[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Re : Erwin Schroedinger and Hinduism
In article <4ebl2l$sir@babbage.ece.uc.edu>, Sankar Jayanarayanan <kartik@Eng.Auburn.EDU> writes:
[...]
|> > The Hare Krishnas handsomely satisfy both 1) and 2) above (substitute
|> > Dvaita for Advaita), yet many of them will tell you that they aren't
|> > Hindu.
|>
|> "hindu" in the sense of "tradition" and not of religion...
|> btw, you still haven't given me the(your) definition of "hindu", and yet
|> you have refuted so many of my claims. I'll tell you what I(personally) mean by
|> the term "hindu"-
|>
|> 1) Culturally- People who are born and/or brought up in India.
|> 2) Religiously- People who believe in the Vedas.
|>
|> Primarily, since this is a religious news-group, I think we ought to
|> take the second(religious) matter much more seriously than the cultural one.
|> After all, this news-group does have the term "religion" in it, and I do
|> see several postings by the Hare-Krishnas, who by your words,
|> " handsomely satisfy both 1) and 2) above (substitute
|> Dvaita for Advaita), yet many of them will tell you that they aren't
|> Hindu."
|> Can you tell me what these people are doing in this news-group?
There are a few thing I'd like to point out in the above reasoning:
a) the original poster (Rajan Parrikar, I believe), correctly used
the term "many", where he says "yet many of them..." There are
Hare Krishnas who will most definitely tell you that they are
Hindus. I don't see any contradiction there. Your statement
seems to make the assumption that all Hare Krishnas are not
Hindus, and this is, of course, false.
b) the question of "what are these people doing in this news group"
should have an obvious explanation. Anyone, regardless of whether
they are Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Atheist, or a Barfing-Yakker,
should be permitted to post to the Hindu newsgroup so long as the
post is on-topic.
[...]
|> and had a look at the alt.hindu archives . I went to the
|> March section of the archives and discovered several articles by a guy
|> called Nathan Parker. I suppose he's a Hare-Krishna, who, by your definition,
|> should not be considered a hindu. What was he doing in the alt.hindu???
a) it's not clear to me by what definition said person is not a Hindu
b) the "what was he doing" question is answered above.
-Vivek
