[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH Reorg FAQ
sns wrote:
> the messages that Mr. Vivek Pai had posted on SRV
> argued that there is no "orthodox"(read western or
> semitic) way of defining Hinduism and made
> disparaging remarks about Lingayats.
And in such a way that he can defend himself later, I might add. If I remember
right, he said something like "is a lingam worshipping lingayat homosexual a
hindu" or something like that. Note that he can defend himself by saying that
he was giving an example if questioned later and also feel satisfied about
insulting shaivas. It's not very surprising given the history of feuds between
lingayats and vaishnavas (sometimes violent) in Karnataka.
This is very typical I must say.
> I would suggest all SRH supporters to understand the
> background of the RFD proponents.All of them are
> ISKCON members or ISKCON sympathisers and consider
> their "Hindu" identity as only a "cultural" one.
> That was the rationale used in not having the
> name "Hindu" associated with SRV.
Not exactly. I would hardly call some of the other srv proponents ISKCON
sympathizers. See srv for the explicit disagreements of some others with
ISKCON and it's ideologies.
I voted YES for srv and hardly care if some vaishnavas consider themselves
hindu or not (though the mind boggles at such a possibility). However, I am
against the RFD for other reasons I have already cited, for which I received
no satisfactory answers.
Rama.
--
Two monks were arguing about a flag. One said, "The flag is moving." The other
said, "The wind is moving." The sixth patriarch happened to be passing by. He
told them, "Not the wind, not the flag; mind is moving." - The Gateless Gate
