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, with their
religion becoming quite obvious in their given names, explicitly so in their
birth certificates (and even "caste certificates", those precious documents
that guarantee the holder a lifetime of reserved jobs and other privileges, to
make up for the disgusting discrimination shown to those castes in some parts
of India far more than in others).
I consider myself a Hindu, sort of. If only because the rest of my family is
Hindu. I still reserve the right to eat beef, smoke .. and generally behave
quite unlike a properly brought up Tamil Brahmin (with assorted other
categories and sub categories, even more important than "hindu" in the minds of
various people).
Token observance (turning up for some stated religious occasions etc) aside,
not a very typical Hindu or Tamil Brahmin at all (or possibly, the "new
typical"). I suspect the same is true of several other people around silk,
Udhay included, from similar cultural backgrounds.
Not very many people bother, or even want, to do a James Dean rebel without a
cause on this because you manage to cut yourself off from a rather large number
of friends and relatives, an entire support system that's available to you if
you explicitly cut the poonal (well, the thread, sacred, one, that Brahmin kids
get issued with on an occasion similar to their confirmation, bar mitzvah etc).
srs
