[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Just say no to "Hinduism" (was Re: ARTICLE : On
In article <ghenDxMoLF.Mno@netcom.com>,
M Suresh <msuresh@india.ti.com> wrote:
>In fact exclusiveness seems to be a property of all dvaita religions.
>I am including Christianity and Islam with ISKCON as dvaita religions,
>because they too preach the eternal separation of god and the soul.
>In fact putting all 3 under one banner of dvaita itself will cause
>protests from each of the 3 religions because differentiation from the
>rest in an attempt to stand out as separate and unique is the very
>characteristic of a dvaita religion.
It would also likely cause "protests from" people who normally think
"Dvaita" means something else, viz., the doctrine referred to as
Tattvavaada.
Whether or not your classifying Islam, Christianity, and ISKCON under
a common banner has any value (which it does not, in my opinion), the
fact remains that the primary characteristic of a "dvaita religion"
has to be acceptance of unauthored texts -- Shruti -- as the primary
basis for one's philosophy, and all others as secondary. (This is if
the appellation `dvaita' has to have any meaning at all.) This is
violated outright in two of the so-called "dvaita religions," and less
obviously so by ISKCON as well.
Also, "differentiation from the rest in an attempt to stand out" is
very much a characteristic of _any_ serious doctrine. Although many
neo-Advaitins, et al, think otherwise, even the stalwarts of Advaita
have tried to show in earnest why their school is completely distinct
and special, as for instance in SaayaNa's `Sarva-darshana-sangraha'
which contrasts and differentiates it with nearly every other
classical school including Tattvavaada.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
>Suresh.
