From: indu@iss700.Columbia.NCR.COM ()
Subject: Re: Marital Status (definition of Hindu)
Originator: indu@iss700
Organization: NCR Corp, E&M-Columbia, Columbia, SC
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 14:05:29 GMT

To: sahmed@occs.cs.oberlin.edu
Subject: Re: Marital Status (definition of Hindu)

In article <SAHMED.92Nov10232311@occs.cs.oberlin.edu> you write:
>In indu@iss700.Columbia.NCR.COM () writes:
>
>?ahmed-shakil@cs.yale.edu writes:
>?>In .. indu@iss700.Columbia.NCR.COM () writes:
>? Not exactly nationalism. But being faithful to all that has given 
>? us this vision. If I were born in India it  would equate to Indian 
>? nationalism. If I were born else where, then it  means Viewing these with 
>? respect and Honor. 
>
>If you were born elsewhere say Canada would hinduism equate to
>Canadian nationalism? 

   Please read my other posts. I do not how and why you are deciphering 
   this way. Please give some clue as to how your logics work. Also I have 
   mentioned something very clearly in the above few sentences.
   (respect and Honor to India.) 

>? I am not just implying,  but saying it CLEARLY. The HINDU values are NOT 
>? faith dependant. Like for example, respecting  woman, respecting cow, 
>? ones freedom of faith in pursuing the Ultimate truth (MOKSHA), ones duties
>? (not only Religious, but towards society, Man kind etc,). So even whether
>? one is Vaishnavite or Shivite or an Athiest if he subscribes to these 
>? he is a HINDU.  The Indian-ness is attributed to them because,
>? these VALUES were practiced by Indians initially.
>
>And the values of respect for fellow beings were not practiced anywere
>else? Is India the first place where these values were practiced. 

   YES. India is the first country, where these have been practiced and 
   Established. And it was during those days, when the west was trying to 
   define a meaning of life and means of life. And it was when the CONCEPT 
   of ISLAM was not heard of (I guess Islam was proposed in  ~650A.D). And
   Much before the Birth of Christ and Christianity (which I guess dates
   back to the period of Moses).  Krishna himself dates back to 4000 B.C.
   Rama, was hundreds of generations before Krishna.  Vishnu Purana  has given 
   an account of all these kings and their parampara. And by the time of 
   RAMA his dynasty had very well established itself,  as a supporter of 
   these Hindu values (ofcourse as I have said before, the Word HINDU was 
   unheard of then) and there were many kings who were ancestors of RAMA.

>??A canadian Eskimo can also become Hindu. He can remain a Hindu, and 
>??remain committed to integrity of Bharat. I DO NOT KNOW WHERE YOU FIND
>??CONTRADICTION IN THESE. How will his Canadian interests clash with his 
>??Hindu interests of "sarve jana sukhino bhavanthu, sarve  santhu .." ? 
>
>If we follow your definition of Hinduism his canadian interests would
>clash with his Hindu interests whenever there is a political dispute
>between canada and India.

   Why will political disputes arise between two Hindus, who are following
   the same LIFE OF TRUTH, which is HINDU way of life?  There cannot be a 
   Canadian truth and Indian truth - you see.

   I have already said, the Hindu ideal of "Let all people live in peace and 
   Happiness" will not arise any clash of Political interests among the TRUTH
   seekers.

>??As for your hearing for the first time this interpretation, HOW can I be 
>??held responsible. As for Hinduism being coinsidered as a religion, that 
>??shows that you did not have the right orientation from where-ever you learnt 
>??(in case you had) Hinduism.
>
>??I said, especially Islam because - ISLAM rules out every thing else. 
>??It does not accept the multiple views and beliefs which makes it diffucult
>??for others to accept. And the more important point is, IT OVER RIDES others
>??right. I do not know what is written in Books, but in action it has happened
>??and been happening  in the  name of Islam.
>
>Above are two extracs from the same posting. First you accuse Shakil
>of having an incomplete or incorrect knowledge of Hinduism. And then
>you admit that you don't know enough about Islam and yet you find it
>fit to lecture on it. Don't you think you should practice what you
>preach. Yes Islam rules out multiple beliefs, but no one is compelled
>to accept Islam. 
 
   I did not ever intend to lecture on Islam.I had some doubts which I wanted 
   to clarify through some other THREAD. As for this thread, I think what ever 
   I have said on Islam were atleast not wrong AS-OF-DATE. If you have read 
   carefully, I have said "I donot know what exactly is written in books, but 
   in action it has happened and been happening in the name of Islam".

   Any way, I DONOT intend to accuse anybody. I believe that facts need to be 
   straightened. Thats it. As far as Mr.Shakil's views on Hinduism today, 
   that is what I say to even most of the present day Hindus who hold similar
   views without knowing the actual truth. I donot know WHY YOU USED accuse.
   It is just a correction to be noted. Thats it.




                 ************************************
A Personal request:   In view of decency and ethics over net, please DON'T 
  get into personal abuse or any such trash. Samyamana (self-control) is one
  of the foremost qualities of Hinduism.
                 ************************************

>| | Saifuddin Ahmed                                                        |
>| | sahmed@occs.cs.oberlin.edu                                             |
-Indu.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  My  views expressed above are made on a PERSONAL basis              |
|  No Group or  Organization   can be held responsible                 |
|                                ( for those in quest of truth .......)|
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian