Justice Nagarathna on the Auroville judgment: please keep the illustration separate. Let us see Aurobindo.. is that philosophy a religious denomination? It can be a denomination but not religious.
SG: It is religion. This may be your ladyship's honest and informed view but what is relevant is my view as a follower. Whether I believe that to be religion.
CJI: we get your argument. It is that because aurobindos follower believe that the view that they follow is a religious view it carries all ingredients of a religion therefore they themselves carve out to be an exception or denomination therefore others cannot impose on them that no no you are not a religion. If someone says I follow Aurobindo right from morning since I get up till I sleep. I follow his idea, his philosophy, his guidance and treat him as my supreme being then who are you to tell me that it's not religion. This is your submission.
Justice Nagarathna: It can be freedom of conscience . But cannot come under religious denomination..
SG: it would be a religious denomination... Else under 26(b) state can say for these followers something is not allowed.
Justice Nagarathna: but it's not religious denomination
Bar and Bench https://x.com/i/status/2041769139426242972
No comments:
Post a Comment