Originally posted by FMF You are misusing the words "lie" and "liar" when you apply it to people who either simply have different beliefs from yours or who propagate something that is mistaken because they "just don't know any better" [i.e. not on purpose]. You call people "liars" a lot - seemingly every day, sometimes numerous times in the same day - so you ought to use the word correctly. Just saying.
You still misunderstand me. I was referring to Dasa calling people dishonest
because they do not agree with him. I do not call people liars everyday as
you state. I only call them liars when I believe they are being untruthful.
Originally posted by RJHinds You still misunderstand me. I was referring to Dasa calling people dishonest
because they do not agree with him.
No misunderstanding. You said to Dasa: "You tell so many lies, but I believe you just don't know any better. This is a misuse of the word "lies". It seems you accuse people of telling "lies" so often and so thoughtlessly that you can't even recall when you did it on the previous page of a thread.
Originally posted by FMF As I said, you call people "liars" a lot - seemingly every day, sometimes numerous times in the same day.
FMF and RJHinds - please take your playground tantrums elsewhere. I am sick to the back teeth of the number of spirituality threads which end up as petty squabbles beween you two. This is / was a serious thread. Contribute to the thread, which may I remind you is God , or get out!!!
Originally posted by Pianoman1 FMF and RJHinds - please take your playground tantrums elsewhere. I am sick to the back teeth of the number of spirituality threads which end up as petty squabbles beween you two. This is / was a serious thread. Contribute to the thread, which may I remind you is [b] God , or get out!!![/b]
Originally posted by Pianoman1 I'm afraid the Vedantic religion is not excused. Religion, as ever, is the poison in India's blood.
What is there to repect in the crimes around the world being committed daily in religion's dreaded name? [b]How well, with what fatal results, religion erects totems, and how willing we are to kill for them! . And when we've done it often enough, the ...[text shortened]... ween religious groups) has happened in God's name.
The problem's name is God.[/b]
I hasten to protest. India has survived, in spite of the onslaught of invaders of all kinds and of all types of religious/non religious inclinations for the last 2500 years ( starting from Alexander the Great's attack on the Punjab ) only because of the pervading philosophy and culture of its religion, namely Hinduism. There is no such thing as Vedantic Religion. It may at best be called Sanatan Dharma, the earlier version of Hinduism.
I may state here that there were no millions of deaths at the time of partition of India. Quite a few died possibly as high as one hundred thousand all over India but not in millions.
Originally posted by Pianoman1 FMF and RJHinds - please take your playground tantrums elsewhere. I am sick to the back teeth of the number of spirituality threads which end up as petty squabbles beween you two. This is / was a serious thread. Contribute to the thread, which may I remind you is [b] God , or get out!!![/b]
Alert the mods if you are concerned about it. I thought your OP was just tongue in cheek, as the quote has been raised and debated here to death more times than I can remember over the four years you have been here. Most of the posts have been off topic so far, and RJHinds calling people liars happened several posts ago and drew no comment from you. Anyway, if you think you have a case, just alert the mods, because your force of personality isn't going to have any effect.
Originally posted by FMF Alert the mods if you are concerned about it. I thought your OP was just tongue in cheek, as the quote has been raised and debated here to death more times than I can remember over the four years you have been here. Most of the posts have been off topic so far, and RJHinds calling people liars happened several posts ago and drew no comment from you. Anyway, if y ...[text shortened]... a case, just alert the mods, because your force of personality isn't going to have any effect.
Originally posted by JS357 There is nothing to keep the ideas from being shared.
I submit an extract from an Upanishad about how the Ultimate Reality or the Truth or God is attempted to be described.
Taittiriya Upanishad, III.iii.1
It is THAT from which all beings and entities are brought into existence, and having been brought into existence, because of which they exist, and into which on the ceasing of existence, they merge, THAT is Brahman.
Brahman is one of the names of God, that is commonly used in the Vedas and the Vedanta.
Originally posted by rvsakhadeo I submit an extract from an Upanishad about how the Ultimate Reality or the Truth or God is attempted to be described.
Taittiriya Upanishad, III.iii.1
It is THAT from which all beings and entities are brought into existence, and having been brought into existence, because of which they exist, and into which on the ceasing of existence, they merge, THA ...[text shortened]... rahman.
Brahman is one of the names of God, that is commonly used in the Vedas and the Vedanta.
I sometimes wonder why there is such conflict over the idea of God. Maybe there is something wrong with the thought that the idea of God can be truly shared. Sometimes I think that if we dig deep enough into the God-ideas of any two people we will find relative heresy -- a point on which they differ fundamentally. Of course now Black Beetle has me thinking about how the Epiontic Principle handles this.
Will it consider each idea of God to be a reality? Do they collapse -- merge -- into Brahman upon the ceasing of (this) existence? Are the differences illusions? What words fit best? Maybe BB will see this and chime in.
Originally posted by JS357 I sometimes wonder why there is such conflict over the idea of God. Maybe there is something wrong with the thought that the idea of God can be truly shared. Sometimes I think that if we dig deep enough into the God-ideas of any two people we will find relative heresy -- a point on which they differ fundamentally. Of course now Black Beetle has me thinking abo ...[text shortened]... stence? Are the differences illusions? What words fit best? Maybe BB will see this and chime in.
I submit one more extract from the Taittiriya Upanishad II.iv.1 :- Yato Vacho Nivartante Aprapya Manasa Sah. This means that the faculty of Speech and the
Mind retreat from ( the concept of God ) knowing it to be unobtainable/ unreachable.
Or the Ashtavakra Samhita (12.7 ) Achintyam chityamanopi chintarupam bhajatyasau. Meaning " When you think of the unthinkable, you betake yourself only to a form of thought. " We just get a piece of thought. The unthinkable can never be caught in our net of thought.
I am using the book " The message of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad by Swami Ranganathananda ISBN 81-7505-267-8. the subtitle of the book is An Exposition of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad in the light of Modern Thought & Modern Needs.
As I have said in a previous post in this thread| religion erects totems for which we are willing to die. I suppose I started this thread rather naughtily expecting all hell to break loose; people of different beliefs firing from the hip, and spraying bullets of dogma and bigotry in all directions.
Originally posted by FMF No misunderstanding. You said to Dasa: [b]"You tell so many lies, but I believe you just don't know any better. This is a misuse of the word "lies". It seems you accuse people of telling "lies" so often and so thoughtlessly that you can't even recall when you did it on the previous page of a thread.[/b]
The fact that Dasa thinks he is telling the truth does not turn the lies he tells into
the truth. It only means that he is not intentionally lying like some others do.
God
15 Apr '12 07:10
Back to Top