[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Sikh view of Hinduism
-
Subject: Re: ARTICLE : Sikh view of Hinduism
-
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@braincells.com>
-
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:18:22 GMT
-
Apparently-To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: Consolidated Braincells Inc.
-
References: <ghenDxL7Jt.L4J@netcom.com> <ghenDxu5pp.5tB@netcom.com> <ghenDy7Exx.911@netcom.com> <ghenDy9FtM.80J@netcom.com> <ghenDyL5Bn.sx@netcom.com>
shrao@nyx.net (Shrisha Rao) wrote in article <ghenDyL5Bn.sx@netcom.com>...
> You seem to have a rather unique conception of what "limit" means. It
> is quite commonly accepted that Vishnu's avataara-s do not have
> material bodies, pangs, joys, etc., yet this is not a limitation,
> whilst it must be according to you. Non-association with, and not
> being subject to, entities that are themselves limited, is not itself
> a limitation -- it is a sign of freedom from limitation. At least,
> that is what I've been given to understand.
>
Actually, I was merely responding to the previous poster who claimed that
his conception of God was superior because it was free of "mundane"
attributes. I'm saying if you hold such a position you cannot be a
particularist. I.e. you cannot say your view of God is the only correct
one. I avoid this paradox by not being a particularist. (As far as God
is concerned anyway.) You avoid the paradox by not claiming God is free
of all attributes.
> Who defines "orthodox" in this case? I'm not aware there is any such
> unanimity that can be called *the* orthodox view.
>
This is the views of the Mimamsaks. All schools of Vedanta (in theory at
least) accept Mimamsak views on the nature of Dharma.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas [jaldhar@braincells.com] o- beable .-_|\
Consolidated Braincells Inc. / \
http://www.braincells.com/jaldhar/ Perth Amboy-> *.--._/
"Witty quote" - Dead Guy finger me for PGP key v McQ!
