Religion Thread - 5

Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

S.Valkan wrote:My take on it is (1), albeit in the form of quiet contemplation of the mind.

The process is succinctly described in the scriptures as Yukti (logic) and Anubhuti (intuitive grasping).
Thanks, Valkan ... the reason I asked is to make sure that the human element is retained in the treatment ...

naively, I can state that this "realization" was achieved by consensus among the thinkers/debaters ...

hence, it is in stark contrast to the concept of a "prophet" who had a privileged spot among peers ...

whwen comparing religions, I believe that this difference is as important as the difference between immanence and transcendence or between duality and non-duality ...

what about the role of Buddha, Mahavir et al? ... they appear similar to Shankaracharya, as distinct to the ancient knowledge which is timeless and hence can not possibly be ascribed to one Person ...
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

This is all about dry Vedanta , What about blissful Bhakti, How does Bhakti fit in with Vedantic GYANA ? Are both paths valid and reach at same destination?
RajGuru
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 15 Sep 2004 11:41
Location: South of Musi, Deccan Plateau

Post by RajGuru »

That is the most advanced post in BRF in any thread I have seen in 3 years! Honestly I did not understand it in first read but I hope I may after few times. :)
This is the quality of BRF
Hats off!
S.Valkan
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 15 Mar 2006 01:29

Post by S.Valkan »

Alok_N wrote:what about the role of Buddha, Mahavir et al?
It is a conjecture, but it also appears that they followed the same model,- contemplation using logic and intuitive grasping.

Overall, however, their emphasis was more on ending the mental suffering of their fellow beings, rather than delve into the absolute reality of all there is.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Prem wrote:This is all about dry Vedanta , What about blissful Bhakti, How does Bhakti fit in with Vedantic GYANA ? Are both paths valid and reach at same destination?
Prem boss,

you have added attributes like "dry" and "blissful", so in fact you have already made the distinction ... I don't want to preempt the answer from Valkan, but just wanted to caution that assuming you ask the question in all seriousness, please be prepared to debate the answer which initially may not be to your liking ... :wink:
S.Valkan
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 15 Mar 2006 01:29

Post by S.Valkan »

Alok_N wrote:I don't want to preempt the answer from Valkan, but just wanted to caution that assuming you ask the question in all seriousness, please be prepared to debate the answer which initially may not be to your liking ... :wink:
Please do the honours, Alok-ji.

I think you can do a wonderful job on this one. :wink:
alok_m
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 23 Apr 2006 19:27

Post by alok_m »

Thank you Valkan... I would never have obtained this much gyan in such short time elsewhere...
SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5784
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Post by SBajwa »

Satyamev Jayate = Truth Always Wins

Sat Sri Akal = Supreme Truth is the Akal (omnipresent, never ending/beginning) that is in you.

Namaste = The True god in me Salutes the True God in you.

Only kafirs can discuss these concepts, believers are not allowed.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

Alok_N wrote:
Prem wrote:This is all about dry Vedanta , What about blissful Bhakti, How does Bhakti fit in with Vedantic GYANA ? Are both paths valid and reach at same destination?
Prem boss,

you have added attributes like "dry" and "blissful", so in fact you have already made the distinction ... I don't want to preempt the answer from Valkan, but just wanted to caution that assuming you ask the question in all seriousness, please be prepared to debate the answer which initially may not be to your liking ... :wink:
ALok Sir,
I have asked the question in all sincerity and the attributes are mentioned for particular reason . As a humble seeker, with both hand folded , i understand that attributes of the Attributeless are nothing but names and forms onlee. 8)
So please let the good news flow from all directions.
Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by Calvin »

As I said earlier Calvin, you have an unconcious bias against anything non-xtian.
Repeating something does not make it true. However, if you had said that "you have a CONSCIOUS bias against anything publically religious" you might have been closer to the truth.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Prem,

uh-oh ... I am in the hot seat and what I say may be faulty ... let me try and put it as an example ...

Let's say Kumar has to explain Godel's theorem to 3 different people:

1. person A gets it after some reading and serious thought

2. person B struggles for a bit ... Kumar says, "look, don't worry about the proof, focus on the essence of the theorem which is very powerful"

3. person C says, "me head hurts" ... Kumar says, "well, why don't you just memorize the statement of the theorem"

a true Bhakt in the Mirabai tradition is person B ... both person A and B realize the same truth ...

person C has effectively made a statue of Godel and is worshipping it ... however, all 3 find peace which was missing in the ignorance of the theorem ...
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

btw, following up on Valkan's exposition, I just wanted to return to what I was posting earlier ...

modern physics has quickly reached the realization that the most important problem is the vacuum ... it is what permeates everything and by itself it is constant ... even space-time are created out of nothing ...

hence, Physics and Maya are similar concepts ...

the absolute vacuum has 2 out of 3 properties of Sat Chit Anant ... physics will make a paradigm change when Chit is included ... Heisenberg made the first move in this direction ... :)
Abhijit
BRFite
Posts: 530
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Bay Area - US

Post by Abhijit »

Alok_N boss kudos to you and to your alma mater too :)
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

Alok_N wrote:Prem,

uh-oh ... I am in the hot seat and what I say may be faulty ... let me try and put it as an example ...

Let's say Kumar has to explain Godel's theorem to 3 different people:

1. person A gets it after some reading and serious thought

2. person B struggles for a bit ... Kumar says, "look, don't worry about the proof, focus on the essence of the theorem which is very powerful"

3. person C says, "me head hurts" ... Kumar says, "well, why don't you just memorize the statement of the theorem"

a true Bhakt in the Mirabai tradition is person B ... both person A and B realize the same truth ...

person C has effectively made a statue of Godel and is worshipping it ... however, all 3 find peace which was missing in the ignorance of the theorem ...
SO Person C become Believer ?
pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Post by pradeepe »

Heartfelt thanks for the great discussion especially to Valkan.

link
We often speak of religion or philosophy as a search for Truth. But only in India’s philosophy of Advaita Vedanta has the concept of "truth" been so meticulously and successfully dissected. According to Advaita, for something to be considered true in the ultimate sense, it must be true not just at one given moment, but always be true—true in all three periods of time: the past, present and future. In fact, Advaita goes one step further. It says if something does not exist in all three periods of time that it does not truly exist, it is not ultimately real. Thus, truth, existence and reality are one and the same. That reality, Vedanta says, is what we call God.
There is something about the way Valkan went about building up the discourse, that makes one feel a slight tremor reading the above. Dont know what it is, but definitely a high.... :).
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

Alok_N wrote:btw, following up on Valkan's exposition, I just wanted to return to what I was posting earlier ...

modern physics has quickly reached the realization that the most important problem is the vacuum ... it is what permeates everything and by itself it is constant ... even space-time are created out of nothing ...

hence, Physics and Maya are similar concepts ...

the absolute vacuum has 2 out of 3 properties of Sat Chit Anant ... physics will make a paradigm change when Chit is included ... Heisenberg made the first move in this direction ... :)
Then Who is the observer, witnessing these properties?
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by TSJones »


even space-time are created out of nothing ...


If I could access all the energy that is contained in say..... a quart jar size of space-time vacuum, I could boil the entire Pacific Ocean off in just a few minutes. The trick is getting the energy. What I could do is lower the temperature of the space-time vacuum below absolute zero. That should do the trick. :idea: :D Person C? Where is my hammer and chisel? I wanna make a statue!
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59847
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

Pradeepe, I felt is was reading the upanishad dialogue of Nachiketa. Glad to know BR has such thinkers.

Alok, Glad you didn't imbibe the DIE values fro your alma mater! Kudos.

BTW I am going to ask you on another matter up your alley.

I want you to look into and see if there are any deep disconnects between Physics and Hinduism.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

ramana,

the disconnect lies in dualism ... physics, by construct, is dualist in that it has to separate the "system" from the "observer" ... in essence, physics is a science of "observables", as enshrined in quantum mechanics ...

another dualism lies in the nature of space-time versus energy dynamics ... the fabric of space-time acts like a "stage" and the particles that play on it are "actors" ... the energy of the particles distorts space-time (hence, creating an effect we call gravity) ... however, space-time does not itself possess energy ... in addition, space time is a classical (not quantum) system ...

the first dualism is fundamental ... the second dualism is a technical problem, so I would not call it a disconnect ...

now, as to the first dualism, the first advance in tackling it was made by Heisenberg in his uncertainty principle, which postulates that some pairs of variables are connected in such a way that the sequence of observations matter ... for example, here is what it says:

if I rotate a quantum object along x-axis, then along y-axis, and then follow it with reverse rotations in y-axis and x-axis, I will not return the system to where I started ...

this is outright weird ... this is legislated ingorance ... attempts to explain this with "hidden variables" roughly say this: ... there were other things that you disturbed in the above operation but failed to restore them because you didn't know about them (these "other" things are hidden variables) ... your failure to return the system to its original orientation is because you were ignorant of what else oyu were disturbing ...

an interesting take on hidden variables comes from Bell's theorem that if such hidden variables exist they have to be tachyonic, i.e., violate causality ... literally tachyonic refers to "faster than speed of light" and the violation of causality is derived from Einstenian relativity ...

what is the point of this long winded stuff? ...

basically, causality and locality are the same thing ... they prevent "action at a distance" by separating two points via the speed of light ...

this is at the core of the dualism ... in essence, duality is a necesary concept because the speed of light is finite ...

a new paradigm is needed in physics ... not because there is disconnect with Sat Chit Anant but because there are new phenomena in the universe that we do not understand ... these could very well be the hidden variables we need ...

we need a new Einsteim ... "me head hurts" when I pursue this for too long ... :)
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Prem wrote: Then Who is the observer, witnessing these properties?
You are ...

in physics terms you are doing it by construction ...

in Advaita terms you are doing it due to ignorance ...

removal of this ignorance, i.e., identifying with the I rather than the Satyan Jnanam Anantam, relieves one of mental suffering ... this state of Anand/Bliss is just one step away, albeit, a very large step ...

[I am tempted to coin SJA acronym because it is too much to type everytime ... will that be crass to reduce God to an acronym? ... :shock: ]
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

Alok_N wrote:Prem,

uh-oh ... I am in the hot seat and what I say may be faulty ... let me try and put it as an example ...

Let's say Kumar has to explain Godel's theorem to 3 different people:

1. person A gets it after some reading and serious thought

2. person B struggles for a bit ... Kumar says, "look, don't worry about the proof, focus on the essence of the theorem which is very powerful"

3. person C says, "me head hurts" ... Kumar says, "well, why don't you just memorize the statement of the theorem"

a true Bhakt in the Mirabai tradition is person B ... both person A and B realize the same truth ...

person C has effectively made a statue of Godel and is worshipping it ... however, all 3 find peace which was missing in the ignorance of the theorem ...
This is essentially the "C-Theory" .. logically, we have more C > B > A. (Actually we have D more than C :twisted: ).

I am sorry.. me thinks if theories are not implemented for Cs, then you get religions that starts with C, and a whole social (culture) that starts with C, since C is abundant.

What can we do, that we can move all Cs to As? If we can find that answer then, we can bring about a social revolution in India. Of course, we should do this in a subtle manner., since the Constitution of India is written mostly to support "C-Theory" (persisted).

varna.. kya karenge?
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

Alok_N wrote:
Prem wrote: Then Who is the observer, witnessing these properties?
You are ...

in physics terms you are doing it by construction ...

in Advaita terms you are doing it due to ignorance ...

removal of this ignorance, i.e., identifying with the I rather than the Satyan Jnanam Anantam, relieves one of mental suffering ... this state of Anand/Bliss is just one step away, albeit, a very large step ...

[I am tempted to coin SJA acronym because it is too much to type everytime ... will that be crass to reduce God to an acronym? ... :shock: ]
ALok Ji,

So observer has the Chitta to observe rest if the 2 elements.

What constitues of "I" in this observer . I am under the impression that Atma which is Identical to Supreme reality is the real "I" in the observer and a Witness or Sakshi.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Prem,

sorry for creating confusion by typing Sat Chit Anant instead of SJA ... Chit and Jnana both refer to awareness ...

SCA is easier to type than SJA ... then there is the combined and distorted form of SCA as Sachidanand ...
Last edited by Alok_N on 28 Mar 2007 04:14, edited 1 time in total.
Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Post by Pulikeshi »

S.Valkan,

Great post. I have two questions that will help my understanding:

1. Is Awareness the same as knowledge? In "Satyam Jnanam Anantam" Is Jnanam awareness or knowledge?

2. How do we explain evolution, if we are just waves and the reality is water. Just forms that come into existance when the water moves? Or is there a pattern towards something more?

The second question is one that I have pondered a lot, but found no clear answer. On the rest of the explanation, I got to commend you on the profound, but simple explanation style you have. In my humble opinion, you should expound these ideas into a couple of short online-books: 1. To explain the core of Hindusim 2. Answer the questions posed by EJs from a Hindu point of view 3. Steps one can take to practice the explanations in book 1.

JMT
Last edited by Pulikeshi on 28 Mar 2007 05:03, edited 1 time in total.
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Post by vsudhir »

Valkan san,

(and also Alok sar) Awesome. Stupendous. My sincere thanks.

P.S.
Following admin suggestions, is anyone archiving the gyan-laden posts anywhere?
Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Post by Pulikeshi »

SaiK wrote: I am sorry.. me thinks if theories are not implemented for Cs, then you get religions that starts with C, and a whole social (culture) that starts with C, since C is abundant.
SaiK, right on! The C - stands for Consumers. The very same ones that are "herd" like, need instant gratification (salvation), and priveleges (wives, status, power). The person-C, whose head hurts, are the ones most interested in the message of other purveyors of "faith."

We "ivory tower" chaps on BRF will keep intellectually patting each other on our collective smart backs and tell ourselves how great our religion and its fundamental philosophical belief is, but in the end if we do not worry about how to sell such high fluting ideas to the consumer, the sheep will follow the shepard to the grass. In some ways, that is the way it ought to be, no competition, no innovation.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18571
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Post by Rakesh »

S.Valkan wrote:Not very hard, if you are willing to apply logic, rather than cling fast to faith blindly.
Thanks for the offer, but I will keep my faith in Jesus Christ :)
S.Valkan wrote:How can there be an extra-cosmic entity in the face of "ex nihilo nihil fit"? So, one part of the Christian Trinity is a product of fertile imagination, in terms of logic. I can't question about irrational belief.
Revelation 1:8 "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty."

But you put it most eloquently --> irrational belief ;)
S.Valkan wrote:Of course. Now, "God" being immanent as Shakti (the closest word to "power" or "energy") must be present in urine and excreta too.
That in my books is irrational belief. But I guess if you believe otherwise, then in your world it must be.
S.Valkan wrote:Now, you may think this is "disgusting".
No absolutely not. Your lessons on the bowel movements of living organisms was quite enlightning. Thank You :)
S.Valkan wrote:That's your belief. What some imaginary character says in a book we know NOTHING about in terms of its origin is immaterial in a logical discourse.
Even in the previous avatars of this thread, I stated that this is my belief and I am not forcing it anyone. Thank you for emphasizing my point.
S.Valkan wrote:Wonderful allegations!
:lol:
S.Valkan wrote:Well, let's revert that charge: does that Judeo-Christian "God" breathe ? If so, what did it breathe BEFORE "creation" ? :eek:
I don't know and it does not concern me. The Bible says that God was present since the beginning. I don't try to answer questions like what God breathed before creation, who created God and who God spoke to. But you obviously know all about God and his most intimate thoughts. Bravo!

Romans 11:33-36 "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen."
S.Valkan wrote:How can you THINK about a "formless" entity, leave alone RELATE to it? Mind you,- "out of sight, out of mind"! :lol: So, you can't form a relation with a "formless" entity.
All part of my irrational, out-of-sight, out-of-mind belief which all stems from the Bible :)
S.Valkan wrote:Some Christians - Catholics and Orthodox - use some form of Jesus in the womb of Mary to relate to "God" as the Son, or Jesus on the Cross as "God" the saviour, while the Protestants use a symbol ( the Crucifix) much towards the same goal.
Well the Catholics and the Orthodox are wrong in that belief. You are not supposed to make graven images of God, as per the Bible. Just because the Catholics and the Orthodox have been pracitising that for 2000+ odd years, that don't make it right.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

Prem wrote:
Alok_N wrote:Prem,

uh-oh ... I am in the hot seat and what I say may be faulty ... let me try and put it as an example ...

Let's say Kumar has to explain Godel's theorem to 3 different people:

1. person A gets it after some reading and serious thought

2. person B struggles for a bit ... Kumar says, "look, don't worry about the proof, focus on the essence of the theorem which is very powerful"

3. person C says, "me head hurts" ... Kumar says, "well, why don't you just memorize the statement of the theorem"


a true Bhakt in the Mirabai tradition is person B ... both person A and B realize the same truth ...

person C has effectively made a statue of Godel and is worshipping it ... however, all 3 find peace which was missing in the ignorance of the theorem ...
SO Person C become Believer ?
The person C has not been enlightened to Person B or A and hence is the most vulnerable to EJ predatory tactics.

India needs a mass movement to enlighten the large mass of person C to Person A/B which could reenergize the entire country.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18571
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Post by Rakesh »

rongsheng wrote:Rakesh, If I understand right, you main line of argument is that according to christianity all humans are sinners and it is okay for Christian god to kill humans who have sinned.
All humans are sinners - yes. God does not kill them. They are judged and are sent to hell to face eternal tormentation. To suggest killing would be ending their life. In hell (or in heaven) it is eternal. I'd suggest you read the following;

Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God
rongsheng wrote:Sorry, I do not buy that argument. IMHO, most humans, I suspect, will not buy that argument either.
No one is forcing you to believe anything.
rongsheng wrote:A "good" person, by most human standards, will not enter heaven in Christianity but a mass murderer who repents in jesus will enter heaven.
Yes. Because God does not judge man by human standards, but by His standards. There is a world of a difference.
rongsheng wrote:Suppose a infant has just been born today. By your/Christian logic that infant is a sinner. And it is okay for Christian god to murder the infant. I think only the most cruel god will do such a thing.
My God certainly is cruel :)
rongsheng wrote:Hitler will be in Christian heaven if he prayed to jesus minutes before he died. Christian god does not care about how one lives their life. The only thing he cares is whether the person prays to him or not.
By all accounts of Hitler's life on earth, Hitler is in hell. But let us assume your scenario (this is really stretching it!) is true - that he repented of his sins before he died - then yes. For that, you need to read Matthew 20:1–15 - the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. But I quote Mathew 20:15 to make a point - "Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?"
Last edited by Rakesh on 28 Mar 2007 05:57, edited 3 times in total.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

The vulnerable types are of the ‘D’ {duh/dumb-can’t memorize the theory} type, whose only objective is to get to ‘C’, so that he is part of the society, and is happy (peace). This is the type that is getting EJed.. While ‘C’ is under “Go Figure!â€
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

Alok_N wrote:ramana,

the disconnect lies in dualism ... physics, by construct, is dualist in that it has to separate the "system" from the "observer" ... in essence, physics is a science of "observables", as enshrined in quantum mechanics ...
Is this the reason dvaita philosophy rose in Hinduism with Madhavacharya.


Dvaita, also known as Bheda-vâda, Tattva-vâda, and Bimba-pratibimba-vâda, is the doctrine propounded by Ananda Tîrtha (1238-1317) that asserts that the difference between the individual soul or jîva, and the Creator, or Îshvara, is eternal and real. Actually, this is just one of the five differences that are so stated -- all five differences that constitute the universe are eternal.


http://www.dvaita.org/docs/faq.html
Last edited by svinayak on 28 Mar 2007 06:14, edited 2 times in total.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Kumar,

truly sorry about using your name in that example above ... it has been quoted way too many times ... now Acharya boss has done the honors with the large font as well ...

I just wanted to say that there is nothing against you in my post ... I thought it was cute, but on second thougts I could have used another example ... :oops:
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18571
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Post by Rakesh »

rongsheng wrote:If you didn't know this before, the story of flood is a rehash of older middle eastern stories of flood. Try Atrahasis, or Gilgamesh or Ziusudra to see the real story.
My real story is there in the Bible. That is all I need to believe.
rongsheng wrote:As I said in my previous post, the only thing christian god cares about is whether humans are praying to him or not.
As along as the praying involves repentence then what you said is true.
rongsheng wrote:Regarding, slavery you say it was a custom then. I say it was a bad custom.
Yes a very bad custom. And a God who allowed that must truly be bad. Perhaps you can ask God why He is being so bad? Perhaps you can also ask him if He can share His throne with you. You can surely give him some pointers about human nature, justice, love, compassion, etc. I am sure he would be enlightened and very interested to hear your views.
rongsheng wrote:There were a lot of other customs too. Was idolatry a custom back then? Didn't christian god talk about idolatry? christian god specifically talks about customs he does not like.
Please provide the verses so I can read what you are saying.
rongsheng wrote:Yes, Rape of virgin women is from Numbers.
Thank You. I need to do some more studying and cross referencing before I comment on this.
rongsheng wrote:For example, Virgin birth is a clear case of Matthew using mistranslated Greek Versions. In the new testament only Matthew and Luke say Mary was virgin when she had Jesus. Luke copied mostly from Mark and Matthew. Matthew was using a greek translation of old testament which had a incorrect translation.
Do you have any evidence to back any of your above claims?
rongsheng wrote:Here is the correct translation of original old testament verse Isaiah 7:14. Matthew was building up the case for Jesus as Immanuel and inserted virgin birth.


Isaiah 7:14 "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."

The above is from the KJV (King James Version).
rongsheng wrote:Psalms 137:9

Hosea 13:16
All acts of a very cruel God indeed ;)
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Calvin wrote: However, if you had said that "you have a CONSCIOUS bias against anything publically religious" you might have been closer to the truth.
Good. This is an excellent starting point for something I would like to say.

Simply put "Religion" is an alien word that is defined as follows in an online dictionary. I will ignore the idiocy (regarding idol wordhip) in the definition - except to comment on it later
The outward act or form by which men indicate their
recognition of the existence of a god or of gods having
power over their destiny, to whom obedience, service, and
honor are due; the feeling or expression of human love,
fear, or awe of some superhuman and overruling power,
whether by profession of belief, by observance of rites
and ceremonies, or by the conduct of life; a system of
faith and worship; a manifestation of piety; as, ethical
religions; monotheistic religions; natural religion;
revealed religion; the religion of the Jews; the religion
of idol worshipers.
This fits in very well with your attitude. Religion should not be discussed.

But Hindu dharma is not about religion per se - as Valkan's post on page 2 of this thread (and much other Hindu knowledge) shows.

Nevertheless whatever is known from the Hindu perspective has always been classified as "religion" placed in the back seat, ignored or even derided as undesirable. For Hindus in India this is a serious lacuna. Hindus live lives that involve modes of behavior NOT mandated by God, but by certain rules of conduct. These rules are not too far different from the Ten commandments or other rule-sets followed by humans.

They have no connection with "God". The conduct of a Hindu's life is not threatened by punishment or reward from God, but from logical thought and theory that does not involve God - incomprehensible as that may sound to a person (such as yourself) brought up on standard monotheistic belief.

It may put you to sleep and it is your right to sleep when you are sleepy - but you have no right to redefine it as "religious" without redefining the meaning of the word religion, and without staying awake long enough to try and learn why Hindus have their knickers in a twist in a world where your comfortable, monotheistic, Christianity biased world view is comforting, present almost everywhere, and keeps you awake.

The atmosphere in India is that welcoming - a fact that you may not acknowledge. It allows you that comfort and ability to sleep through Hindu discourse despite the fact of hundreds of millions of Hindus living Hindu lives under a voluntarily accepted and secular umbrella.

I am saying for the third time that a Hindu viewpoint is absent from what is "generally known" in this world and two examples of that are the dictionary reference to "the religion of idol worshipper" and your allergy to hearing about what you have been taught to consider as "religion."

Since Hindu thought has been generally classified as religion and it has been opposed and sidelined as "religious thought" to the extent that people such as yourself can dismiss it from your mind as boring and undersirable, - it will be discussed under the religion thread.

That might change when there is more general agreement that Hindu thought has no specific battle with Christianity or Islam, but the reverse is true - i.e. that Christianity and Islam are both at war with Hindu thought because their core guidelines oppose anything that does not conform.

I see it as no business of yours to oppose anything that does not

a) Criticise you
b) Criticise your belief system
c) means something to a large number of Indians

Hindu dharma is all of the above.

If you or your belief system is being criticised - it is your right to defend your viewpoint. You will find none of that in Hindu thought - if you stayed awake long enough.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Post by Bade »

Freedom of speech is often ballyhooed in the context of religious freedom, but what about freedom of thought. From what this comparative discourse by various BRF members on religion has shown is that the latter than the former is the higher truth that need to be used to protect the larger good of any society, not just within India.

So can it be legislated for the greater good ? :wink:
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Acharya wrote:Is this the reason dvaita philosophy rose in Hinduism with Madhavacharya.

Dvaita, also known as Bheda-vâda, Tattva-vâda, and Bimba-pratibimba-vâda, is the doctrine propounded by Ananda Tîrtha (1238-1317) that asserts that the difference between the individual soul or jîva, and the Creator, or Îshvara, is eternal and real.
Acharya,

I will let Valkan gurudev address this ... on another forum, there was this Advaita vs Dvaita debate between Valkan and another member that lasted for months ...

it got pretty heavy duty and the rest of us were caught in the Sanskrit cross-fire ... :)

I like it when gurudev posts purely in English, and as he put it, "without taking recourse in scriptures" ... in that sense, I belong in category B/C above and very willing to do without the "proof" of scriptures ...

I see that Rakesh guru has his own bazooka loaded with scripture bombs ... :)

(just kidding ... no offence)
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

Acharya wrote:
Prem wrote: SO Person C become Believer ?
The person C has not been enlightened to Person B or A and hence is the most vulnerable to EJ predatory tactics.

India needs a mass movement to enlighten the large mass of person C to Person A/B which could reenergize the entire country.
Persons like C or D regardless of their progress still belong to the family of Snatan Dharma . A and B can do whatever they can for them to bring them at their level without any kind of violence and disturbance . We the follower of Dharma are duty bound to not let them fall prey to EJs ditry tactics. EJs are organized troops assaulting vulnurable individual Cs and Ds. There in lies their advantage and this is why SD need protection of law before EJs succeed in destroying our family structure deterimental for keeping the soul of our society , culture and Dharma intact.
EJs need to be kept at the periphery and never be allowed to gain the legitimacy or become mainstream while working toward eliminating the threat for good and any organization doing so should be supported.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

shiv wrote:Nevertheless whatever is known from the Hindu perspective has always been classified as "religion" placed in the back seat, ignored or even derided as undesirable.
this is very true at several levels ... I was earlier complaining that "soul" is a horrible translation for "atman" ...

the former, apparently, is a physical entity that travels from point A to B (i.e., earth to heaven or earth to hell) ... I may be wrong about this, so someone please correct me ...

the latter is a concept of the "I" as opposed to SJA ... this concept is borne out of Maya, which is ignorance, and hence can be removed ...

for that matter, translation of "Maya" as "illusion" is even worse ... grrr ...

I translate "Maya" as "physics" ... :)
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

oh well, quoting myself, to make a point ...
Alok_N wrote:this concept is borne out of Maya, which is ignorance, and hence can be removed ...

for that matter, translation of "Maya" as "illusion" is even worse ... grrr ...

I translate "Maya" as "physics" ... :)
a quick conclusion from the highlighted parts would be something like "physicists study ignorance" ...

this relates to my exchange with Johann ...

there is no dichotomy in studying ignorance in order to remove ignorance ...

this is what I meant by "pure" science ... other sciences are not "impure" ... it is just that they are building on their knowledge, while physics is constantly trying to undermine itself ...

if I were Deepak Chopra, or the dude who wrote "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", or Friztof Capra with the "Tao of Physics", I would pen a book entitled, "The Self Destructive Yoga of Physics" ...

btw, the Motorcycle book is pretty good ... it highlighted the angst over "quality" ... all you old farts, go read it again ... the protagonist in that story is essentially struggling with SJA ...
G Subramaniam
BRFite
Posts: 405
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 17:58

Isaiah used the word almah and not bethulah in Is. 7:14

Post by G Subramaniam »

According to : “Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Languageâ€
Locked