[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Who decided that all vaishnavs are not hindus?
In article <ghenDvCC24.I56@netcom.com>,
Roy Raja <rajaroy@ecf.toronto.edu> wrote:
>
> I don't need any authority to question Pai. If you are saying something
> contrary to popularly held notions, the burden of proof is on you.
> If I say that earth is round, then I have to prove that, and nobody
> is wrong in questioning me.
I meant if I say earth is flat, sorry for the slip.
Raja
>
> The fact is you are spreading a monumental lie, and I have every reason
> to question how did you come to that conclusion.
>>
>>The SRV FAQ, which you incorrectly referred to, defines Vaishnava as
>>"a devotee of Vishnu." Note, however, that unless *both* `Vaishnava'
>>and `Hindu' are defined, no sensible argument can be made to show that
>>the former is entirely subsumed by the latter.
>
> Let me turn the table on you. If you failed to define Hindu, how did
> you come to the conclusion that there are some vaishnavs who are not
> Hindu?
>
>
> Raja
>--
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>Mail posts to: ghen@netcom.com : http://www.hindunet.org/srh_home/
