 |
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|
>In article <ghenE2LK37.G3M@netcom.com>, "H. Krishna Susarla"
><susarla.krishna@tumora.swmed.edu> wrote:
>> To call Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktaism, Smaarthaism all as Hinduism is
>> like calling Christianity, Judaism, and Islam as Jordanism.
>
>A more proper analogy is calling Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists,
>Anglicans,
>Presbyterians, Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists,
>Eastern Orthodox people etc. as Christians.
>
>Or you could say that calling Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism etc. as
>Indianism is like calling Christianity, Judaism and Islam as Jordanism.
>
>Otherwise you are comparing apples to oranges.
>
>Regards,
>
>Kalyan Sundaram
Respectfully speaking, I believe it is you who are comparing apples and
oranges. The first analogy offered by you is inappropriate, because
Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans, etc all trace their beliefs to
a single prophet and a single scripture. Furthermore, the basic beliefs
between them are the same, specifically their acceptance of one Supreme
Deity and one prophet through whom the said Deity gives His teachings. In
contrast, Smaarthas, Shaivites, Vaishnavas, etc give emphasis to different
parts of the Vedic literature, and they do not necessarily agree to
worshipping the same God, or even agree as to the basic qualities of that
Deity.
Even more important is the fact that the various Christian sects all have a
common ancestor, and they readily admit this. Most Christian sects broke
off from what became the Catholic church. By contrast, Vaishnavas,
Shaivities, etc each claim an eternal tradition that goes all the way back
to God, and none of them would accept that they had branched off from a
prior tradition at some point in history.
regards,
-- K
H. Krishna Susarla
UTSW Class of '99
http://www.swmed.edu/home_pages/personal/krishna
{my views are my own}
|
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|