[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH ARTICLE : Who decided that all vaishnavs are not hindus?
In article <ghenDv4vtB.Ju7@netcom.com>,
Vivek Sadananda Pai <vivek@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
>No, we have the exact same problem - there are some bigots in a
>numerically larger group who want to try to force their views on to a
>smaller group. With the Ahmaddiyas, the situation got ugly with their
>temples being burned, etc., etc.
No, there are few bigots on the other side, who for some ulterior motive
are trying to divide the Hindu society. Hindus offer all kind of support
to Hare krishnas. If there are some people who don't like to be called
hindu, they should not call themselves Vaishnavs, because it is proven
fact that Vaishnavs are a sect of Hindus. I can quote you several
authorities to this effect. Can you produce one single paragraph from any
respected work that there are some vaishnavs who are not hindus. Don't
quote other Pai or Rao.
>
>Interesting - you want to say what other people are, despite what they
>themselves say. If you recall, the British called all of us heathens
>and barbarians. I assume that you would have approved of that?
Don't twist the argument. If tomorrow you start to say that you are not
human being, but you are a monkey, then am I supposed to accept that
I am arguing with a monkey on the net?
>
>If you've followed the debate, you'd know that such groups exist, with
>one slight modification - the groups don't claim not be Hindus, but
>instead, they don't claim to be Hindus. Most people don't go around
>telling you what they are not, unless they are being persecuted
>because of it.
>
Just because some people start claiming something , it does not become
a fact. There are hundreds of people claiming they are God, should I
accept that.
Raja
>-Vivek
>--
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>Mail posts to: ghen@netcom.com : http://www.hindunet.org/srh_home/
