Guest guest Posted November 27, 1998 Report Share Posted November 27, 1998 > > Why condemn the word, "Hindu"? > > Why be ashamed of that. > > No need to do so. > Just to be considered that "Hindu" sounds sectarian, and IMHO for > practical reasons ISKCON devotees do not basically identify as Hindus > because Krsna consciousness was meant equally for Christians, Moslems ... > everyone. Wherever you are, just add Krsna consciousness. Avoid > sectarianism. "Vaisnava" is preferred, since it means 'the one who > [follows the instruction of \ worships \ etc.] Visnu', which is a more > universal name. > > Otherwise, "Hindu" is OK. Whatever it means, it is just another material > label we can use as we wish. No problem with that :-) > > Miodrag Thakura Bhaktivinoda uses the term 'Vedaanuga' in Chaitanya Sikshamrita. Prabhupada also refers often to 'followers of the Vedas' or Vedic civilization and the like. This is not just a material label but one that identifies those who are practicing (at least) VAD; they are obviously factually superior to those who do not follow the Veda at all which is also mentioned by Prabhupada and BVT. Unfortunately many modern Indians are giving up the practice of following Vedas and so their vedaanugatva is dubious, to say the least, if not pretentious. yhs vgd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.