本文選題：印度教極端主義 + 印度教國(guó)家�。� 參考：《新疆大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：印度教極端主義以“印度教特性”認(rèn)同為理論基礎(chǔ)，以“同盟家族”為組織基礎(chǔ)，以暴力為手段對(duì)付非印度教徒，追求建立一個(gè)印度教徒占多數(shù)的排他性的“印度教國(guó)家”。20世紀(jì)80年代以來(lái)，印度教極端主義的影響力日益增強(qiáng)，宗教流血事件發(fā)生的頻率明顯上升，越來(lái)越受到人們關(guān)注。 “印度教傳統(tǒng)”和“閃族宗教”是兩種完全不同的社會(huì)文化現(xiàn)象。前者具有多元偶像崇拜和宗教寬容的特點(diǎn)，反對(duì)改宗；而后者則是反對(duì)偶像崇拜的一神論，倡導(dǎo)宗教自由，鼓勵(lì)改宗，因而兩者存在結(jié)構(gòu)性矛盾。印度殖民政府以及獨(dú)立后的印度政府都接受了世俗化和國(guó)家中立觀念，使得印度教面臨著外來(lái)宗教競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的壓力，印度教團(tuán)體不得不按照“閃族宗教”的模式對(duì)印度教進(jìn)行改革，印度教極端主義應(yīng)運(yùn)而生。 20世紀(jì)90年代以來(lái)，原來(lái)國(guó)大黨獨(dú)大的政治體制逐漸演變?yōu)橐試?guó)大黨和印度人民黨為首的兩極政黨聯(lián)盟競(jìng)爭(zhēng)體制。在選舉政治邏輯的推動(dòng)下，印度多元宗教文化為教派主義提供了豐厚的土壤，印度教極端主義對(duì)其國(guó)家建設(shè)構(gòu)成了挑戰(zhàn)。就“民族建構(gòu)”而言，，印度教極端主義者堅(jiān)持以“印度教特性”進(jìn)行“民族”建構(gòu)，將穆斯林和基督教徒排斥在外，這與現(xiàn)代民族建構(gòu)理論大相徑庭，而理論上“民族”的文化內(nèi)核與“國(guó)家”的政治外殼的錯(cuò)位正是導(dǎo)致實(shí)踐上印度不時(shí)爆發(fā)殘酷教派沖突的內(nèi)在邏輯。就制度建構(gòu)而言，印度教極端主義的影響是復(fù)雜的，首先，在印度教極端主義的鼓動(dòng)下，各種族、宗教和種姓?qǐng)F(tuán)體也自我組織起來(lái)參與政治，以至于政治系統(tǒng)不能承受過(guò)度政治化之苦；其次，教派主義耗散了聯(lián)邦的權(quán)威從而使其無(wú)法對(duì)國(guó)家進(jìn)行有效整合；再次，印度教極端主義挑戰(zhàn)了世俗化原則，惡化了政治環(huán)境。這都使國(guó)家對(duì)社會(huì)的控制能力下降，從而使得其制度建構(gòu)受阻。同時(shí)，在中位選民定理作用下，印度人民黨會(huì)逐漸放棄其極端主義主張，選擇中間路線以爭(zhēng)取中間選民，所以政治制度也會(huì)對(duì)印度教極端主義形成制約。
[Abstract]:Hinduism extremism, based on the identity of Hinduism, is based on the "alliance family" as the organizational basis, dealing with non India believers by violence and pursuing the establishment of an exclusive "Hindu country" of the majority of India believers in the 80s of the.20 century, the influence of religious extremism in India is increasing and religious flow is increasing. The frequency of blood events has increased significantly, attracting more and more attention.
The "Hindu tradition" and "the Semitic religion" are two completely different social and cultural phenomena. The former is characterized by multiple idolatry and religious tolerance, and the latter is a monotheism against idolatry, advocating religious freedom and encouraging the reform. Therefore, there are structural contradictions between the two. The colonial government of India and its independence are independent. After the India government accepted the secularization and state neutrality, Hinduism faced the pressure of foreign religious competition. Hindu groups had to reform the Hinduism according to the "Semitic religion" model, and Hindu extremism came into being.
Since 1990s, the political system of the independence of the big party has gradually evolved into a two polar party alliance competition system headed by the National Congress Party and the India people's party. Under the impetus of the political logic of the election, the pluralistic religious culture of India provides a rich soil for sectarianism, and India's extremism poses a challenge to its national construction. As far as "national construction" is concerned, Hinduism extremists insist on "national" construction by "Hinduism" and exclude Muslims and Christians from the modern national construction theory, and the dislocation of "national" cultural core and the political shell of "state" in theory leads to the fact that India is not in practice. The internal logic of the clash of the cruel sects erupted. As far as institutional construction was concerned, the influence of Hinduism extremism was complex. First, under the agitation of Hinduism extremism, the various ethnic, religious and caste groups also organized themselves to participate in politics, so that the political system could not bear the suffering of excessive politicization; secondly, sectarian dissipation. Again, Hinduism extremism challenges the secularization principle and worsens the political environment. This makes the state's ability to control society down, thus making its institutional construction blocked. At the same time, the people's Party of India will gradually abandon its extremes under the role of the medium of voters. It is advocated that the middle route be chosen to win the middle voters, so the political system will also restrict the Hindu extremism.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：新疆大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D735.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 朱明忠;印度教民族主義的興起與印度政治[J];當(dāng)代亞太;1999年08期

2 邱永輝;;印耶皈依之辯——印度立法和印度教與基督教之間辯論[J];南亞研究季刊;2010年03期

3 李興華;宗教極端主義研究概要[J];西北民族研究;2002年04期

本文編號(hào)：1800945