[net.religion] Tax Relief for Churches--ARRRGHH

slb@drutx.UUCP (Sue Brezden) (10/22/85)

I was flaming the anti-witchcraft bill, and said, tongue firmly in cheek:
>>Then how about Tibetan Buddhism and Hinduism--after all they have all those 
>>dieties with skulls and such, obviously Satanist.  (:-)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I don't know about Tibetan Buddhism, 

I do.  You really should look at some Tankas some time.

>but in all my exposure to
>Hinduism (the real Hinduism, not some junk like Hare Krishna, Rajneesh
>or some other faith-- I hope you know the difference) 
 
I do indeed.  And I know that these groups you name are not representative
of Hinduism.  However, I don't think they should be maligned.  They are
looking for truth in their own way, and are considerably less inclined
to violate other's rights than many fundamentalist Christian groups.

>I have *NOT* seen
>any diety with "skulls and such". If you don't understand what the diety
>looks like or what it is supposed to look like, then I urge you to not
>come to some arbitrary (and uninformed) conclusions.

I have seen such a diety.  As I type this, I am looking at a photo of 
the image of Kali in her Dakshineswar temple in Calcutta.  The description 
of the image is an accurate one if you look at the photo and says:

     "The image of Kali at Dakshineswar is small; less
      than 3 feet in height...(description of materials and
      dress)...She also wears a girdle of severed arms and
      a necklace of skulls, all carved out of marble..."

Kali is usually depicted with a necklace of skulls or severed heads.  Lord 
Shiva is occasionally shown with such a necklace also.  In the Sarvalinga Stava,
one prayer to Lord Shiva, is the phrase: "Thy garland is strung of skulls..."  
This is not so universal as in Kali's case--the picture on my altar shows
Lord Shiva wearing snakes instead, the more common portrayal.  (Which, by the 
way, would probably upset Christians more than the skulls!)

>Upset enough about the act passed in the Senate, and even more so
>by certain uninformed, ludicrous remarks.
>				Sameer Nadkarni

You really should flame your enemies, not your friends.  I am on your
side.  I hope that I am not uninformed or ludicrous.  But if I am, I would 
like to learn not to be.  Perhaps you can help to inform me.  If you want to
continue this discussion, though, we should change the subject line and
move it out of net.flame and net.politics--since it has strayed from the
original subject matter (the act of congress against witchcraft.)
-- 

                                     Sue Brezden
                                     ihnp4!drutx!slb

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I march to the beat of a different drummer, whose identity,
   location, and musical ability are as yet unknown.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~