[Reader-list] (no subject)

[anupam chakravartty]

"In that sense, even Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, tribals,
atheists, agnostics, etc. can be Hindus."

dear rakesh,

isnt it going abit too far? i mean why would you want to give so much of
importance to one religion. hinduism is a way of life and all is understood
but what makes you say everyone who is not a hindu should be counted amongst
them. There are several other schools of thought, which are not neccesarily
hindu but have assumed the status of being a way of life. for example:
shintoism or zen buddhism. this way you are turning it into a cult like
thing where anyone who is following the so called way of life is a member. i
find it extremely big brotherly when one says that hinduism is a way of
life. it is dumbing down the finer or the greater aspects of other
religions, which are also a ways of life if led in such a way. god and the
association of god is something personal, which doesnt neccesarily demand a
way to be followed. you might just find your god in the filthiest corner of
the world. what would you do then? reject that god for your way of life?

-anupam

On 7/5/09, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:

> The SC has made a mistake in this judgement. Hinduism is not just 'a' way
> of
> life (or one way of life), it's a combination of many ways of life. In that
> sense, even Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, tribals,
> atheists,
> agnostics, etc. can be Hindus.
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>