[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: The definition of HINDU (Was about VK Rao's def) .. very long
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: The definition of HINDU (Was about VK Rao's def) .. very long
-
From: vijia@pop.jaring.my (Singam)
-
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 13:29:10 GMT
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: Unconfigured
-
References: <DKBuD9.968@ecf.toronto.edu> <4d736m$8fc@babbage.ece.uc.edu> <4df2ob$68l@babbage.ece.uc.edu> <4di8c9$fos@babbage.ece.uc.edu> <4dks54$kh5@babbage.ece.uc.edu>
vivek@cs.rice.edu (Vivek Sadananda Pai) wrote:
>I would have hoped that it proved nothing, but take a look at a recent
>post on soc.religion.hindu:
>In article <4df2vq$6a8@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
>Santhosh Kumar <santhosh@iss.nus.sg> wrote:
>[...]
>>I would like to clarify Caitanya that you cannot be a Hindu
>>because you are born in Canada, a Hindu is the one who is
>>born in Hindustan ( INDIA ) and follows Sanatana Dharma.
>>However, the Hinduism is based on Sanatana Dharma and anybody
>>could practise that and benefit from it.[...]
>In other words, there are definitely Hindus who feel that you _must_
>be born in India in order to be a Hindu. This definition would
>probably make most of the members of the HSC, for example, non-Hindu,
>since they were likely born in the US.
Oh dear, I was born in Malaysia and not in Hindustan. I suppose that
means I too am not a Hindu :-(
Just out of curiosity, I wonder what percentage of those subscribing
to SRH are 'non-Hindu'.
BTW, Bali, one of the islands of Indonesia, has been recognised as
being Hindu for a long time. I suppose we will have to re-catagorise
that now. I wonder how we are going to tell that to the people of
Bali.
I wonder whether Sri Lanka is considered a part of Hindustan. All
those Saivites there will be quite upset to learn that they too are
not Hindu.
Cheers.
SV Singam
Minden, Penang
