[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Who decided that all vaishnavs are not hindus
First of all, let me say thanks for an intelligent post on this
topic. I'd rather explain my views, etc., in a discussion format than
while under attack.
In article <ghenDvE59n.K9r@netcom.com>,
GERALD J. LA CORTE <l23@hopi.dtcc.edu> wrote:
>To me it would appear that a Hindu is one who respected or worshipped
>_all_ the gods, kept all (or most) of the holidays and festivals. And it
Vaishnavas wouldn't disrespect any of the Deities, but they wouldn't
suggest that they're all on the same level, either. Simply put, they
are all far greater than us, and for that reason alone, they are
worshippable, but not necessarily _independently_ worshippable.
Vishnu can be worshipped through His devotees, and that is the mood in
which Vaishnavas would worship personalities other than Vishnu.
>would appear that a non-Hindu Vaishnava would repect or worship all of the
>facets of the Maha-Vishnu (including possibly Lakshmi and Hanuman), but
>would not participate in festivals of other gods.
Probably a fair statement. Vaishnavas of any sort might participate
with the understanding mentioned above, but there's probably less
likelihood that a non-Hindu Vaishnava would do so.
>Would a member of the Vaishnava relgion attend a diwali festival or would
>their attendance compromise their faith? A member of the Vaishnava
>denomination would attend.
I don't think there are many issues of compromising faith involved. If
there's something going on, there's nothing wrong with watching. I
would even argue that participation with the right mindset (and in
such a way that you don't offend your hosts) would probably
occur.
>While a member of the Vaishnava denomination
>might / would attend a Shiva festival, a member of the Vaishnava relgion
>wouldn't.
I could see it happening for social reasons, but probably not for
cultural or religious reasons, true.
>Because 70% of all Hindus are Vaishnava (include Vaishnava religion), they
>have a supermajority of all Hinduism. They are able to hold themselves
>separate from Hinduism and make their own rules to a large extent. (A
Personally, I really doubt the 70% figure if we're talking about any
reasonably strict interpretation of Vaishnavism. Also, the "holding
themselves separate" is well-nigh impossible, since I would guess that
upward of 95% (if not 99%) would call themselves Hindu.
-Vivek
