[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Why I support soc.religion.hindu: Reorganisation
In article <4cgd5k$jhn@babbage.ece.uc.edu> vidynath@math.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) writes:
> The point is that Mani Varadarajan, S. Rao and the Pais argued that
> `Hindu' is an ethnic term and does not refer to a religion.
This point has been answered again and again. I should point
out that this discussion is completely orthogonal to a
discussion of the merits of the RFD.
1) I do not think I have *ever* said that Hindu is an ethnic
term. Rather, I have said it is a term that denotes ``dharma'',
which encompasses more than religion, as the latter term is
understood.
Don't take my word for it -- look at what the Hindu Students
Council defines it as.
2) That being the case, I would like to see soc.RELIGION.hindu
deal with the religious aspects of Hinduism -- i.e., discussions
of religious ethics, God, upaasana, and related things. Please
see the RFD for further details.
Why can we not discuss the RFD's merits on its own without
getting into all sorts of ad hominem attacks?
Mani
