--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 2, 2009, at 9:34 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > [I wrote:] > > > > > >> http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/politics/bogey.html > > > > > >> > > > > > >> A critique of a paper by Nanda, written by a Belgian > > > > > >> scholar of Hindu revivalism, multiculturalism, language > > > > > >> policy issues, ancient Chinese history and philosophy, > > > > > >> comparative religion, and the Aryan invasion debate. > > > > > > > > > > > > Didn't go on to read this one. > > > > > > > > > > I see a link to an article by Koenraad Elst. We're on > > > > > several lists together. He comes across as a radical > > > > > nutcase in most of the emails I've read, he's WAY out > > > > > there, not unlike some American Vaishnavite Hindatva > > > > > apologists. So I suspect you're not missing anything > > > > > by not reading one of his diatribes. > > > > > > > > Oh, that's hysterical. > > > > > > > > Nobody here, of course, is going to bother to read the > > > > critique; they'll just take Vaj's word for it that the > > > > guy is a Hindutva nut. > > > > > > > He is a self admitted supporter of Hindu nationalism. > > > I found that out before I read Vaj's post and posted a > > > response to you. To be clear, he doesn't appear to > > > buy all aspects of Hindutva. > > > > Understatement of the year, especially since what > > we're discussing is Nanda. > > > > You don't have much faith in people doing their own > > > research, do you. > > > > Have you read the critique yet? > > > Why?
You sure won't know if you don't read it. Safer that way. I need to read what he is criticizing for it to be a worthwhile exercise. Otherwise, what is the point? To argue with you? >
