[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: ARTICLE : Just say no to "Hinduism" (was Re: ARTICLE : On attempting to define Hinduism)



Jaldhar H. Vyas (jaldhar@braincells.com) wrote:

: Aurobindo was not a scholar either.  First he was a bureaucrat, then he
: was a terrorist.  His later actions may be "admirable" but that doesn't
: make them any more relevant.  I truly admire comedian Jerry Seinfeld.  I
: certainly wouldn't be very interested in any opinion of his on the central
: verse of the Rgveda.

: It is not enough to quote someone who has an opinion.  Opinions are two a
: penny.  Try quoting someone who is part of our tradition (which dates back
: further than the 19th century you know.) or someone who meets the
: standards of critical scholarship.  (I don't accept Indology as being
: authoritative even if it agrees with tradition but at least I can respect
: it as being intellectually honest.)  If you really believe what you say
: this will require just a little mental effort.  No problem for someone who
: has the courage of their convictions.

Dear Jaldharji:

I am truly astounded by the statement that Sri Aurobindo was not a
scholar.  He began as a scholar, and ended up as the Rishhi.  I will be
very willing to put in more than a 'little mental effort' to explore with
you, how you decided that Sri Aurobindo does not 'meet the standards of
critical scholarship'.  Please be so kind to enlighten me.



: And incidentally it is by no means unanimous that religion is given to
: us by God.  The Mimamsak belief is the Veda is self-evident and 
: uncreated by any being even Bhagawan.

Please enlighten me how such a 'belief' was established, and if you would,
please give me some references about it.

With best regards,

Dhruba.



Advertise with us!
This site is part of Dharma Universe LLC websites.
Copyrighted 2009-2015, Dharma Universe.