Bhagavad Gita 18 :32

Originally posted by nook7
Your last post was full of direct insults right after you said that you dont insult people, but maybe you do by accident. Which is it sparky?

l have not come out of left field. In your previous alter ego you did exactly what you are doing now - provide baseless comments and insult all who do not agree with your particular brand of belief. You promised the f ...[text shortened]... other line of work as this one doesnt agree with you - and it sure as hell doesnt agree with me.

I do not lie.

I cannot.

Originally posted by sumydid
From my personal perspective I see a lot of truth in this. Take the secular progressives in Western Culture. Generally speaking they are very friendly to the pagan people (new agers, wiccans, et al) while at the same time they are aggressive and hostile toward Jews, Christians, and biblical theology.

The Tibetan and Indian buddhists and Hare's(Hindus),that I have met personally here in Australia, (maybe 50 or 60 of them), have never shown any hostility towards any Western religon. Not even by hinting at it through their answers to questions (given to them after a short sermon, for example).

A true bhuddist/hindu is not hostile or aggresive towards any other cultures or religons, (except those cultures/sociteies/religons that are violent, even then their dialogue tries to lessen any aggresive or hostile tendencies).

A true buddhist/hindu embraces diversity in both other religons and cultures/societies.
(I'm sure there are exceptions, but the core truth of the vedas, as I unserstand them , is much similar to that of jesus, where he "turns the other cheek" when "slapped" and implores his followers to love their enemies to be true christians)

Originally posted by Dasa
I do not lie.

I cannot.

Truly mind boggling crazy

Originally posted by karoly aczel
The idea of detachment IS well portrayed through the story of...(whats his name dasa?)

edit: the main guy of the book , (other than Krsna)

The warrior prince Arjun ( also spelt as Arjuna ) is the one who has developed doubts about the propriety of the fratricidal war that is about to start between the Pandavs and the Kauravs,who are cousins. His has thrown down his bow and says to Lord Krishna that he just cannot think of fighting and killing his grandfather and cousins. The Geeta ( also spelt as Gita ) is a dialogue between them, which is the core of Hindu philosophy.

Originally posted by Dasa
I do not lie.

I cannot.

Pure GOLD.

Thumbs up.

Originally posted by Dasa
I do not lie.

I cannot.

Are you Kryten?

Originally posted by Conrau K
I really have to say I enjoyed it. As a Western reader, it does seem strange to have this metaphysical conversation right before an impending battle. I don't buy into the whole dogmatic side of it but what I did find enlightening was the idea of 'detachment' as something different from ascetism, that we don't have to withdraw from the world into a cloister ...[text shortened]... works so I cann't compare. I'll just say I do find it interesting and wish to read more.

The Geeta or the Bhagavat Geeta or the Bhagavad Gita or just Gita is the essence of Hindu philosophy. I wonder which translation you read. Several good translations are available. Usually the translations are accompanied by commentaries.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
The warrior prince Arjun ( also spelt as Arjuna ) is the one who has developed doubts about the propriety of the fratricidal war that is about to start between the Pandavs and the Kauravs,who are cousins. His has thrown down his bow and says to Lord Krishna that he just cannot think of fighting and killing his grandfather and cousins. The Geeta ( also spelt as Gita ) is a dialogue between them, which is the core of Hindu philosophy.

I'm living in Nakula street right now (in the house I built); before that we lived in Harjuno street; before that it was Kresno street (only about 1km away), which led on to Sadewa street and then Bima street; I often go along Puntadewa street to get to work. The Hindu 'layer' in Javanese culture goes well beyond street names though and is still having a moderating effect on the more recent and now predominant brand of Islam here.

Originally posted by FMF
I'm living in Nakula street right now (in the house I built); before that we lived in Harjuno street; before that it was Kresno street (only about 1km away), which led on to Sadewa street and then Bima street; I often go along Puntadewa street to get to work. The Hindu 'layer' in Javanese culture goes well beyond street names though and is still having a moderating effect on the more recent and now predominant brand of Islam here.

Yes indeed. The entire south east Asia was at one time greatly influenced by Indian culture, with the Hindu component predominating.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
The warrior prince Arjun ( also spelt as Arjuna ) is the one who has developed doubts about the propriety of the fratricidal war that is about to start between the Pandavs and the Kauravs,who are cousins. His has thrown down his bow and says to Lord Krishna that he just cannot think of fighting and killing his grandfather and cousins. The Geeta ( also spelt as Gita ) is a dialogue between them, which is the core of Hindu philosophy.

So other than this major lesson of detachment, what other major lesson(s) are contained in the Geeta? (other than Krsna is Lord,etc.)

Originally posted by karoly aczel
So other than this major lesson of detachment, what other major lesson(s) are contained in the Geeta? (other than Krsna is Lord,etc.)

The Lord says that there are 4 ways to reach/realize him/her/it. One is by Devotion.One devotes himself/herself to God by building some relationship with him such as deeming the Lord to be a brother or father or mother or friend or confidant or lover.One yields himself/herself to God.He/she lives life as if living it for God.The second one is by Karma or by Action.One does one's duty selflessly,without worrying about the fruits of the work, as if one is working for God.The work may be good or in the eyes of the world bad, it does not matter The third way is by practice of Yoga.Yoga is disciplining first the body and then mind by certain purification s of the body and mind and then practicing meditation.The fourth is by study of the scriptures and thinking over them till God is known. God says that no mature person thinks of death as the end. All beings with bodies have to cast off their old bodies and assume new ones. If they desire to break off this chain of life and death, in which all beings are manipulated to go through life, they must follow one of the four ways given above or a mix of the four ways.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
The Lord says that there are 4 ways to reach/realize him/her/it. One is by Devotion.One devotes himself/herself to God by building some relationship with him such as deeming the Lord to be a brother or father or mother or friend or confidant or lover.One yields himself/herself to God.He/she lives life as if living it for God.The second one is by Karma or ...[text shortened]... o go through life, they must follow one of the four ways given above or a mix of the four ways.

During WWII and for a time after, the common understanding of the Eastern religions ("Oriental" was the word, at the time) was that they didn't value human life. This was propaganda, generated to explain the Japanese kamikaze attacks and to justify ruthlessness in response, including the use of the A-bomb based on the idea that the Japanese, soldier and civilian alike, would never surrender to conventional force. Little distinction was made between the various religious traditions beyond the fact that they weren't Christian. I believe the British had the same kind of propaganda about Hinduism. The same beliefs were held concerning the Vietnamese in the 60's and 70's.

I don't want to overstate this criticism. The way of realizing God by doing one's duty even if it may be in the eyes of the world bad, is to some of us, a troubling reminder of those days. Desiring to break off the chain of life and death may seem to the Western mind, to be a sign of disrespect for human life, or even a desire for annihilation. I just want to say that there are some of us who recall the days when such beliefs about the religions of Asia were commonly held -- and vestiges of these beliefs, even in those of us who 'know better,' might be part of the resistance that is seen.

Originally posted by JS357
During WWII and for a time after, the common understanding of the Eastern religions ("Oriental" was the word, at the time) was that they didn't value human life. This was propaganda, generated to explain the Japanese kamikaze attacks and to justify ruthlessness in response, including the use of the A-bomb based on the idea that the Japanese, soldier and civili ...[text shortened]... , even in those of us who 'know better,' might be part of the resistance that is seen.

The way of realizing God by doing one's duty even if it may be in the eyes of the world bad, is to some of us, a troubling reminder of those days.

But Christians hold this precept too. Jesus does not promise universal popularity for good works; a Christian disiple, rather, can expect persecution. I certainly cannot recall Jesus saying that a duty can be neglected if the rest of the world disapproves.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b] The way of realizing God by doing one's duty even if it may be in the eyes of the world bad, is to some of us, a troubling reminder of those days.

But Christians hold this precept too. Jesus does not promise universal popularity for good works; a Christian disiple, rather, can expect persecution. I certainly cannot recall Jesus saying that a duty can be neglected if the rest of the world disapproves.[/b]

That's true, but Western colonialism of the East (GB in India, France in Indochina, USA in the Philippines, etc.) was seen by the majority in the West as morally justified, and was seen by the East as something to be resisted on moral grounds. Hence, Gandhi. Hence Pearl Harbor. This is the background, IMO, of a basic problem for Eastern religions in the West, and my point concerned that.

Originally posted by sumydid
From my personal perspective I see a lot of truth in this. Take the secular progressives in Western Culture. Generally speaking they are very friendly to the pagan people (new agers, wiccans, et al) while at the same time they are aggressive and hostile toward Jews, Christians, and biblical theology.

You mean they don't persecute pagan's and don't let majority religions do it either...