Can Hindus be atheist?

[Aupmanyav]

However, that demarcation I argue, reiterating what Vinayaka said, is theism. Hinduism is thoroughly theistic and believes in souls, spirits, devatas, supernatural realms(astral plane) reincarnation, god/goddesses.

That too is Hinduism, the 'Village Hinduism', but kindly do not ever think that it is all of Hinduism. There is a whole lot beyond that. You find no difference between Hinduism and Haitian Vodou, do you?
Good.

But I did not compare them at all. That would be insulting to Christianity as Hinduism is far more barbaric and uncivilized than all of Christendom.

Yeah, Sha'irullah, I too never compare Hinduism (or Buddhism because I consider Buddha also as my guru) to Christianity or Islam, which are barbaric religions and cause of all miseries in the world throughout the history, because it is insulting to Hinduism (and Buddhism).

What counts as family, and how far distant of a relationship can one be and still be considered family?

Among Hindus, it is generally seven generations, but 'gotra' takes it back to thousands of years. Marriages between third generation cousins are strictly prohibited. The Vedic grammarian, Aupamanyava, quoted by Yaska in around 700 BC, belonged to my 'gotra' (genealogically) - 'Upamanyu' (Aupamanyava - Wikipedia).

 

[sayak83]

For me personally, if someone says they're a Hindu, that's good enough for me, unless they chronically say things that prove otherwise, like quoting the Christian bible, condoning adharmic behaviour, and more. It would take some time and a lot of reading between the lines before I'd conclude they weren't Hindu.

Very well said.
I would also humbly submit that some people who have been bitter but constructive critics of some forms of Hinduism and even seceded from them should still be accorded as people who were Hindu-s in the sense that they often did more for dharma than many on the inside.
B. R. Ambedkar - Wikipedia

The current (and still imperfect) open-ness of Hinduism would not have been possible without people such as these.
A tradition (or a nation) that cannot accept and honor their greatest critics is not worth following.

 

[Kapalika]

That too is Hinduism, the 'Village Hinduism', but kindly do not ever think that it is all of Hinduism. There is a whole lot beyond that. You find no difference between Hinduism and Haitian Vodou, do you?
Good.Yeah, Sha'irullah, I too never compare Hinduism (or Buddhism because I consider Buddha also as my guru) to Christianity or Islam, which are barbaric religions and cause of all miseries in the world throughout the history, because it is insulting to Hinduism (and Buddhism).

I am glad someone finally said it. I don't know why everyone is so quick to compare us to Abrahamic religions as opposed to another set of religions. I guess because that's what most people are familiar with with how big they are but the comparison falls very flat because it's not very similar at all.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Very well said. I would also humbly submit that some people who have been bitter but constructive critics of some forms of Hinduism and even seceded from them should still be accorded as people who were Hindu-s in the sense that they often did more for dharma than many on the inside.
B. R. Ambedkar - Wikipedia

He was a smart fellow, Sayak. There were invitations from Christians and Muslims, but the gentleman chose Buddhism which is not different from Hinduism in any way.

 

[Spirit_Warrior]

Hi there, occupied again right now, so I will reply when I have time.

I just wanted to invite more participation of non Hindu atheists to this thread, as there are more Hindu atheists posting here, rather than non-Hindu atheists. So far the only non Hindu strongest atheist that has posted here is:

But I did not compare them at all. That would be insulting to Christianity as Hinduism is far more barbaric and uncivilized than all of Christendom.

Although I am completely opposed to this poster because of their views are the exact antithesis of my views, the opposition is mututal It is also not uncommon to hear views like this from atheists. The Charvaka themselves hurled abuses at Hinduism:

.

There is no other world other than this;
There is no heaven and no hell;
The realm of Shiva and like regions,
are invented by stupid imposters

​

This is fair, they are entitled to this, because we also condemn them most strongly too. The point is it is mutual.

I think Hindu atheists here, much like Hindu Muslims or Hindu Christians, who think they are being wise, open minded, liberal, accommodating and friendly and modern etc --- but they are not accepted by the other side. Such Hindus then get rude awakening when the other side does speak e.g. Sri Sri Ravishankar attends a debate with the Islamic scholar Zakir Naik, attended by thousands of Muslims in the audience. Ravishankar was preaching a message of religious unity that is familiar to Hindu minds(truth is one, the wise call him by many names) but Naik and the thousands of Muslims in the audience were having none of it. Naik's argument was "Brother, I love you, which is why I want you to stop following a false religion and come to Islam" He was met with fierce hostility from the Muslims in the audience.

These, should I say postmodern Neo-Hindus who identify as Hindu Atheists, Muslims and Christians then end up living in their own little bubble, belonging neither to any side, not accepted fully by either side. I would argue they are confused, misguided, ignorant and a bit deluded. In fact I would make an even more grave charge they are denying the right to people to forming their own positions. Charvaka, Buddhism and Jainism are extremely well formed and mutually opposing traditions of philosophy, each with their own founder, literature and own epistemology, metaphysics and ethics.

When these confused Hindus deny them their position, they actually do violence to them when they are themselves thinking they are being friendly. The other side does not appreciate it. Muslims do not appreciate it if you say Mohammed was just another Rishi or sage or an avatar of Vishnu; Christians do not appreciate it if you say Jesus was just a yogi. Atheists do not appreciate if you tell them their position is mere semantics.

Similarly, we Hindus do not appreciate it when this same group denies us our core beliefs. I will elaborate on this further, but of course Hinduism has core beliefs. To argue it doesn't is delusional.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'm a non-Hindu atheist and I don't see the problem with calling oneself that from an atheist perspective. If one doesn't believe in the existence of literal deities, such as those who feel spirits aren't deities or that figures from scripture were allegorical or literary aspects of humanity or the world we occupy.

 

[LuisDantas]

I just wanted to invite more participation of non Hindu atheists to this thread, as there are more Hindu atheists posting here, rather than non-Hindu atheists. So far the only non Hindu strongest atheist that has posted here is:

Allow me to point out that I am a non-Hindu strong atheist as well, so I don't think @Sha'irullah is the only one posting in this thread.

Technically I once received Hindu initiation, but it was a long time ago and, in all honesty, I am far more aware of Hinduism now than I was back then. And while I respect @Aupmanyav 's intent when he says that Buddhism is no different from Hinduism, I do not agree with him.

 

[sayak83]

Hi there, occupied again right now, so I will reply when I have time.

I just wanted to invite more participation of non Hindu atheists to this thread, as there are more Hindu atheists posting here, rather than non-Hindu atheists. So far the only non Hindu strongest atheist that has posted here is:



Although I am completely opposed to this poster because of their views are the exact antithesis of my views, the opposition is mututal It is also not uncommon to hear views like this from atheists. The Charvaka themselves hurled abuses at Hinduism:

.

There is no other world other than this;
There is no heaven and no hell;
The realm of Shiva and like regions,
are invented by stupid imposters

​

This is fair, they are entitled to this, because we also condemn them most strongly too. The point is it is mutual.

I think Hindu atheists here, much like Hindu Muslims or Hindu Christians, who think they are being wise, open minded, liberal, accommodating and friendly and modern etc --- but they are not accepted by the other side. Such Hindus then get rude awakening when the other side does speak e.g. Sri Sri Ravishankar attends a debate with the Islamic scholar Zakir Naik, attended by thousands of Muslims in the audience. Ravishankar was preaching a message of religious unity that is familiar to Hindu minds(truth is one, the wise call him by many names) but Naik and the thousands of Muslims in the audience were having none of it. Naik's argument was "Brother, I love you, which is why I want you to stop following a false religion and come to Islam" He was met with fierce hostility from the Muslims in the audience.

These, should I say postmodern Neo-Hindus who identify as Hindu Atheists, Muslims and Christians then end up living in their own little bubble, belonging neither to any side, not accepted fully by either side. I would argue they are confused, misguided, ignorant and a bit deluded. In fact I would make an even more grave charge they are denying the right to people to forming their own positions. Charvaka, Buddhism and Jainism are extremely well formed and mutually opposing traditions of philosophy, each with their own founder, literature and own epistemology, metaphysics and ethics.

When these confused Hindus deny them their position, they actually do violence to them when they are themselves thinking they are being friendly. The other side does not appreciate it. Muslims do not appreciate it if you say Mohammed was just another Rishi or sage or an avatar of Vishnu; Christians do not appreciate it if you say Jesus was just a yogi. Atheists do not appreciate if you tell them their position is mere semantics.

Similarly, we Hindus do not appreciate it when this same group denies us our core beliefs. I will elaborate on this further, but of course Hinduism has core beliefs. To argue it doesn't is delusional.

I have been an active participant of humanist and atheist groups in US for over 10 years (along with Hindu, Buddhist, Christians and even Confucian groups). Needless to say my analysis of atheism is based not on a few isolated anti-theists but a much broader sample. You forget that majority of Western scientists and philosophers are non-theists and only a few of them are virulently anti-religious and even a lesser number of them are hostile to Buddhist or Hindu traditions. There are points of disagreements of course, but most are not hostile. Obviously most atheists will not be Hindu-s, which is perfectly fine. Also obviously an atheist who is hostile to Hinduism will not call himself a Hindu. We are talking about atheists who are friendly to and identify with Hinduism to the extent that they consider themselves Hindu, and if there is any reason to exclude such people apriori from Hinduism. You think there is, I think there is not. You are the person lumping all atheists into one category, which, for atheism particularly, makes no sense. Similarly not all Buddhists will identify themselves as Hindu as well, which is perfectly fine.

You believe that the schools of Hinduism and Buddhism are the ultimate expressions of the two dharma-s and that to be a Hindu or a Buddhist one has to belong to one of them. You are completely wrong in that. They are specialized branches which has always been the reserve of only a minority of Hindu and Buddhists. The main trunk of dharma is always always the individuals in dharma who have used insights from their own personal experience and walk in life, coupled with inspiration and knowledge from these specialized schools (often multiple ones and always selectively) to bring dharma alive in their private and personal lives in their own unique manner. That is the heart, and all schools, all philosophy, all scriptures serve them and not the other way around.

 

[sayak83]

*** post moderated ***

I can make neither head nor tail of what you are going on about. I have never talked with you before, and you seem to be in mid-conversation with someone else.
What precisely are your objections to Hinduism?

 

[Sha'irullah]

I can make neither head nor tail of what you are going on about. I have never talked with you before, and you seem to be in mid-conversation with someone else.
What precisely are your objections to Hinduism?

I apologize about the writing but I prefer poetry and limericks over conversation.

I specifically alluded to HInduism and its tendency to promote cults, false supernatural claims, subdue vast population into perpetual poverty, and decrease IQ throw devaluation of human pursuits. Examples can be:

• Breatharianism
• Religious figure cults (Sri Baba, Prabupada etc)
• The multitude of IQ research in Hindu nations
• Caste system
• Orthodoxy and self proclaimed hierarchy (something Sunni Islam faces right now)

Also most of my experiences with Hinduism is in person and I took into account many desi people and friends I have known.

. . . . . .

Also one of the posters criticized the Carvaka system of thoughts which I studied tremendously and is one of the main reasons I do not disassociate myself from religion altogether. If you wish to know where I stand on matters I am strictly speaking an atheist with influences from Islam and I have a strong interest in ancient polytheism.

 

[sayak83]

I apologize about the writing but I prefer poetry and limericks over conversation.

I specifically alluded to HInduism and its tendency to promote cults, false supernatural claims, subdue vast population into perpetual poverty, and decrease IQ throw devaluation of human pursuits. Examples can be:

• Breatharianism
• Religious figure cults (Sri Baba, Prabupada etc)
• The multitude of IQ research in Hindu nations
• Caste system
• Orthodoxy and self proclaimed hierarchy (something Sunni Islam faces right now)

Also most of my experiences with Hinduism is in person and I took into account many desi people and friends I have known.

. . . . . .

Also one of the posters criticized the Carvaka system of thoughts which I studied tremendously and is one of the main reasons I do not disassociate myself from religion altogether. If you wish to know where I stand on matters I am strictly speaking an atheist with influences from Islam and I have a strong interest in ancient polytheism.

Please provide scientific evidence that Hinduism is responsible for the poverty of Indians. I find the claim hard to believe since all the developing post-colonial world is suffering from poverty and India is currently a booming economy as well as a staunchly religious society.

Some religious leaders are bad and some are good and some are in the middle. Just like all leaders in any facet of life. If you do not like a religious leader do not follow him. And if you do, then feel free to follow him/her. Hinduism has no requirement to follow any specific guru or forces anybody to go to the temple on certain days of the week or forces them to pray at certain times of the day in a certain manner.

Please provide scientific evidence that connects Hinduism with low IQ.

Discrimination based on caste system is a social evil that, like slavery and serfdom, is a pre-industrial institution that needs to be eliminated quickly. It is unfortunate many of the later Hindu shastra-s provide legitimacy to it. But like medieval Catholic texts, they do not form any part of inspired scripture and hence can be, and has been, abrogated. Most importantly, Hinduism does not claim that the ethics and laws of society are fixed for all time. Vast differences in social laws and behaviors and traditions are recorded in Hinduism over time, and it does not consider laws and morals of one period of human history to be normative over any other.

Your last point is basically about caste system again. So I have replied to it adequately.


More importantly, what is the basis of your comparison here? India, the only Hindu majority state is doing quite well as a developing country and the only atheist states (apart from the horrendous Marxist ones) are the Scandinavian countries that have already started off with a very high and prosperous economic base. Most Hindu-s aspire for higher education and prosperity through good jobs and good business. Hinduism too is flourishing. Where is your evidence that Hinduism has been an impediment to the growth and prosperity of Indian people?

 

[Sha'irullah]

Please provide scientific evidence that Hinduism is responsible for the poverty of Indians. I find the claim hard to believe since all the developing post-colonial world is suffering from poverty and India is currently a booming economy as well as a staunchly religious society.

Some religious leaders are bad and some are good and some are in the middle. Just like all leaders in any facet of life. If you do not like a religious leader do not follow him. And if you do, then feel free to follow him/her. Hinduism has no requirement to follow any specific guru or forces anybody to go to the temple on certain days of the week or forces them to pray at certain times of the day in a certain manner.

Please provide scientific evidence that connects Hinduism with low IQ.

Discrimination based on caste system is a social evil that, like slavery and serfdom, is a pre-industrial institution that needs to be eliminated quickly. It is unfortunate many of the later Hindu shastra-s provide legitimacy to it. But like medieval Catholic texts, they do not form any part of inspired scripture and hence can be, and has been, abrogated. Most importantly, Hinduism does not claim that the ethics and laws of society are fixed for all time. Vast differences in social laws and behaviors and traditions are recorded in Hinduism over time, and it does not consider laws and morals of one period of human history to be normative over any other.

Your last point is basically about caste system again. So I have replied to it adequately.


More importantly, what is the basis of your comparison here? India, the only Hindu majority state is doing quite well as a developing country and the only atheist states (apart from the horrendous Marxist ones) are the Scandinavian countries that have already started off with a very high and prosperous economic base. Most Hindu-s aspire for higher education and prosperity through good jobs and good business. Hinduism too is flourishing. Where is your evidence that Hinduism has been an impediment to the growth and prosperity of Indian people?

But India has become more secularized sooooo . . . . everything you just said was a complete waste of time.

IQ
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
IQ By Religion

Economics assesments
India GDP Annual Growth Rate | 1951-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar
GDP growth (annual %) | Data

and Religiosity
Map: These are the world’s least religious countries


I cannot find the original link to secular growth by country but I am sure you know how

 

[SomeRandom]

But India has become more secularized sooooo . . . . everything you just said was a complete waste of time.

IQ
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
IQ By Religion

Economics assesments
India GDP Annual Growth Rate | 1951-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar
GDP growth (annual %) | Data

and Religiosity
Map: These are the world’s least religious countries


I cannot find the original link to secular growth by country but I am sure you know how

Yeah and India only got it's independence in 1947. Like most countries suffering from the colonial hangover and conflicting religions competing with each other, it took them a while to get themselves on their feet, after their resources were plundered and raped. Hell, look at what Evangelical Christianity did to Uganda. Or the HIV epidemic the Catholic Church basically encouraged in poor countries by spreading falsehoods about condoms. Religion as a whole has done some awful things. But it's also just one of many factors and comes with it's own baggage.
There are many different unique factors, especially for a country that has been through many conquerors and upheavals. Though I abhor the Caste System, that is atrocious. And any religious leader in Hinduism is completely optional.
Like most countries secularization certainly helped to stabilize and reduce outdated superstitious nonsense. But religions have adapted, some more successfully than others. Dharmics were probably the easiest transition, since they just throw out anything they think is outdated without so much as a battered eyelash anyway. Though stubbornness persisted and persists still in some areas. As do most culturally ingrained ideas, regardless of religion or even lack thereof.
Also that study of IQ you posted has been pretty much lambasted (by individuals more knowledgeable than me) as having flawed methodology, inconsistent samples and false GPD predictions. Richard Lynn has even been accused of misrepresenting data from other scientists in the field.
I'm sure he's still fairly well respected in his field, though.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Buddhism is no different from Hinduism, I do not agree with him.

Ha ha, we have had this discussion and there are threads on this. Do you think we could revive that? Buddhists are welcome to maintain that but give me a reason why an atheist Hindu should accept that?

There is no other world other than this,
There is no heaven and no hell;
The realm of Shiva and like regions,
are invented by stupid imposters.

Yes, some charvakists might have used that kind of uncouth language but I do not think all charvakists were like that. There are militant atheists also who may use uncouth language but all atheists are not like that. The problem is that all available information on charvakists is from people who were opposed to them.

However, the question still remains valid. We have not yet found any world inhabited by sentient beings like us; and we still have no information on where heaven and hell are located.

I do not believe in Ravi Shankar's or Ramakrishna's trash that 'all religions are one'. That is a 'paramarthika' position which ignores the 'vyavaharika' position. 'Vyavaharika' is not something which can be ignored. When you face a lion, you either have to run or climb a tree or if you have means, you have to kill the lion. I am an atheist Hindu and I can be more militant than you if called upon to defend Hinduism. My atheism does not make me a non-Hindu. I think you have not really understood my atheist advaitic position. I do believe that there is a core to Hinduism and that is observance of one's duties, 'dharma'.

The Carvaka had every right to hurl rational and critical statements at Hinduism since it is a violent, backward and dangerous religions that propagates cults and completely psychotic behaviour. It formulates denial in the presence of evidence.

The worship Siva and Krsna is to worship lesser gods that should have been forgotten ..

While Christianity and Islam encourage charity and growth Hinduism ..

Sure, Charvakists had every right to pose such questions and the theists should have answered them. Similarly you have to prove that Hinduism is a violent religion, you have not given us any proofs. Hinduism (and Christianity too) still has atheists who question the theists, something which I do not find as common in Islam.

Your second point is very funny that we should have forgotten the lesser Gods as if there were any greater Gods! There are neither lesser Gods nor the greater Gods. As a Hindu atheist, I refute the existence of any God or gods. You are not as anti-theist as you claim to be. But what do we do with people who would not abandon the idea of Gods? Should we break their idols and kill them unless they accept our position like what Mohammad did in Mekka? No, we are not barbarians like that. We inform them. When they are ready by education, they will probably accept it. Otherwise also, their worshiping their idols or Gods is not harming any one. Let them do their thing.

Your last line only shows your ignorance of Hinduism. Charity - Dana and that too anonymous, is considered as important in Hinduism as in any other religion. Every Hindu does it to the extent possible by his/her means, it is known as 'dharmartha'. It is part of Hindu 'dharma'. Non-possessiveness is a strong requirement of Hinduism. According to Hinduism, I should, in about six-month's time, abandon all my possessions and attachments and stay in wilderness as a renunciate, because I will be completing my 75th year and entering what we know as the next stage of life, 'Sanyasa Ashram'.

 

[Vinayaka]

I do not believe in Ravi Shankar's or Ramakrishna's trash that 'all religions are one'.

I believe that even those who still do are in dwindling numbers due to many religious leaders of all persuasions pointing to the obvious falsity of the statement.

 

[LuisDantas]

Ha ha, we have had this discussion and there are threads on this. Do you think we could revive that?

We could, although right now I don't particularly want to.

Frankly, clarifying why Dharma (Buddhist, Hindu or any other) should not be gauged by Abrahamic expectations is a much higher priority to me. And you have rarely if ever given me any trouble on that front. Or most others, come to think of it.

Buddhists are welcome to maintain that but give me a reason why an atheist Hindu should accept that?

I can't think of any. Whatever your Dharma is has little reason to submit to my expectations of proper terminology.

You will agree with me on that matter, or you will not. Either way is fine as long as the right to decide by ourselves is acknowledged. If either or both of us change our minds, that is just as fine as well.

We all have our own actualizations of our Dharmas. That is just a fact, not a problem in any way.

Nor am I quite so vain as to be bothered by the realization that we do not agree on our understandings of what constitutes Buddhism and/or Hinduism. I used to be, but no longer.

Whatever is meant by any claims comparing Buddhism and Hinduism is highly dependent on context anyway. For instance, I would not compare Soka Gakkai to Buddhism, let alone Hinduism.

 

[Vinayaka]

I think that Buddhism and Hinduism are two separate religions, but brother dharmic faiths. I've never really delved into Buddhism in any philosophical or practical way, but by the mere fact that the vast consensus of those who have is that they are separate is enough for me. Maybe its just the lazy man's out. I trust my fellow man to make accurate assessments on such things.

 

[ShivaFan]

Generally, if one definition of atheism is that there is no one "controlling power with a personality" viz "God", yes you can be an atheist and a Hindu.

I fall into the "Village Hindu" category, that is I believe in many powers that have Names and Personality, that is Devatas, Devi, Gods and Demons and Angels (not a Hindu word, better terms such as Apsaras), there are Powers in nature as well, rules of Dharma - all those Hindu Gods of modern and olden Vedic Gods, but ...

... but none are what is the "end game". In my path, there are all sorts of life and beings in many forms in many dimensions over many universes, yes you need to be careful in that some make up things but then there are Hindu sages and savants and devotees who have actually perceived "them" and communicated with "them" and so we can know "them" even as well, based on authority, but ...

... some are "high", some are "low", some are "strange", some are "like demons", some are like a Mahavira, on and on, some have created universes, some have destroyed universes - but they are all fellow travellers in a very big ocean.

... it is nice to have some of them "on your side". And some are very, very, very wise.

... but do not think one of them is your final abode. What is more important than "them" is your experience. In your experience, there is something. And there is no experience like Hinduism.

So in one way, I guess I am sort of a "hybrid" atheist?

I was taught this, it wasn't just something I invented. As a Village Hindu, I can have many. Or sometimes none. Since it is nice to go on adventures with fellow travellers, it is amazing how easy you can find them at a Hindu Temple. There you can find them. I know many even before we meet. Birds of a feather stick together. We tend to go to the same "watering holes". The big universe is in one way a small world when birds flock.

The other day I went to a Durga Temple. Lots of ladies that day. Then on the very same day, I went to a Guru Temple. The Guru wasn't there. But some of his devotees were. Funny, in so many ways they were exactly the same as the devotees in the Durga Temple. Then I spoke to an old Indian man outside the Guru Temple. He really didn't believe in the Guru. But he had the same power as all the rest. He said he didn't believe in Gods. But he was a devotee of Hinduism. He had so much experience, it literally glowed from him.

The Buddha is a Hindu. Mahavira is a Dharmi. Happy trails. Not all religions are one. But - Are you experienced? You can be. It may not be the same as mine.

I am a Hindu.

 

[sayak83]

But India has become more secularized sooooo . . . . everything you just said was a complete waste of time.

IQ
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
IQ By Religion

Economics assesments
India GDP Annual Growth Rate | 1951-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar
GDP growth (annual %) | Data

and Religiosity
Map: These are the world’s least religious countries


I cannot find the original link to secular growth by country but I am sure you know how

Your second source is just a random webpage analysis which has never been published scientifically and is from a crackpot website.
Khazar Plutocracy Orchestrated 9/11 And Fabricated "Gas Chambers" Hoax
If you are linking un-peer-reviewed pages from websites such as these, which says that the Holocaust is a hoax, there is very little hope for a rational and empirical discussion with you.

The only scientific paper it ever quotes is a completely different study that demonstrates a correlation between IQ and mean climatic temperature. A detailed analysis of the results the researchers of the paper show IQ is strongly correlated with nutrition, health, education level and (contested)ethno-genetic component. There is no correlation with religion at all. The webpage has distorted the study and is just pseudoscience of the worst kind.
Nations and intelligence - Wikipedia
Why Do Some Nations Have Lower IQ Scores?
And the supposed IQ gap is rapidly closing due to greater nutrition and education levels in the developing world falsifying any systematic skew due to ethnic heritage. Its called the Flynn effect.
Intelligence
Why Is Average IQ Higher in Some Places?
Parasite prevalence and the worldwide distribution of cognitive ability | Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences

We tested all these ideas. In our 2010 study, we not only found a very strong relationship between levels of infectious disease and IQ, but controlling for the effects of education, national wealth, temperature, and distance from sub-Saharan Africa, infectious disease emerged as the best predictor of the bunch. A recent study by Christopher Hassall and Thomas Sherratt repeated our analysis using more sophisticated statistical methods, and concluded that infectious disease may be the only really important predictor of average national IQ.

This should be enough to completely refute your absolutely nonsensical claim that somehow Hindu religion causes low IQ scores. While genetics is a factor, the alleged link between genes associated with ethnic groups and IQ has turned out to be unsubstantiated.

Finally its unclear what your religiosity map is supposed to show. It correctly identifies the fact that India is country where overwhelmingly people are religious/spiritual.

India 18th ‘most religious’ country in world, finds survey - Indian Express

India's GDP score only serves to underscore its rapid growth after its embrace of free market economy. Why did you link it?

 

[Sha'irullah]

Yeah and India only got it's independence in 1947. Like most countries suffering from the colonial hangover and conflicting religions competing with each other, it took them a while to get them back on their feet. Look at what Evangelical Christianity did to Uganda.
I suspect this is way more complicated than just Hinduism stunting such and such. Though I abhor the Caste System.

Christianity wholesale has never institutionalized suffering though. Hinduism is a whole other story and on top of this is that the caste system as a general conception is a logical extent of archaic reincarnation and the systematic cycle it glorifies.

Uganda and Catholicism are two different stories though. Catholicism is no where near the boundaries of Protestant Christian thought when it comes to life and the nature of human strife. They are two different religions for the most part

Your second source is just a random webpage analysis which has never been published scientifically and is from a crackpot website.
Khazar Plutocracy Orchestrated 9/11 And Fabricated "Gas Chambers" Hoax
If you are linking un-peer-reviewed pages from websites such as these, which says that the Holocaust is a hoax, there is very little hope for a rational and empirical discussion with you.

The only scientific paper it ever quotes is a completely different study that demonstrates a correlation between IQ and mean climatic temperature. A detailed analysis of the results the researchers of the paper show IQ is strongly correlated with nutrition, health, education level and (contested)ethno-genetic component. There is no correlation with religion at all. The webpage has distorted the study and is just pseudoscience of the worst kind.
Nations and intelligence - Wikipedia
Why Do Some Nations Have Lower IQ Scores?
And the supposed IQ gap is rapidly closing due to greater nutrition and education levels in the developing world falsifying any systematic skew due to ethnic heritage. Its called the Flynn effect.
Intelligence
Why Is Average IQ Higher in Some Places?
Parasite prevalence and the worldwide distribution of cognitive ability | Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences


This should be enough to completely refute your absolutely nonsensical claim that somehow Hindu religion causes low IQ scores. While genetics is a factor, the alleged link between genes associated with ethnic groups and IQ has turned out to be unsubstantiated.

Finally its unclear what your religiosity map is supposed to show. It correctly identifies the fact that India is country where overwhelmingly people are religious/spiritual.

India 18th ‘most religious’ country in world, finds survey - Indian Express

India's GDP score only serves to underscore its rapid growth after its embrace of free market economy. Why did you link it?

The second link was reciting previous data and frame an analysis. It was the opposite of pseudoscience and ended its claim very abruptly before attempting to conjecture any falsehood or probability of falsehood.

You lack the most fundamental insight to sciences yet alone research. I guess I was mistaken for having a bit of hope towards a Hindu which yet again proves my previous held assumption (do not associate with bigotry or prejudice). Not everybody kowtows to your religion for its "liberal theology."

Have a good day.