[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: The definition of HINDU (Was about VK Rao's def) .. very long
(1) I did not take any post from S.Rao. What i responded to was YOUR
OWN post on the net obliquely addressing it to me as a "certain netter"
so before making allegations, check what you have posted.
(2) I have not posted this to news.groups because it is purely discussion
on the term hindu, and does not belong there.
(3) I did post a brief pointer on news.groups at appropriate thread
informing that i have posted it to s.c.i.
so please stop conspiracy theories.
(4) I have separately addressed the aspects relevant to RFD on srh
reorganisation on news.groups and elsewhere.
(5) I have also posted separately my response to srh, but got delayed
due to s.r.h. vacation.
(6) i have clearely stated that i have not read all historic debates
on the topic, and then you posted the article -- claiming that it
meant to inform me the history of discussion. so if there are problems
with the post -- have courage to accept them.
(7) Even if you have the continuation of clause (2) as part of the
scriptures, it does not change my arguments, since the word "infallible"
is still part of that clause.
good luck next time
