:
247:
234:
204:
191:
103:
61:
1813:
it implies that Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism/Sikkhism are so similar that they are treatable as a cohesive unit.
2003:
1671:
400:, I came upon this article last week and found its existence invaluable. I was looking for information on
2066:
to be able to say, in first approximation, "Abrahamic: 54%, Dharmic: 20%, irreligious: 14%, Taoic: 7%". --
1081:
Exaclty. Making Google books a fantastic online resource, but most definitively not comprehensive enough.
862:, Prabhu, Joseph, Some challenges facing multiculturalism in a globalized world, ReVision, June 22, 2001·
1784:: judging from the opinions expressed above, there are three issues that are being conflated in this AFD:
214:
2092:
1727:
651:
176:
121:
2053:
339:, which more or less covers what this article currently does and which is pretty much what the famous
2063:
1842:
1731:
1302:
PDF itself does not contain the word "dharmic", let alone "dharmic tradition" and anyways the article
1167:
1158:
it has been suggested during these discussions that the term is in common use. possible, but that is
1139:
1028:
1020:
977:
887:
706:
256:
2222:
1054:
I understand over 80% of overall collection and all the out-of-print books have been digitized now.
57:
2124:
2107:
2071:
2039:
1946:
1888:
1743:
1659:
1570:
1562:
925:
921:
860:
356:
77:
939:
902:
1835:
891:
759:
564:. Neologism, possibly politically motivated. Less than five hits on google scholar. According to
495:
1324:
the article does contain the phrase "dharmic tradition" but it is used specifically to refer to
920:
There are three possibilities for this AFD: First one, we delete this article together with the
705:
Buddhipriya didn't read the books, he only looked up the index. The books could use a synonym --
2247:
1926:
1918:
1914:
1872:
1723:
1511:
1123:
930:
850:
775:
505:
430:
289:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
2221:
and fix it. But this is clearly a notable encyclopediac topic and isn't a firnge neologism.--
2019:
1925:(formerly "Religion in India") about the religions of Indian origin per EB. So, the stuff at
1219:. The term is a neologism not used widely, if at all, in the published academic literature.
548:, we need a reliable source to tell us that it makes sense before it can be used everywhere.
2180:
2116:
2087:
2062:
it doesn't exactly have more currency than "Dharmic". It is still very useful for topics of
1961:
1957:
1934:
1930:
1922:
1900:
1880:
1868:
1305:
1220:
743:
725:
565:
401:
302:
218:
165:
113:
89:. I found this via the RFC. Most of the comments below appear to be from involved parties.
67:
1609:
has almost no material not already covered at "Dharma", a redirect would certainly suffice.
2240:
Can you please show where the term is widely used? Claiming it is well used isn't enough.
2156:
1993:
1839:
1795:
1407:
1395:
Thanks Fullstop for resolving the anomaly! I have edited my post above for clarification.
1343:
1271:
1096:
1086:
1055:
1024:
966:
715:
691:
663:
549:
381:
268:
230:
217:
or other suitable name. The subject is encyclopedic. Also, I would avoid making claims of
100:
90:
2211:
as it is a well used term. If the conflict is factual inaccuracies, tag the article with
408:
article since I would assume that is about a concept rather than a group of religions. --
938:
religion", and explain all the other terms in the same article. For Indic religion, see
367:
or redirect. The phrase seems to me to have sufficient currency to justify the article.
2184:
2120:
2067:
1942:
1884:
1867:
the concept is useful, but the term is not in use. No problem. Per my EB quote above, "
1858:
1739:
1655:
1566:
1423:
1396:
1329:
1313:
1256:
1176:
972:
The term ‘Indic’ is how the field is recognized by American scholars, hence our choice.
820:
804:
767:
763:
755:
528:
53:
1005:. Lexis, similarly, was checked because it indexes news and reviews from sources that
957:
1825:
1765:
1735:
1688:
1675:
1626:
1612:
1472:
1387:
1380:@Abecedare: page 210, 11th line from the bottom; page 211, 10th line from the bottom.
1321:
1266:
Search for "Dharmic tradition" or "Dharmic faith" (search both "faith" and "faiths")
1185:
854:
782:
344:
240:
169:
1734:(the latter two could be merged). this is obviously about categorizing religions by
1292:" and their plurals in all four academic indexes, and the result was same as above;
1120:
A Comparative Sociology of World Religions: virtuosos, priests, and popular religion
942:
772:
A Comparative Sociology of World Religions: virtuosos, priests, and popular religion
301:
Frawley is clearly a fringe author who is completely unreliable on matters of fact.
2257:
2241:
1965:
1535:
1419:
1207:
1130:
1069:
1044:
1002:
791:
681:
499:
476:
455:
443:
425:
is an OR puff job, with any salvageable material belonging in other pages such as
409:
368:
244:
201:
198:
Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_September_2#Category:Dharmic_religions
188:
1206:(1957) etc. That it is not books over 50 years old does not make it a neologism.
951:
838:
151:
948:
770:
article provides the following support for this specific claim: Sharot, Stephen.
2198:
1857:
for "Dharmic religion(s)"). It is a false parallelism to compare the two terms.
1801:
Does the material in the "Dharmic religions" article justify a separate article?
1181:
1933:, and the title should either be a redirect there, or a disambiguation between
1909:
I think I fixed it: there used to be two overlapping articles with merge tags,
1415:
875:
The motivation (at least for Hornplease) behind this AFD was apparently this:
819:
only once in an unrelated sense (based on both amazon and google book search).
807:
article (at least in pages 70-76). Incidentally it does not even use the words
2151:
2139:
1979:
1339:
1267:
1082:
834:
521:
454:: If there is a name for it, (I doubt it) then it is not "dharmic religions".
226:
288:
Frawley's Ph.D. is in Chinese medicine or somesuch at a no-name institution.
1806:
Is the title of the "Dharmic religions" article appropriate for the content?
1683:
the most recent work suggested as additional reading is Fred Louis Parrish,
841:
81:. The person who nominated this article has simultaneously opened up and an
49:
1411:
960:
243:
as fringe. A mere glance at the book titles gives already some indication.
963:
954:
1685:
The Classification of Religions: Its Relation to the History of Religions
909:
1803:
No, the material in the article is to a great extent covered at Dharma.
914:
905:
898:
845:
654:
article is better, but here, again, there isn't any organic analysis.
97:
Knowledge talk: Hinduism-related_topics_notice_board#Dharmic_Religions
1938:
1876:
1719:
1639:
426:
405:
336:
183:
Wikipedia_talk:Hinduism-related_topics_notice_board#Dharmic_Religions
1791:
What is the collective name for Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism/Sikkhism?
857:
327:
being part of a classification of religions (as this article assert
935:
869:
865:
849:
that one up.)) Secondly, the term is probably more often used as "
677:
673:
1565:. The question is not "is the term useful", but "is it notable".
2270:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
177:
Talk:Dharmic_religion#Please_do_not_remove_request_for_citations
239:
Comment: I think there is good reason to classify the books by
1883:(is rarely used as a synonym for that group). Problem solved.
1162:
enough for us to put together an article without sources that
790:
Question: Does the reference use the term "dharmic religion"?
2169:
I personally find the term "Dharmic religion" convenient and
648:
there are no reliable sources on which to base this analysis
1304:
does not talk about anything relevant to the topic of the
1240:
American Theological Library Association religion database
475:
and it disambiguates religions from Abrahamic religions.
172:, so any redeemable contents could be merged there. See
1960:
which is a much more common term and makes the article
837:
has more than enough of results for "dharmic religion"
524:
518:
332:
147:
143:
139:
86:
82:
2038:
924:
article. The second possiblity is to keep it, and the
335:) is not attested by reliable sources. Or redirect to
2174:
through a google search, but a passing reference to
1489:. But there it ends. The terms may be the same --
196:
Note: closely related category for deletion is here
1237:
Thomsons-ISI's Arts & humanities citation index
1011:
The term is practically unknown in reliable sources
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1300:as a hit for "dharmic tradition" but the article
2280:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1921:(formerly "Major religions in India"), and made
1198:is not (as mentioned above) indexed in Basham,
803:, the book doesn't support the statement in the
929:obviously the term has become a bit less used (
1122:. Pp 71-72, 75-76. New York: NYU Press, 2001.
774:. Pp 71-72, 75-76. New York: NYU Press, 2001.
2052:
1875:should hence be a disambiguation between (a)
1718:the disambiguation should perhaps be between
8:
517:deletion...bordering on bad faith. I notice
1956:Comment: I had forgotten about the article
1654:be grouped together, but under what name?
1118:does not appear in the index of the book
221:in reference to Frawley. Google books is
1406:Here is some coverage information for :
1164:"address the subject directly in detail"
1328:religion, and not as an umbrella term.
758:grouping, Dharmic is comparable to the
1992:, what, then, are we going to do with
1917:. I merged the demographic stuff into
2183:- a better if still imperfect title.
1707:Mahayana (“Greater Vehicle”) Buddhism
7:
1929:should at this point be merged into
611:An Introduction to Indian Philosophy
1202:(1954) or Radhakrishnan and Moore,
623:The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism
95:Reopening debate per discussion at
853:", dharmic beliefs" and such. See
404:and would not have looked for the
24:
1879:(explains the "Dharmic") and (b)
1204:A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy
617:A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy
1557:I fail to see how any of this,
1280:OK, I repeated the search for "
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1316:14:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
965:and many others. This website
93:03:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1:
2261:10:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
2251:10:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
2234:06:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
2202:14:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
2188:22:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
2162:22:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
2143:22:22, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
2129:16:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
2111:04:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
2099:23:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
2076:19:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1983:17:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1969:19:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1951:17:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1904:08:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
1893:16:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1862:15:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1846:15:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1829:15:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1769:15:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1748:10:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1692:10:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1679:10:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1664:09:58, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1630:00:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1616:00:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1575:09:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1539:11:32, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1515:20:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1476:19:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1427:14:28, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1400:00:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1391:00:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1348:14:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1333:00:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1276:13:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1260:12:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1243:Bibliography of Asian studies
1224:08:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
1211:12:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1189:10:46, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1143:02:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1134:02:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1100:02:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1091:02:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1073:11:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
1059:02:20, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1048:01:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1039:01:49, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
981:01:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
872:and Flora of India database?
824:01:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
795:01:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
786:00:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
747:02:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
729:02:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
719:02:20, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
710:01:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
695:00:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
685:00:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
667:00:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
553:00:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
532:23:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
509:23:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
485:23:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
459:22:39, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
447:22:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
434:22:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
413:21:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
385:00:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
372:19:56, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
360:19:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
348:17:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
306:08:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
293:18:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
272:00:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
260:01:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
248:17:35, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
235:17:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
225:a library (at least not yet)
213:and discuss possible move to
205:19:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
192:17:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
104:07:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
62:20:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
1670:any enlightenment to be had
1296:for one anomaly: JSTOR gave
1003:our criteria for reliability
901:encyclopedia uses the term.
396:Having come across the term
2297:
1808:There are two issues here:
997:Google results per se are
660:in this particular fashion
644:little or no real analysis
380:On what basis, precisely?
2150:as per above comments. --
2119:. Just merge it there. --
1200:The Wonder That Was India
1171:haven't sourced anything
629:Buddhist Thought In India
615:Radhakrishnan and Moore,
599:The Wonder That Was India
2273:Please do not modify it.
1911:Major religions in India
1834:Why not bring the other
32:Please do not modify it.
1173:about Dharmic religions
498:concerning this issue.
2179:already covered under
1480:Actually, the idea is
1184:affect this deletion.
609:Chatterjee and Datta,
579:Kulki and Rothermund,
1728:Hinduism and Buddhism
1711:(3) Indian religions,
1009:meet those criteria.
652:Buddhism and Hinduism
605:Philosophies of India
2064:comparative religion
1732:Hinduism and Jainism
1561:, cannot be said of
904:It says: :Buddhism,
1563:Abrahamic religions
1110:True, but the term
926:Abrahamic religions
922:Abrahamic religions
760:Abrahamic religions
656:This is a neologism
646:, obviously, since
468:- Dharmic Religion
215:Dharma in religions
83:Request for Comment
1471:substantial etc.--
1248:and found exactly
892:divide and conquer
581:A History of India
494:Per discussion on
353:Delete or redirect
343:(page 27) merits.
2176:dharmic tradition
2127:
2074:
1949:
1927:Dharmic religions
1919:Religion in India
1915:Religion in India
1891:
1873:Dharmic religions
1746:
1724:Religion in India
1662:
1573:
1346:
1311:
1286:dharmic tradition
1274:
1116:dharmic tradition
1089:
1037:
1023:comment added by
931:Semitic religions
851:dharmic tradition
402:Dharmic religions
341:Frawley reference
325:Dharmic religions
233:
60:
2288:
2275:
2231:
2228:
2225:
2220:
2214:
2181:Indian religions
2123:
2117:Indian religions
2095:
2090:
2070:
2057:
2056:
2042:
1978:as neologism. --
1962:dharmic religion
1958:Indian religions
1945:
1935:Indian religions
1931:Indian religions
1923:Indian religions
1887:
1881:Indian religions
1869:Indian religions
1742:
1658:
1569:
1559:mutatis mutandis
1342:
1309:
1306:Dharmic Religion
1282:dharmic religion
1270:
1112:dharmic religion
1085:
1036:
1017:
801:an Amazon search
566:User:Buddhipriya
482:
480:
398:dharmic religion
355:per Doldrums. --
229:
155:
137:
114:Dharmic religion
68:Dharmic religion
52:
34:
2296:
2295:
2291:
2290:
2289:
2287:
2286:
2285:
2284:
2278:deletion review
2271:
2229:
2226:
2223:
2218:
2216:totallydisputed
2212:
2093:
2088:
1999:
1994:Taoic religions
1838:up for AfD too.
1796:Indic religions
1018:
888:Jewish creation
764:Taoic religions
740:Delete and salt
478:
477:
128:
112:
76:Closing due to
74:The result was
71:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2294:
2292:
2283:
2282:
2266:
2265:
2264:
2263:
2237:
2236:
2205:
2204:
2191:
2190:
2164:
2145:
2138:as neologism.
2133:
2132:
2131:
2101:
2079:
2078:
2060:
2059:
2058:
1986:
1985:
1972:
1971:
1907:
1906:
1865:
1864:
1832:
1831:
1822:
1821:
1820:
1818:
1814:
1810:
1809:
1807:
1804:
1802:
1799:
1792:
1786:
1785:
1778:
1777:
1776:
1775:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1771:
1755:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1716:
1709:, and Shinto;
1697:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1667:
1666:
1632:
1621:
1618:
1610:
1607:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1585:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1468:
1444:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1435:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1384:
1381:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1359:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1350:
1320:As pointed by
1246:
1245:
1244:
1241:
1238:
1235:
1226:
1192:
1191:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1014:
995:
988:
974:
973:
883:
882:
829:
828:
827:
826:
805:Taoic religion
797:
768:Taoic religion
756:world religion
749:
737:
736:
735:
734:
733:
732:
731:
700:
699:
698:
697:
639:
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
633:
632:
625:
619:
613:
607:
601:
595:
589:
583:
570:
569:
558:
557:
556:
555:
535:
534:
511:
488:
487:
463:
462:
461:
436:
415:
390:
389:
388:
387:
375:
374:
362:
350:
317:
316:
315:
314:
313:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
296:
295:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
274:
252:
251:
250:
186:
185:
180:
162:
161:
108:
70:
65:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2293:
2281:
2279:
2274:
2268:
2267:
2262:
2259:
2254:
2253:
2252:
2249:
2248:
2245:
2244:
2239:
2238:
2235:
2232:
2217:
2210:
2207:
2206:
2203:
2200:
2196:
2195:Strong delete
2193:
2192:
2189:
2186:
2182:
2177:
2172:
2168:
2165:
2163:
2160:
2159:
2155:
2154:
2149:
2146:
2144:
2141:
2137:
2134:
2130:
2126:
2122:
2118:
2114:
2113:
2112:
2109:
2105:
2102:
2100:
2097:
2096:
2091:
2084:
2081:
2080:
2077:
2073:
2069:
2065:
2061:
2055:
2051:
2048:
2045:
2041:
2037:
2033:
2030:
2027:
2024:
2021:
2018:
2015:
2012:
2009:
2005:
2002:
2001:Find sources:
1998:
1997:
1995:
1991:
1988:
1987:
1984:
1981:
1977:
1974:
1973:
1970:
1967:
1963:
1959:
1955:
1954:
1953:
1952:
1948:
1944:
1940:
1936:
1932:
1928:
1924:
1920:
1916:
1912:
1905:
1902:
1897:
1896:
1895:
1894:
1890:
1886:
1882:
1878:
1874:
1870:
1863:
1860:
1856:
1855:
1850:
1849:
1848:
1847:
1844:
1841:
1837:
1830:
1827:
1823:
1815:
1812:
1811:
1805:
1800:
1797:
1790:
1789:
1788:
1787:
1783:
1780:
1779:
1770:
1767:
1763:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1759:
1758:
1757:
1756:
1749:
1745:
1741:
1737:
1736:cultural area
1733:
1729:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1715:
1712:
1708:
1703:
1702:
1701:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1693:
1690:
1686:
1682:
1681:
1680:
1677:
1673:
1669:
1668:
1665:
1661:
1657:
1653:
1649:
1645:
1642:
1641:
1637:
1633:
1631:
1628:
1624:
1620:
1617:
1614:
1604:
1600:
1599:
1576:
1572:
1568:
1564:
1560:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1537:
1532:
1516:
1513:
1508:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1492:
1488:
1483:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1474:
1469:
1465:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1428:
1425:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1409:
1405:
1401:
1398:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1389:
1385:
1382:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1349:
1345:
1341:
1336:
1335:
1334:
1331:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1315:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1290:dharmic faith
1287:
1283:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1258:
1253:
1252:
1247:
1242:
1239:
1236:
1233:
1232:
1230:
1227:
1225:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1190:
1187:
1183:
1178:
1174:
1169:
1168:WP:NOTABILITY
1165:
1161:
1157:
1154:
1153:
1144:
1141:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1132:
1128:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1101:
1098:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1074:
1071:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1057:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1046:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1015:
1012:
1008:
1004:
1000:
996:
993:
989:
985:
984:
983:
982:
979:
971:
970:
969:
967:
964:
961:
958:
955:
952:
949:
946:
943:
940:
937:
932:
927:
923:
918:
916:
911:
907:
903:
900:
895:
893:
890:", or has a "
889:
881:
878:
877:
876:
873:
871:
867:
863:
861:
858:
855:
852:
847:
843:
839:
836:
833:
825:
822:
818:
814:
810:
806:
802:
799:According to
798:
796:
793:
789:
788:
787:
784:
780:
777:
773:
769:
765:
761:
757:
753:
750:
748:
745:
741:
738:
730:
727:
722:
721:
720:
717:
713:
712:
711:
708:
704:
703:
702:
701:
696:
693:
688:
687:
686:
683:
679:
675:
671:
670:
669:
668:
665:
661:
657:
653:
649:
645:
630:
626:
624:
620:
618:
614:
612:
608:
606:
602:
600:
596:
594:
590:
588:
584:
582:
578:
577:
576:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
567:
563:
560:
559:
554:
551:
547:
543:
539:
538:
537:
536:
533:
530:
526:
523:
520:
515:
512:
510:
507:
506:
503:
502:
497:
493:
490:
489:
486:
483:
474:
471:
467:
464:
460:
457:
453:
450:
449:
448:
445:
440:
437:
435:
432:
428:
423:
419:
416:
414:
411:
407:
403:
399:
395:
392:
391:
386:
383:
379:
378:
377:
376:
373:
370:
366:
363:
361:
358:
354:
351:
349:
346:
342:
338:
334:
330:
326:
322:
319:
318:
307:
304:
300:
299:
298:
297:
294:
291:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
282:
281:
280:
273:
270:
265:
264:
263:
262:
261:
258:
253:
249:
246:
242:
241:david Frawley
238:
237:
236:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
209:
208:
207:
206:
203:
199:
194:
193:
190:
184:
181:
178:
175:
174:
173:
171:
170:David Frawley
167:
159:
153:
149:
145:
141:
136:
132:
127:
123:
119:
115:
111:
110:
109:
106:
105:
102:
98:
94:
92:
88:
84:
80:
79:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
2272:
2269:
2246:
2242:
2208:
2194:
2175:
2170:
2166:
2157:
2152:
2147:
2135:
2103:
2086:
2083:Disambiguate
2082:
2049:
2043:
2035:
2028:
2022:
2016:
2010:
2000:
1989:
1975:
1908:
1866:
1853:
1852:
1833:
1781:
1710:
1706:
1704:
1684:
1651:
1647:
1644:disambiguate
1643:
1635:
1634:
1622:
1602:
1601:
1558:
1506:
1502:
1498:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1481:
1463:
1325:
1317:
1301:
1298:this article
1293:
1289:
1285:
1281:
1250:
1249:
1228:
1216:
1203:
1199:
1172:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1019:— Preceding
1010:
1006:
998:
992:particularly
991:
975:
919:
896:
884:
874:
864:
831:
830:
816:
812:
808:
771:
751:
739:
659:
655:
647:
643:
640:
628:
622:
616:
610:
604:
598:
592:
586:
580:
561:
545:
541:
513:
504:
500:
491:
472:a used term
469:
465:
451:
438:
421:
417:
397:
393:
364:
352:
328:
324:
320:
222:
210:
195:
187:
163:
107:
78:WP:FORUMSHOP
75:
73:
72:
45:
43:
31:
28:
2026:free images
1964:redundant.
1901:Buddhipriya
1507:differences
1487:terminology
1326:brahmanical
1221:Buddhipriya
752:Strong keep
744:Buddhipriya
726:Buddhipriya
680:is absurd.
593:Early India
442:religions.
303:Buddhipriya
1140:Harryhouse
1127:0814798055
1097:Hornplease
1056:Hornplease
1025:Hornplease
999:not enough
978:Harryhouse
835:Google.com
779:0814798055
716:Hornplease
707:Harryhouse
692:Hornplease
664:Hornplease
550:Hornplease
382:Hornplease
269:Hornplease
257:Harryhouse
101:Balloonman
91:Balloonman
2185:Abecedare
2108:Sarvagnya
1859:Abecedare
1836:neologism
1817:currency.
1424:Abecedare
1397:Abecedare
1340:≈ jossi ≈
1330:Abecedare
1314:Abecedare
1268:≈ jossi ≈
1257:Abecedare
1083:≈ jossi ≈
917:systems.
842:Abrahamic
821:Abecedare
815:and uses
813:Abrahamic
529:Sherurcij
227:≈ jossi ≈
219:WP:FRINGE
168:books by
166:WP:Fringe
2115:there's
2085:per dab.
1826:Fullstop
1766:Fullstop
1689:Doldrums
1687:(1941)!
1676:Doldrums
1636:redirect
1627:Fullstop
1613:Fullstop
1473:Tellervo
1388:Fullstop
1322:Fullstop
1308:article
1186:Doldrums
1033:contribs
1021:unsigned
968:says:
910:Hinduism
832:Comment:
783:Evb-wiki
603:Zimmer,
597:Basham,
591:Thapar,
357:Strothra
345:Doldrums
158:View log
2258:Andries
2171:thought
2032:WP refs
2020:scholar
1990:comment
1966:Andries
1782:Comment
1606:reader.
1536:Johnbod
1499:saṃsāra
1464:Comment
1229:Comment
1208:Johnbod
1156:Comment
1131:Andries
1070:Johnbod
1045:Johnbod
987:phrase.
915:dharmic
906:Jainism
899:Encarta
846:Semitic
817:Dharmic
792:Andries
754:- As a
682:Andries
627:Conze,
621:Flood,
546:further
456:Andries
452:Comment
444:MarkBul
439:Comment
410:Dajanes
369:Johnbod
245:Andries
202:Andries
189:Andries
131:protect
126:history
2199:Sethie
2167:Delete
2148:Delete
2136:Delete
2104:Delete
2004:Google
1976:Delete
1939:Dharma
1877:Dharma
1720:Dharma
1652:should
1640:Dharma
1623:Delete
1491:dharma
1344:(talk)
1294:except
1272:(talk)
1087:(talk)
766:. The
650:. The
585:Keay,
562:Delete
540:It is
496:WT:HNB
492:Delete
481:facets
427:Dharma
422:dharma
418:Delete
406:Dharma
337:Dharma
321:Delete
231:(talk)
135:delete
85:and a
46:delete
2243:Gizza
2140:Keb25
2047:JSTOR
2008:books
1980:Ragib
1603:Merge
1512:rudra
1503:mokṣa
1495:karma
1412:JSTOR
1234:JSTOR
1217:books
1182:won't
1166:, as
936:Indic
870:Fauna
866:Lexis
809:Taoic
678:human
674:human
587:India
522:users
519:other
501:Gizza
431:rudra
290:rudra
152:views
144:watch
140:links
16:<
2209:keep
2125:(𒁳)
2089:Baka
2072:(𒁳)
2040:FENS
2014:news
1947:(𒁳)
1937:and
1913:and
1889:(𒁳)
1854:zero
1840:nids
1744:(𒁳)
1726:and
1672:here
1660:(𒁳)
1571:(𒁳)
1418:and
1408:ATLA
1288:", "
1284:", "
1251:zero
1177:list
1124:ISBN
1029:talk
897:The
781:. --
776:ISBN
762:and
525:have
514:Keep
466:Keep
394:Keep
365:Keep
211:Keep
148:logs
122:talk
118:edit
58:Desk
54:Talk
50:ST47
48:. --
2230:gle
2227:rin
2224:Sef
2153:NAH
2121:dab
2094:man
2068:dab
2054:TWL
1943:dab
1885:dab
1843:(♂)
1824:--
1740:dab
1656:dab
1638:to
1611:--
1567:dab
1482:not
1420:BAS
1416:ISI
1410:,
1386:--
1160:not
1114:or
959:,
844:or
811:or
542:not
223:not
179:and
156:– (
87:CFD
2219:}}
2213:{{
2158:ID
2034:)
1996:?
1941:.
1730:/
1722:,
1674:?
1648:is
1501:,
1497:,
1493:,
1414:,
1318:PS
1312:.
1035:)
1031:•
1007:do
962:,
956:,
953:,
950:,
947:,
944:,
941:,
859:,
856:,
631:."
470:is
429:.
333:ed
323:-
255:--
200:.
150:|
146:|
142:|
138:|
133:|
129:|
124:|
120:|
2050:·
2044:·
2036:·
2029:·
2023:·
2017:·
2011:·
2006:(
1798:.
1027:(
934:"
886:"
479:S
331:-
329:s
160:)
154:)
116:(
56:·
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.