[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Just say no to "Hinduism" (was Re: ARTICLE : On attempting to define Hinduism)
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: ARTICLE : Just say no to "Hinduism" (was Re: ARTICLE : On attempting to define Hinduism)
-
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vidya@cco.caltech.edu>
-
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 14:51:05 -0700
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
-
References: <ghenDwHznC.9A0@netcom.com> <ghenDwqLww.Bpu@netcom.com> <ghenDwt2DE.ME1@netcom.com> <5077j1$rd2@news.ececs.uc.edu> <ghenDx64HG.1x3@netcom.com>
Dhruba Chakravarti wrote:
>
> Dear Sri S. Vidyasankar:
>
> Thank you for joining this discussion. You are absolutely right about
> saying that Scriuptures are described as aparA-vidyA. If you read what I
> wrote one more time, you will see that I wrote that viGYAna is parA-vidyA.
> aparA-vidyA is GYAna. I did not call Scriptures parA-vidyA.
>
That is not what I remember having read. I was objecting to your
statement, "Hinduism is against intellectual interpretation of the
scriptures." Whether scriptures are parA- or aparA- vidyA is besides the
point for the purposes of this discussion. The scholastic traditions,
which form the backbone of Hinduism, like it or not, are squarely on the
side of intellectual interpretations of the scriptures. That is all I
wanted to say. You may give it different names - GYAna, viGYAna,
whatever else. But you can't escape from intellectual interpretation of
the scriptures.
S. Vidyasankar
