--- On Tue, 20/4/10, J Alfred Prufrock wrote:
> From: J Alfred Prufrock
> Subject: Re: [silk] How does one unregister from Hinduism?
> To: "J Alfred Prufrock"
> Cc: "silklist@lists.hserus.net"
> Date: Tuesday, 20 April, 2010, 21:03
> IN Goa, I mean.
&
On Tuesday 20 Apr 2010 8:30:45 am Charles Haynes wrote:
> So you may not want to be associated with that person, their actions,
> or that religion. You may want to explicitly distance yourself from
> such an association, whether it be in their mind, the minds of other
> people, or the "minds" of th
:
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
Subject: Re: [silk] How does one unregister from Hinduism?
To: silklist@lists.hserus.net
Date: Tuesday, 20 April, 2010, 20:09
Kiran Jonnalagadda [20/04/10 19:51
+0530]:
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Deepa Mohan
wrote:
Why, in our country, is the word
This is the kind of thread I can follow.
Particklerly after 5 days of Gormandising on Goa
Phone-Mail
On 20-Apr-2010, at 20:51, Indrajit Gupta wrote:
--- On Tue, 20/4/10, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
Subject: Re: [silk] How does one unregister from Hinduism
I can jaast pheel the lobh toonaait
Phone-Mail
On 20-Apr-2010, at 20:09, Suresh Ramasubramanian
wrote:
Kiran Jonnalagadda [20/04/10 19:51 +0530]:
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Deepa Mohan
wrote:
Why, in our country, is the word "vegetarian" invariably preceded
by the
word "pure"
--- On Tue, 20/4/10, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
> Subject: Re: [silk] How does one unregister from Hinduism?
> To: silklist@lists.hserus.net
> Date: Tuesday, 20 April, 2010, 20:09
> Kiran Jonnalagadda [20/04/10 19:51
> +0530]:
> >On T
Kiran Jonnalagadda [20/04/10 19:51 +0530]:
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Deepa Mohan wrote:
Why, in our country, is the word "vegetarian" invariably preceded by the
word "pure"?
Because those foul egg and mushroom eaters also claim to be vegetarian?
and bongs are wont to exclaim "you ar
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Deepa Mohan wrote:
> Why, in our country, is the word "vegetarian" invariably preceded by the
> word "pure"?
>
Because those foul egg and mushroom eaters also claim to be vegetarian?
It's like how a Nokia or a Bajaj isn't really a Nokia or a Bajaj unless it's
a
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Krish Ashok wrote:
> In which case, I wonder if dogs living in a Hindu household automatically
> become Hindu dogs
>
Is there any doubt about this? I have seen Tambram families proudly saying
that their dogs are "pyooor vegetarians", eat curd rice, and probably
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
wrote:
> (fried? what do you call it when you pour batter on a
> griddle and make pancakes?)
What's wrong with 'made'? It's not a twenty dollar word, but it fits.
Cheeni
Sriram Karra [20/04/10 13:07 +0530]:
(fried? what do you call it when you pour batter on a
griddle and make pancakes?)
A literal translation from Tamil would suggest a dosa is 'shot'?
to heat a dosa would be more literal / appropriate for "chudarathu"
being tirunelveli / deep south tambrams
>
> (fried? what do you call it when you pour batter on a
> griddle and make pancakes?)
>
A literal translation from Tamil would suggest a dosa is 'shot'?
Kiran Jonnalagadda [20/04/10 12:52 +0530]:
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
wrote:
Tambram household dogs even become vegetarian, and I've seen at least one
pomarenian that had a dot of kungumam on its forehead.
Ah, yes. Dal rice and milk it was for every day of his f
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
wrote:
>
> Tambram household dogs even become vegetarian, and I've seen at least one
> pomarenian that had a dot of kungumam on its forehead.
Ah, yes. Dal rice and milk it was for every day of his fifteen years,
except the occasional treat
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Krish Ashok wrote:
> In which case, I wonder if dogs living in a Hindu household automatically
> become Hindu dogs
But of course. My mother regularly applied a tilak to Sparky's
forehead after her puja.
Krish Ashok [20/04/10 12:21 +0530]:
In which case, I wonder if dogs living in a Hindu household automatically
become Hindu dogs
Tambram household dogs even become vegetarian, and I've seen at least one
pomarenian that had a dot of kungumam on its forehead.
In which case, I wonder if dogs living in a Hindu household automatically
become Hindu dogs
On 20-Apr-2010, at 12:01 PM, Vinayak Hegde wrote:
>
> Since you have now invoked Godwin's law, This discussion is officially
> going to the dogs.
>
> -- Vinayak
>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 7:31 AM, ss wrote:
> claiming to support a religion have used a Goebbelsian propaganda tactic to
Since you have now invoked Godwin's law, This discussion is officially
going to the dogs.
-- Vinayak
At 2010-04-20 07:55:19 +0530, cybers...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> ams - with respect may I point out that it was you who first raised a
> strawman about "lack of Hindu violence" on this thread which you tried
> to knock down subsequently.
Sure, go ahead. It would be churlish of me to deny you the plea
The tactic is somewhat like the child who says "I did not do it" to
his mother
even before she realises that a window has been broken. In other
words, a
Freudian slip.
Amateur armchair psychology crap :-)
Belated whiny post-empting is more what it seems like :-)
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:01 PM, ss wrote:
> So friggin what if it is someone's religion?
So you may not want to be associated with that person, their actions,
or that religion. You may want to explicitly distance yourself from
such an association, whether it be in their mind, the minds of othe
On Monday 19 Apr 2010 10:56:54 pm Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> Yippee, I'm moving up in the world.
ams - with respect may I point out that it was you who first raised a strawman
about "lack of Hindu violence" on this thread which you tried to knock down
subsequently.
I believe that what I am goi
On Tuesday 20 Apr 2010 2:48:06 am Charles Haynes wrote:
> From it has flowed a river of
> religious violence in the name of Hinduism deliberately encouraged by
> people using Hinduism to perpetrate religious and political violence
> against non-Hindus.
This is such a blinkered and restricted vie
Ayhodhya was a political act, but it was also self evidently a
religious, and specifically an act that used Hinduism to incite
religious violence against others. From it has flowed a river of
religious violence in the name of Hinduism deliberately encouraged by
people using Hinduism to perpetrate r
At 2010-04-19 21:01:37 +0530, cybers...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Would you be greatly inconvenienced to point out two posts from anyone
> in the archives that make this assertion and prove that this is not
> the first of three strawmen you have created.
Yes, I would. I remember what happened the last
On Monday 19 Apr 2010 6:58:10 pm Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> The act of interpreting *any* event or situation is a political act. Or
> were you using "political" as a dirty word, as in "only bad people do
> that sort of thing"?
Yes. If political acts are bad, I am bad because a large proportion of
At 2010-04-19 08:18:59 +0530, cybers...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> What religions dictate and what followers of religions do are two
> different things.
Right. One is smoke, the other is mirrors.
> The act of attributing a religious motivation to a societal event or
> societal situation is a political
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Biju Chacko wrote:
>
> hands. I was merely pointing out that IMO Hinduism is equally guilty.
There were many merry blood thirsty battles for millennia between the
Indian religions before Islam & Christianity made sufficient inroads.
Kings fought each other for Sha
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:19 PM, ss wrote:
> On Sunday 18 Apr 2010 6:22:52 pm Biju Chacko wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
>> > At 2010-04-17 11:55:25 +0530, mohande...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> Some religions (though not Hinduism) have no place for those who do
>>
On Sunday 18 Apr 2010 8:22:11 pm Thaths wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 7:37 AM, ss wrote:
> > Hindus are allowed to kill both believers and unbelievers.
>
> Couldn't that be said about all religions? Muslims killing muslims in
> the Iran-Iraq war, Christians killing (in some theaters of war)
> c
At 10:36 AM +0530 4/18/10, ss wrote:
>You can be the head of a donkey shit worshipping cult or religion and
>still be Hindu. But if you worship donkey shit and try being Muslim or
>Christian - you will have some trouble getting in and having your view
>accepted as legitimate. But as long as you can
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 7:37 AM, ss wrote:
> Hindus are allowed to kill both believers and unbelievers.
Couldn't that be said about all religions? Muslims killing muslims in
the Iran-Iraq war, Christians killing (in some theaters of war)
christians in the WWI and WWII, etc? The reasons people kil
On Sunday 18 Apr 2010 6:22:52 pm Biju Chacko wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> > At 2010-04-17 11:55:25 +0530, mohande...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Some religions (though not Hinduism) have no place for those who do
> >> not believe; they are labelled "pagan" or "hea
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 6:45 PM, ashok _ wrote:
[...]
> Many times I have found it more worthwhile (and beneficial) to
> temporarily (as in, for that moment) adopt a religion - rather than to
> explicitly deny it completely. For one, it opens many doors if you are
> traveling, and at least in som
On 18-04-2010 10:47, ss wrote:
But if you live in India and you have no religion
to pin yourself down upon, you are Hindu by default. Just another person with
no fixed belief.
Er, yes, this is the problem. Some of us don't want to be "Hindu by
default".
--
Madhu Menon
http://twitter.com/ma
On Sunday 18 Apr 2010 8:58:15 am Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> At 2010-04-17 11:55:25 +0530, mohande...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Some religions (though not Hinduism) have no place for those who do
> > not believe; they are labelled "pagan" or "heathen" or "unbelievers"
> > and can be persecuted and killed
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> At 2010-04-17 11:55:25 +0530, mohande...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Some religions (though not Hinduism) have no place for those who do
>> not believe; they are labelled "pagan" or "heathen" or "unbelievers"
>> and can be persecuted and kille
On Sunday 18 Apr 2010 8:14:47 am Tim Bray wrote:
> > If you do not belong to group X and wish to belong to group Y, surely
> > joining group Y should suffice.
>
> Suppose there is no particularly-organized Group Y? "I do not believe
> in God" seems like a very worthwhile unregistration to me. Wh
On Sunday 18 Apr 2010 7:43:10 am Charles Haynes wrote:
> Only when I've been wrongly identified as belonging to a group with
> which I do not wish to be associated - usually by some officiously
> bureaucratic government agency.
That is exactly my point sir. The need to unregister arises under exte
Charles Haynes wrote:
> When the claim is made that India is "80% Hindu" is that just people
> the government has labelled "Hindu" who have not bothered to unregister,
> or is that people who actually consider themselves "Hindu?"
They do register, or rather they get registered by their parents, w
At 2010-04-17 11:55:25 +0530, mohande...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Some religions (though not Hinduism) have no place for those who do
> not believe; they are labelled "pagan" or "heathen" or "unbelievers"
> and can be persecuted and killed...
Yeah. No persecution and killing of unbelievers when it com
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 6:51 PM, ss wrote:
> Like Nixon's immortal words "I am not liar"
Clearly not *that* immortal. I believe it was "I am not a crook":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh163n1lJ4M
Thaths
--
"Marge, you being a cop makes you the man! Which makes me the woman... and
I have no i
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 6:51 PM, ss wrote:
> If you do not belong to group X and wish to belong to group Y, surely joining
> group Y should suffice.
Suppose there is no particularly-organized Group Y? "I do not believe
in God" seems like a very worthwhile unregistration to me. While I
totally
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:51 AM, ss wrote:
> Have you ever found
> the need to "unregister" from groups of liars, Christians, gays or violent
> people?
Only when I've been wrongly identified as belonging to a group with
which I do not wish to be associated - usually by some officiously
bureauc
On Saturday 17 Apr 2010 11:55:25 am Deepa Mohan wrote:
> Well, it's interesting to me that the need to not belong to a specific
> group is often as imperative as the need to belong. How often do we hear
> people say, rather proudly, "...but I'm not like them!"
I hear that 165 million times, one
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Krish Ashok wrote:
>
> On 17-Apr-2010, at 8:22 AM, ss wrote:
>
> >
> > Why unregister?
> >
> > shiv
> >
>
> Good point. I don't remember explicitly registering, and given the sheer
> diversity of practices and beliefs, not to mention the lack of a single
> organi
On 17-Apr-2010, at 8:22 AM, ss wrote:
>
> Why unregister?
>
> shiv
>
Good point. I don't remember explicitly registering, and given the sheer
diversity of practices and beliefs, not to mention the lack of a single
organizing authority, why the need for an explicit unregister process? One
On Thursday 08 Apr 2010 8:28:08 pm Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
> Apparently the catholic church has a form that you fill out, at least
> in Switzerland. Seeing how Hinduism has all the bases covered -
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_Hinduism how does one get rid
> of it?
>
> Cheeni
Why unr
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Kiran Jonnalagadda wrote:
>> Mahesh Shantaram did that many years ago. Here it is:
>> http://bbs.seacrow.com/cix/106/829
>> http://bbs.seacrow.com/cix/106/881
>
> Thanks, I am sure that this is the most p
OK, OK...I agree that's spelling Nazism, but I still bristle when I
hear...and then read the British mauling of Indian place names
like Mejura (Madurai) Seringapetam (Srirangapatna) and Serampore
(Srirampur). Oh well
Come, come.
Even the construct "Deepa Mohan" as a name is about
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Thaths wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan
> wrote:
> > It's true that Hinduism lays claim who all who breathe this air, walk
> > on this earth and live under the sky.
>
The first time my son-in-law visited India (er, as someone said at t
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Thaths wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan
> wrote:
> > It's true that Hinduism lays claim who all who breathe this air, walk
> > on this earth and live under the sky.
>
> Apparently some Hindus are more equal than others. Balinese Hindus,
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
> It's true that Hinduism lays claim who all who breathe this air, walk
> on this earth and live under the sky.
Apparently some Hindus are more equal than others. Balinese Hindus,
for example, don't find it easy to visit Puri's Juggenaugh
I could always make up my own religion that is defined as consisting of
anyone born in the geography of India. Why would you be obliged to release
yourself from that?
Precisely the question that's been bothering me as well. Why do you feel
obliged to release yourself from it?
And what would
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Ramakrishna Reddy wrote:
> Yes, Mahesh Shantaram did that many years ago, it costed him Rs 25/- .
> But it also got me curious, If one does not have a religion, does it
> automatically qualify him for a religious minority or any minority
> status in India.
Ironic
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
>
> OTOH, the larger philosophical question still remains - how does one
> relinquish Hinduism when by its definition it is impossible :-)
>
>
Constitutionally speaking, shouldn't you NOT have to relinquish anything you
didn't accept of yo
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Kiran Jonnalagadda wrote:
>> Mahesh Shantaram did that many years ago. Here it is:
>> http://bbs.seacrow.com/cix/106/829
>> http://bbs.seacrow.com/cix/106/881
>
> Thanks, I am sure that this is the most pr
On Friday 09 April 2010 01:14 PM, Udhay Shankar N wrote:
>> I'm glad he hasn't found out about the SECRET HANDSHAKE.
>
> Tim, you realise you're going to have to explain this breach of
> confidentiality at the next monthly cabal meeting, yes?
Tsk.. Tsk...
Rule 1: Breach confidentiality at the ri
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Kiran Jonnalagadda wrote:
> Mahesh Shantaram did that many years ago. Here it is:
> http://bbs.seacrow.com/cix/106/829
> http://bbs.seacrow.com/cix/106/881
Thanks, I am sure that this is the most practical solution, even if I
have to repeat some variant of it in ev
Tim Bray wrote, [on 4/9/2010 12:49 PM]:
>> Besides there is no
>> formal process (legally speaking) to be admitted as an atheist
>
> I'm glad he hasn't found out about the SECRET HANDSHAKE.
Tim, you realise you're going to have to explain this breach of
confidentiality at the next monthly cabal
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:46 PM, sankarshan <
sankarshan.mukhopadh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You can, apparently, go to a court and get an affidavit stating that
> you have no religion. The same or, a variant of it was once narrated
> to me by Ramakrishna.
Mahesh Shantaram did that many years ago
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
> Besides there is no
> formal process (legally speaking) to be admitted as an atheist
I'm glad he hasn't found out about the SECRET HANDSHAKE.
-T
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
> Apparently the catholic church has a form that you fill out, at least
> in Switzerland. Seeing how Hinduism has all the bases covered -
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_Hinduism how does one get rid
> of it?
You can, apparently,
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Danese Cooper wrote:
> Ah, but you're not "born" Catholic. You have to consciously choose it and
> be "confirmed" before you can celebrate sacrament. Hinduism has a lower bar
> to entry. My understanding is that pretty much everybody (even a future
> Catholic) is
Ah, but you're not "born" Catholic. You have to consciously choose it and
be "confirmed" before you can celebrate sacrament. Hinduism has a lower bar
to entry. My understanding is that pretty much everybody (even a future
Catholic) is "born" Hindu. I'm sure you'll all let me know if I've been
m
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Radhika, Y. wrote:
> of course. state sponsored religion and state sponsored persecution both had
> roles - where would Buddhism be without Ashoka's imperial control?
I agree. In the case of Buddhism, state sponsorship propagated the
religion far and wide (Maurya)
of course. state sponsored religion and state sponsored persecution both had
roles - where would Buddhism be without Ashoka's imperial control?
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Thaths wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Radhika, Y. wrote:
> > i don't think the answer to why Charuvakas died
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Radhika, Y. wrote:
> i don't think the answer to why Charuvakas died has been found yet.
> Their existence is only known because Shankaracharya took great pains to demolish their arguments.
ITYM Adi Shankara. Shankaracharya is a title.
Let us not discount cases wh
i don't think the answer to why Charuvakas died has been found yet.
Their existence is only known because Shankaracharya took great pains
to demolish their arguments.
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Deepa Mohan wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
>
>> Apparent
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
> Apparently the catholic church has a form that you fill out, at least
> in Switzerland. Seeing how Hinduism has all the bases covered -
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_Hinduism how does one get rid
> of it?
>
Would be interes
Apparently the catholic church has a form that you fill out, at least
in Switzerland. Seeing how Hinduism has all the bases covered -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_Hinduism how does one get rid
of it?
Cheeni
71 matches
Mail list logo
