>>If there is a change in any religion, it comes from within by the religious people and not from outside. Arya Samaj to Brahmo samaj broght these changes in Hinduism. This was called Hindu reformation. Yes, there are sects and those sects moderate a religion.Do sects always moderate and modernize? I had given instance of how codification which took the garb of modernity, uniformity, had in some cases reduced women's rights. Many of the "reformist sects" can be more dogmatic.
Change is not always good. I don't think change in Arab world was good. It is digression tho.
When i speak about the change in hinduism in what was called hindu reformation, arya samaj brought good changes to hinduism that includes image worship, sacrifice. In the same way, Brahmo Samaj by Ram mohan roy also brought in the good changes change. In christianity, martin luther and clavin brought in reformation.
In Islam, the change was brought by religious was done by Islamic revivalist groups like Wahhabis and deobandis. That change wasn't good at all. I still believe that there has been no reformation in islam but only revival.
The history of MB in Egypt and Iranian shia revolution starts with Jamal-al-Din al-Afghani. It is impossible to write the whole history here but the present problems in Islam show what is wrong with it. Moreover, there are stalin's relatives who will delete the post and there is no point in writing critical on a religion. In a country like India, one religion is sacrosant and believers of other religion can be termed as suffering from oedipius complex with impunity.
Anyway before posts get deleted, I agree with what you say about Brahmo Samaj, but with the other one, did it not bring dogmatism? Again, Calvin brought in change but was it for good? You know some of these reformisms had a certain "revolutionary" fervor' I keep talking about revolutionary romanticism and the need to be rooted with nose to the ground.. They deleted the one that I had posted on the spirit of the times.and uniform civil code.But I had saved a copy. I will develop and blog it.
I would say that changes that came with eg Bhakti movement were reformations as they were not accompanied by anti- any body emotions. Brahmo Samaj reforms were unaccompanied by trying to be one up- or "competing" against West. It turned to Upanishads in a positive way.
I agree about Wahhabism & deibandis, but do not forget Ahmedis.
About Oedipus Complex. Freud got it wrong. Child sex abuse is not uncommon and what he thought was fantasy on part of children was sad fact of life for some. Who said Oedipus Complex wrt to religion? You do not mean Ramanujan's essay do you?But such themes do emerge in mythology. Yes; One effect of so called reformation in hinduism is taking mythology as history. Actually I do not see what needed to be reformed about hinduism. There were social practices that needed to go. I am quite OK with idol worship and not having one holy text etc. But then you probably talk from a Brahmin perspective and I from a Shudra one. What you cited as reformation would have be seen in my family .as fanatical and I share the same perspective. No my family was never into EVR etc, who were also seen as fanatical. You know, I think I speak for the silent majority among hindus who are ill represented in this forum.