[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: The definition of HINDU (Was about VK Rao's def) .. very long
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@moderators.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: The definition of HINDU (Was about VK Rao's def) .. very long
-
From: Savio <savio@cs.man.ac.uk>
-
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 10:06:08 +0000
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: Aryan Krunwanto Vishwam Inc.
-
References: <DKBuD9.968@ecf.toronto.edu> <4di8c9$fos@babbage.ece.uc.edu> <4dks54$kh5@babbage.ece.uc.edu> <4dpegp$mib@babbage.ece.uc.edu> <4e16mi$m2l@babbage.ece.uc.edu>
-
Sender: news@yama.mcc.ac.uk
Okay gentlemen (and the occasional ladies!).
Lets be grown up about this..
Are we really THAT interested in what the hell we call ourselves?
Call yourself WHATEVER you like. I really dont think that GOD will mind if you
call yourself a SunWorkstation or a Hindu. Names change depending on the place
and time.
I for one would like the term Arya re-installed. But that is for political issues
etc.
All in all...does it matter if Hindu is valid or not.
Havent you realised that you cant persuade the masses....
Do your own thing.
Praise God and Be Forever Happy.
Namaste
Vivek Sadananda Pai wrote:
>
> In article <4dpegp$mib@babbage.ece.uc.edu>, Singam <vijia@pop.jaring.my> wrote:
> [...]
> >>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.[...]
> [...]
> >Oh dear, I was born in Malaysia and not in Hindustan. I suppose that
> >means I too am not a Hindu :-(
>
> Oops.
>
> >Just out of curiosity, I wonder what percentage of those subscribing
> >to SRH are 'non-Hindu'.
>
> Probably a fair portion, because I'd venture that many readers are
> college-age Indians who were born in the US.
>
> >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.
>
> Even worse, someone's got to break the news to Nepal. If I remember my
> trivia correctly, they are the _only_ country in the world which
> declares itself Hindu. I can see it now: "dear sirs - please desist
> from calling your kingdom Hindu, because very few, if any, of you were
> born in India. Therefore, may we suggest that you call your kingdom
> Hindu-favorable, or Hindu-sympathizing, but not really Hindu?"
>
> >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.
>
> Uh-oh - your innocent query could set a bad precedent. This might be
> the start of a new naming convention where anywhere there are Hindus
> is considered part of Hindustan. I, for example, would then be writing
> this article from Houston, Texas, USA subsection of Hindustan
>
> ;-)
>
> -Vivek
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subm.: srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu Admin: srh-request@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu
> Archives/Home Page: http://rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu:8080/soc_hindu_home.html
--
Savio savio@cs.man.ac.uk
