[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Becoming Hindu
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: ARTICLE : Becoming Hindu
-
From: "janahan (j.) skandaraniyam" <skandar@nortel.ca>
-
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:10:50 +0000
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: Nortel
-
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2)
-
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=BNR/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/C=CA/;<541jnq$kqh@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>]
-
X400-Originator: /dd.id=psd52384/g=usenet/i=u/s=support/@bnr.ca
-
X400-Received: by mta bnr.ca in /PRMD=BNR/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/C=CA/; Relayed; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 02:23:04 -0400
-
X400-Received: by /PRMD=BNR/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/C=CA/; Relayed; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 02:22:57 -0400
-
X400-Received: by /PRMD=bnr/ADMD=telecom.canada/C=ca/; Relayed; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 23:10:50 -0400
"Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@braincells.com> wrote:
>Well I have four eyes so I can see a little better. :-) ( or should that be
>8-)?)
>
>If you want to argue that R & V were some kind of mystics that's fine.
>There's not really much difference between what they taught and what
>country sants and babas have been preaching to the farmers of India for
>many years My problem is when they or their followers try to present
>themselves as spokesmen for traditional culture, (They are not)
>interpreters of Vedanta and shastras (they are not) or possesors of any
>kind of coherent and logical philosophy. (They simply haven't got one.)
>
>As for my original contention that their influence on Dharmik people at
>large is minimal, I stand by it. It is actually their lack of any kind of
>systematic thought that makes them valuable to secular India.
The above statements are so childish and baseless, that I don't
know where to start to reply.
J.
