[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: No political articles on SRH? Really?
In article <ghenDuKtr2.7HJ@netcom.com>,
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
>Vivek Sadananda Pai wrote:
>
>Reservations based on religion is certainly of interest. While you may not
>have had problems with reservation etc, let me assure you that I personally
>know tons who were. A new reservation for muslims is certainly of interest to
>_Hindus_, since they will be directly affected. It's certainly not out of
>place in a hindu religion news-group. The article deals with the direct
>material consequences of being a Hindu. While you may be on the highest rung
>on the spiritual ladder, many of us here are not, and are still stuck in the
>mundane affairs of life.
That's fine; we can both accept that the political aspects of being a
Hindu are of interest to both of us. But let us at least agree to
call a spade a spade -- accept that such postings *are* political
rather than religious (vide your statement about "mundane affairs of
life," etc.) That is the point Vivek was trying to make, I think.
Any claim that SRH does not carry political articles is flat-out
wrong.
>> Hmmm... I didn't happen to find even the tiniest bit of
>> religious content to this article. Whatever happened to
>> the claim that there weren't articles which were "pure
>> politics" on SRH? I guess that while the RFD was being
>> discussed, all of the political types must have been
>> requested to stay away?
>
>If articles about the BJP or VHP had been given, extolling their policies etc,
>that would have been purely political.
Even that news item about the reservation issue is purely political.
Tell me, where and what exactly is the spiritual content in it? What
scripture is used? Who is the saint whose teachings are applied or
explained? What is the higher moral or spiritual truth conveyed?
>
>ayodhya - Ram temple - not hindu?
>
> ''All I have said is that anyone who was responsible for
>> |> the unfortunate happenings at Ayodhya and has not been
>> |> prosecuted would be brought to justice,'' he said.
>
>current action on ayodhya incident - not hindu related?
Yes, but again, accept that those things are *not* spiritual; they
relate to the "mundane affairs of life." There may be a very few
people, such as my guru's guru Sri Pejavar Swamiji (sometime
vice-president of the VHP), who believe that by getting involved in
this issue they are serving the Lord, but they are exceptions. The
vast majority, including people like L.K. Advani, etc., treat it as a
purely political exercise, a "symbolic redressal of past grievances,"
"an exercise in national character-building," etc. They are not
Ram-devotees in the main.
As such, while we may agree that these kinds of things are of interest
to Hindus, we *must* accept that they are of interest in a political
sense, and have nothing to do with spirituality per se. The claim
Vivek was trying to refute was that political postings were not/would
not be allowed on SRH.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
>Ramakrishnan.
>--
Follow-Ups:
