Namaste members,

This is a light-hearted thread for canteen. For sometime I have been posting in another forum (HDF's competitor ). Not that I do not wish to post in HDF, just that I am not a scholar enough to post in HDF!

In my observation, native Indian Hindus and adoptees both operate with "pre-defined" notions towards each other. A long time ago, I did address this, but that time, I chose (unfortunately) a wrong terminology, blame my ignorance, and thus ended up conveying a meaning that was the opposite of what I intended to say.

We all know "profiling". It means, our unconscious and conscious mind, out of acquiring notions mostly from hearsay, formulating a certain "idea" on how people of a different gender/race/religion would be!

I say / declare hereby that both native Indian Hindus as well as adoptees of Hinduism from all over the world are kinda hostile towards each other on account of 'profiling'.

For example, native Indian Hindus 'assume' that other adoptees of Hinduism always have much more to learn of Hinduism.

Whereas, adoptees of Hinduism of non-Indian origin 'presume' Indian Hindus act with a high-handed know-it-all-attitude!

In my observation, BOTH the above notions are wrong! In a forum as this, we are all here for knowledge sharing. There is absolutely no place for emotions. When I say I know something more about a certain upanishad, for instance, and able to 'explain' with example or quote, it means I really do know something more about it, is it not? Where from the notion of 'knowing-it-all' comes in this?! If I say I know more, and do not produce an evidence, only then it implies I act high-handed. If I produce 'evidence' of some sort, then it becomes the duty to consider that, is it not?

Many adoptees, in my belief, are given to considering native Indian Hindus 'high handed' on the above account, I feel.

Or am I 'profiling' on my behalf?

Thanks.