0

Can Shashi Tharoor's new book Why I Am a Hindu be used as a source to answer Who is considered Hindu?

Or will the answer be taken down?

EDIT:

An answer using this book as source is now live.

9
  • 1
    I would consider it as a valid source, since "Hindu" is more of an identity, than a religion. Even discounting this Qn, any works from famous philosophers (be it politicians of businessmen), should be considered valid; Because there is no degree for one to become a religious Guru. – iammilind Apr 30 '18 at 4:26
  • 1
    What if the author is a Christian or Muslim @iammilind? – sv. Apr 30 '18 at 4:28
  • 1
    In that case, most of the users won't agree. Rightly, because if a person identifies oneself with other religions, then it may not be suitable for being a "Hindu". Hence their quotes may not be allowed. What if their quotes are from Quran or Bible? Having said that, personally, I would like to see "Hinduism" on an open philosophy grounds. Anyone who don't identify themselves with particular other religion, should be eligible to be quoted. It's analogical to "Linux". Linux may less popular among domestic users, but it's existent everywhere. – iammilind Apr 30 '18 at 4:36
  • If the answer is touching political issues and about making sensitive comments, that may get deleted. I heard that Shashi Tharoor made some political arguments in the book. Otherwise, there would be no problem IMO. – Sarvabhouma Apr 30 '18 at 5:13
  • @iammilind If the quotes are from Quran or Bible, they will be deleted. No doubt in that. The answers should be from Hinduism point of view It need not to be of a Hindu author. Does it need to be? – Sarvabhouma Apr 30 '18 at 6:04
  • 1
    So Zakir Naik's works/commentary on Hinduism are allowed though the community may not like it? The person's faith is of no relevance? @Sarvabhouma – sv. Apr 30 '18 at 12:08
  • 2
    @sv. I expected this type of comment from one or the other. You yourself commented. Obviously not. Such works should not be allowed. The answer should also be respectful and correct also. Works from people who have a good reputation in the community (Hindu community I mean). I would not take example of Zakir Naik. You are naming a Muslim preacher. I am talking about Max Muller, Ralph Griffith when you are taking example of person's faith. You mistook as something else! – Sarvabhouma Apr 30 '18 at 12:50
  • "The answer should also be respectful and correct also." - respectful, agree. What does "correct" mean? I didn't mistake your intent I'm just continuing the conversation to see where the line is drawn. Muslim preacher cannot be an expert in Hindu scripture? @Sarvabhouma – sv. Apr 30 '18 at 12:56
  • 2
    I think it can be allowed as source on the site. But yet Sastric definition may be recommended over Political authors. – The Destroyer♦ May 4 '18 at 17:52
7

No.

  1. Shastra defines who is an aastika and why one must repose faith in god. Shastric input is the only benchmark.

  2. Shashi tharoor's work counts as personal opinion. In the context of the sociopolitical zeitgeist.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .