[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: NEWS : Sri Lankan president accepts her anti-Hindu stance.
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: NEWS : Sri Lankan president accepts her anti-Hindu stance.
-
From: shrao@nyx.net (Shrisha Rao)
-
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 07:27:21 -0700 (MST)
-
References: <ghenE0spJr.8p7@netcom.com>
"Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@braincells.com>
> And Sanatana Dharma hardly includes Buddhism. No Budhhist from Siddhartha
> Gautama on down has ever refered to Buddhism as Sanatana Dharma. This is a
> term that describes Hinduism only. And proponents of Sanatana Dharma have
> always considered Buddhism to be one of the foremost of the nastika or
> heretical philosophies.
All those statements must be considered a bit outlandish, because
there is _no_ evidence in the shaastra literature that "[Sanatana
Dharma] is a term that describes Hinduism only." If one decides to do
away with the traditional literature and stick to common perception,
then one notes that "Hinduism" itself is hardly rigorously defined,
and means different things to different people.
As far as I'm aware, the closest one gets to a formal definition of
"sanaatana dharma" is in the Manu-Smrti:
satyaM brUyAt.h priyaM brUyAt.h na brUyAtsatyamapriyam.h |
priyaM cha nAnR^itaM brUyAt eshha dharmaH sanAtanaH ||
Speak the truth; speak the pleasant; do not speak an unpleasant truth;
Also, do not speak a pleasant falsehood -- this is the ancient law.
By this standard, a "proponent of Sanatana Dharma" is neither
[necessarily] a Hindu nor a Buddhist, but only one who accepts these
rules of morality in speech!
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
--
http://www.rit.edu/~mrreee/dvaita.html
