[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Religious unity and the word Hindu
On Thu, 11 Jan 1996 17:27:13 +0800 (MYT), vijia@pop.jaring.my (SV
Singam) wrote:
> And eventually, I hope that SRV will choose to become become
>SRHV.
>On Wed, 10 Jan 1996 21:39:48 GMT kstuart@snowcrest.net wrote:
>>On Wed, 10 Jan 1996 12:52:18 +0800 (MYT), SV Singam (vijia@pop.jaring.my) wrote:
>>>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.
>
>>Sai Baba [who is not my teacher, by the way], who, to me, fits what we
>>call a Hindu, but the ensignia of his organization has the symbols of
>>many of the world's religions and so, is not a "Hindu" organization.
>
>Baba has accomplished in a beautiful way what I had thought about but did
>not speak of except privately for fear of causing hurt. Sanathana Dharma can
>encompass ALL religions of the world. The label one chooses to wear is
>completely irrelevant. It does not matter whether you are Pagan or Shia or
>Vaishnava or Adventist or Zen Buddhist. We are all seeking The Truth in
>whatever form we imagine.
Therefore Sanathana Dharma, popularly known as Hindusim, encompasses
all of the religions of the world.
Therefore the word "religion" is the same as Sanathana Dharma which is
the same as "Hindu".
Therefore:
soc.religion.vaishnava
is the same as
soc.religion.hindu.vaishnava
In fact, "soc.religion.hindu.vaishnava" is redundant, since "religion"
and "hindu" mean the same thing.
>>Thus the Vaishnavas can consider themselves Hindus and can participate
>>in Hindu unity by participating in SRH, which is exactly what they are
>>doing.
>
>Of course Vaishnavas and anyone else should be welcome on SRH. If some feel
>more comfortable in SRV or anywhere else, so be it. I only hope SRB and SRS
>do not sprout.
It is NOT that they feel more comfortable in SRV because they hate all
the non-Vaishnavas.
It's just because they want a forum, where they can discuss the minor
details of Vaishnavism, without dealing with posts about Shaivism,
Jainism or Bicycle Repair.
It's nice to be able to tell your newsreader to fetch all the messages
from a particular newsgroup, and then be able to read all those
messages, knowing that all of them will be on the topic you want to
read about.
And, in fact, if one is a Vaishnava, one's spiritual practice will
advance more by reading messages about the details of Vaishnavism than
by reading about Shaivism, Jainism or Bicycle Repair.
>As I said before, there is no such religion as Hinduism. It is simply a
>convenient label. If the various schools adopt the same approach as the
>proponents of SRV (which they justifiably can) we will have a tremendous
>splintering.
>The Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains did not want to be associated with Hindus.
>The Vaishnavas do not want to use an imprecise pop term.
>The Ramakrishnaites want to keep their funds for themselves.
>Such remarkable spirituality :-(
Reading other messages you've written, I'm really surprised to read
this, since it SEEMS to show a very shallow concept of spirituality.
Spirituality is solely one's own personal relationship with God.
To judge others only by your own interpretations of what their actions
seem to indicate to you, is exactly what your whole campaign of
religious unity is trying to AVOID.
Because you are judging the actions of another religion by the
standards of YOUR religious beliefs, and condemning them for it.
Isn't that the opposite of religious unity ??
Cheers,
Ken
kstuart@snowcrest.net
"The ego arises from the mistaken notion that the light of consciousness
reflected in the intellect and coloured by objectively perceived phenomena
is the true nature of the Self. Thus, the personal ego falsely identifies
the Self with that which is not the Self and vice versa." - Mark Dyczkowski
References:
