04-13-2007, 07:32 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-narayanan+Apr 13 2007, 06:32 PM-->QUOTE(narayanan @ Apr 13 2007, 06:32 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I see! So the Hare Krishna devotees cannot be accepted as Hindus.
Other worthies (coming with their expertise through the Indian expertise) have declared that anyone born beyond the holy shores of India cannot be a Hindu - in fact several temples have been refusing admittance to "foreigners" (translation: someone born outside India) on the ground that they cannot be Hindus.
In my view, any "narrative" worth narrating, should very very clearly specify what is wrong with such superstitions. A way of belief that is valid for the "14 universes" and "all living and inanimate beings" cannot very well be limited to those who imagine themselves to be special by virtue of biological or geographical or political accident.
[right][snapback]66907[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
N,
It is a disturbing trend surely. That seemingly educated and intelligent go into some defensive gear for a simple question like "Who is a Hindu?" is saddening - or maybe that is what social engineering does to a whole generation. Reversing is obviously going to take some time.
Eventhough, I understand what shiv is trying point out - as in let us not try to make a new one, instead encompass what each Hindu narrative holds and make that THE narrative - I am not sure how we can combine a seemingly impossible amount of these narratives (700 million of them, since each Hindu holds a personal copy of the Hindu framework, customized to his requirements, in his mind). Hence, my thought that, we need to find a single strand - a point of reference - which says in a simple sentence what a Hindu is.
Regards,
Eswar
Other worthies (coming with their expertise through the Indian expertise) have declared that anyone born beyond the holy shores of India cannot be a Hindu - in fact several temples have been refusing admittance to "foreigners" (translation: someone born outside India) on the ground that they cannot be Hindus.
In my view, any "narrative" worth narrating, should very very clearly specify what is wrong with such superstitions. A way of belief that is valid for the "14 universes" and "all living and inanimate beings" cannot very well be limited to those who imagine themselves to be special by virtue of biological or geographical or political accident.
[right][snapback]66907[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
N,
It is a disturbing trend surely. That seemingly educated and intelligent go into some defensive gear for a simple question like "Who is a Hindu?" is saddening - or maybe that is what social engineering does to a whole generation. Reversing is obviously going to take some time.
Eventhough, I understand what shiv is trying point out - as in let us not try to make a new one, instead encompass what each Hindu narrative holds and make that THE narrative - I am not sure how we can combine a seemingly impossible amount of these narratives (700 million of them, since each Hindu holds a personal copy of the Hindu framework, customized to his requirements, in his mind). Hence, my thought that, we need to find a single strand - a point of reference - which says in a simple sentence what a Hindu is.
Regards,
Eswar