[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Religious unity
>In accordance with the rules of USENET, everyone is allowed to say
>whatever they want on this topic, and no one is preventing them.
My concern here is that, as usual, the 'silent majority' don't really care
what is happening. As a result, the 'outspoken few' have their say and very
likely push their preferences through on the pretext that it is for the
benefit of 'everyone'.
I am not proposing to prevent anyone from speaking out. I am simply
suggesting that those who have had much to say simply volunteer to maintain
their peace for a few days and observe how important this issue is to the
'everyone' that they are thinking of.
I believe we are seeking peace and this seems to be one practical approach.
>>In the first instance, those who proposed SRV, by choosing to exclude
>>the word 'Hindu', sought to divide. Surely we do not need that.
>
>This is simply false.
>
>You yourself state:
>
>>While no Indic texts identify a religion called Hinduism, many of us
>>have become comfortable with calling ourselves Hindu.
>
>And that is why there is a "soc.religion.hindu".
My suggestion is that instead of looking for factors that divide us, let us
look for factors that unite us.
Just as the Vaishnavas can isolate themselves, so can the Shaivas, the
Shaktas, Ramakrishnaites etc...
Instead of having a plurality of religions, I am suggesting that all
religious traditions that originated on the Indian Sub-continent be happy
about associating with each other, be happy to share a common label. The
label can be as clumsy as 'Religious traditions of Hindustan' or as simple
as Hindu.
>However, BECAUSE no Indic texts identify a religion called Hinduism,
>and because all Vaishnava texts call it "Vaishnava", the newsgroup is
>called "soc.religion.vaishnava" because it was desired to have the
>name be precise in denoting what the newsgroup was about.
By so doing, they are isolating themselves from the other religions of
India. Such desire for isolation is the culmination of centuries of 'enmity'
(for want of a better word). I am suggesting that all of us should encourage
a closing of that gap.
>And, as the s.r.v have stated over and over again, there ARE some
>people who are Vaishnavas who do not consider themselves Hindus.
The word Hindu has become a pigeonhole with a narrow meaning. Who IS a
Hindu? Going by what these Vaishnavas impute, we may as well drop the word
Hindu from common usage and each group simply call themselves by whatever
specific name they choose. But that will not lead us to unity.
I am suggesting that all Vaishnavas seek to view the label Hindu with a new
perspective. Being Hindu does not 'reduce' them to the level of the
'others'. It simply identifies them as believing in a religion that
originated in Hindustan.
>They took this into consideration in naming s.r.v EVEN THOUGH THEY
>CONSIDER THEMSELVES HINDUS.
This would have been a terrific starting point. Since they consider
themselves Hindu, they must understand there is no conflict with being
Vaishnava and Hindu at the same time. They would have been the perfect
vehicle for promoting s.r.h.v. They can still do so. If they can work
towards persuading those 'non-Hindu' Vaishnavites that there is no demerit
in associating with other schools of belief, they would have done very much
in the path towards fostering unity.
>>The suitability of Ajay Shah as a moderator has been questioned.
>
>It really has not, especially when you consider that the RFD
>proponents still are allowing Ajay Shah to be one of the moderators.
If Ajayji has been doing a good enough job as moderator, additional
moderators should not be necessary. If those who felt Ajayji help wished to
help/support him had worked this out with him, all would have been well. To
impose additional moderators is to imply that Ajayji was not coping well
enough. To do so over Ajay's objections appears hostile. To 'allow him' to
join the others seems to add insult to injury.
We are not talking here about politics or hostile takeovers. We are talking
about a newsgroup that has, as its objective, an enhancement of our
religious understanding. We are (I hope) seeking to elevate our spiritual
attainment.
Everyone one of us must do everything we can to foster unity and harmony.
Act in consensus following discussion. I don't think Ajay is such an
unreasonable person. There is no need to force his hand.
I believe this reply of mine should be relevant to everyone on s.r.h.
However I cannot post to s.r.h from my e-mail account. If you agree that
these contents would benefit s.r.h. please feel free to post this mail there.
Peace and blessings.
--
Singam
Minden, Penang
Malaysia
Truth, viewed from any angle, remains Truth.
Is the One Truth, Love?
Where does it hide?
Why?
Follow-Ups:
