--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <lengli...@...> wrote: > > Is some aspect of ayurvedic medicine religious because tradition says it was > presented to some vaidya by a god? > Umm, uh, well...huh?? Not sure where you are going with that one :)
(smiley face added to reduce f-word road rage, as we are probably friends) > And, as I pointed out, what the f- are you doing telling me what is > religiously > significant about any practice I choose to indulge in? > There are many things we don't self assign. One of them is whether or not what we are doing has religious significance. Because words have meanings (no pun intended, I swear). We don't get to self determine whether what we are doing is religious or not religious. I suppose you could make a strained case that chanting the names of Hindu gods was not religious. I could maybe somehow get my head around that, just a rest technique, I didn't know the meaning, etc. But a major determinate between philosophy and religion is the presence of soteriological content. Notions relating to salvation. Our community is undeniably shot through with that one. Not sure what is so shameful about being religious. Well actually it does have a troubled association, both cultural and political, so maybe I can see the politics involved.
