[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Hindu conversion
In article <ghenDyotK3.415@netcom.com>, dawnpub <dawnpub@dataplace.net> wrote:
>Bille J. Crayton wrote asking for info. on becoming a Hindu. Jaldhar Vyas
>replied that this was not possible. Vyas's remark was not only inaccurate
>but demonstrates an arrogance that is neither spiritual, religious or
>Hindu. Anyone can become a Hindu.
Define `Hindu', and state what it means to "become" one. Then we can
proceed to consider whether Jaldhar Vyas was right or wrong.
I notice that since you call something, namely J. V.'s "arrogance," to
be "neither spiritual, religious, or [sic] Hindu," it must be that
"Hindu" has, to you, a connotation that is itself neither spiritual
nor religious (for otherwise your classification is not meaningful).
Under the circumstances, it might be asked if you and J. V. mean the
same thing when using the word `Hindu'. I have a feeling his idea of
`Hindu' is both spiritual and religious -- or at least one of the
two.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
>Swami Param
