I like that Vishva's here

Originally posted by vishvahetu
You have already admitted to eating meat, and commented that you would continue because it has no affect on your spiritual grounding.

This comment has revealed that you have no spiritual insight, because animal killing and cruelty is something persons on the spiritual path do not partake of.

When persons begin their spiritual journey they understand ...[text shortened]... ritual matters that are beyond your scope to understand.....I would just be inviting conflict.

Why is it religiously ok to eat meat 10,000 years ago but not today? If what you say is true, there will be few people who would reincarnate upwards and most would repeat same ole same ole if I have it correct from you.

Another thing: Cells are living things, no? So a cell taken out of the body will live for some time. Doesn't that mean that cell also has a soul?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Why is it religiously ok to eat meat 10,000 years ago but not today? If what you say is true, there will be few people who would reincarnate upwards and most would repeat same ole same ole if I have it correct from you.

Another thing: Cells are living things, no? So a cell taken out of the body will live for some time. Doesn't that mean that cell also has a soul?

It has never been religiously ok to eat meat, but in the Vedas there is a concession for those that will eat meat no matter what.....and they are required to perform all soughts of rituals too purify the activity.

Concession is not the same as condone.

Persons who take advantage of this concession where not classified as elevated, but were classified as low class.

True there are not many persons returning back to Godhead especially in this age of Kali on this planet, but remember there are unlimited universes and unlimited planets, so if you had the greater perspective then there would be a greater number returning back to Godhead than imagined.

Seven billion humans in the scope of all the human life in existence throughout the entire material cosmos is very small, and on this planet most persons are just reborn as you say......but sooner than later this age of Kali will be over and the cycle shall begin again and the new age of Satya Yuga will commence and this will be accompanied by a strong spiritual resurgence, and then many shall come to the proper platform to return home.

If someone is living there present life in the spiritual way, but are not quiet ready to return home, they dont necessarily return to this earth but may take birth again in a better situation on another planet in another universe, where spiritual society is flourishing.

About your question on cells,.....well the answer evades me for the moment and I will have to do some referencing when I get the chance, to be clear on that situation.

Originally posted by vishvahetu
It has never been religiously ok to eat meat, but in the Vedas there is a concession for those that will eat meat no matter what.....and they are required to perform all soughts of rituals too purify the activity.

Concession is not the same as condone.

Persons who take advantage of this concession where not classified as elevated, but were classifie ...[text shortened]... ent and I will have to do some referencing when I get the chance, to be clear on that situation.

Well well well, something vishy doesn't know off the bat🙂

We have him thinking, something a lot of people here don't do for themselves.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well well well, something vishy doesn't know off the bat

Well he quite clearly cannot substantiate his claim that life exists in or on the Sun either. As is his way, he has taken to trying to insult the poser of a direct question even though the direct question concerns an assertion he has made. Perhaps the answer evades him for the moment and he will have to do some referencing when he gets the chance, to be clear on the situation?

Originally posted by FMF
Well he quite clearly cannot substantiate his claim that life exists in or on the Sun either. As is his way, he has taken to trying to insult the poser of a direct question even though the direct question concerns an assertion he has made. Perhaps the answer evades him for the moment and he will have to do some referencing when he gets the chance, to be clear on the situation?

While you support animal killing and dishonesty, you will remain unqualified to understand anything of a higher spiritual nature.....actually your having trouble understanding the basics of spiritual life, and this is because you are not truthful in your dealings with people.

The first requirement in the religious life, is to embrace truthfulness and not to reject it.

Originally posted by vishvahetu
While you support animal killing and dishonesty...

How can he support animal killing dishonestly? Are you saying he doesn't really support it but is deliberately pretending to?

If you try to consruct your sentences with words that actually mean what you intend to convey you may find it easier for people to understand you.

Originally posted by divegeester
How can he support animal killing dishonestly? Are you saying he doesn't really support it but is deliberately pretending to?

If you try to consruct your sentences with words that actually mean what you intend to convey you may find it easier for people to understand you.

A person supports animal cruelty dishonestly by falsely saying it not wrong.

No sane man can say it is not wrong with conviction, and can only say it dishonestly........I have been over this many times.

If someone wants to support animal cruelty and be honest, this is how they can do it.

They must say...... I support animal cruelty and I know it is wrong, but I cannot control my mind and senses, so I will continue to support it even though it is wrong.

This will allow them to continue supporting animal cruelty and make them honest at the same time....you cannot deny this.

If they keep saying it is not wrong, I will keep saying they are dishonest.

Now do you understand.

Originally posted by vishvahetu
A person supports animal cruelty dishonestly by falsely saying it not wrong.

No sane man can say it is not wrong with conviction, and can only say it dishonestly........I have been over this many times.

If someone wants to support animal cruelty and be honest, this is how they can do it.

They must say...... I support animal cruelty and I know it ...[text shortened]... ey keep saying it is not wrong, I will keep saying they are dishonest.

Now do you understand.

Now that we have established that we have a different spiritual take on the rights and wrongs of eating meat, we can move on to your explanation of how and what life there is on or in our Sun. Why not have a go, even if you'd prefer to see yourself as directing your comments at vegetarians?

Originally posted by FMF
Now that we have established that we have a different spiritual take on the rights and wrongs of eating meat, we can move on to your explanation of how and what life there is on or in our Sun. Why not have a go, even if you'd prefer to see yourself as directing your comments at vegetarians?

You do not have any spiritual take on the rights and wrongs of eating meat, because your choice to support animal cruelty, as against the choice to not support it, has classified you as anti spiritual.

Therefore your anti-spiritual views are not based on anything spiritual, but based on ignorance instead, and with this position you have put yourself in, you have disqualified yourself from understanding spirituality all together.

This is what happens when a person comes to spirituality topics, with only the agenda of debating in their mind....they disqualify themselves immediately.

Originally posted by vishvahetu
You do not have any spiritual take on the rights and wrongs of eating meat, because your choice to support animal cruelty, as against the choice to not support it, has classified you as anti spiritual.

You could not make your disagreement with me any clearer. We have established that. I even understand that you see my spirituality as "anti-spiritual" because it differs from yours. I accept your disagreement and I accept that you are being sincere. But now that we have agreed to disagree, please explain to me how there is life on the Sun. Do it using 'Reply' and not 'Reply & Quote' by all means.

Originally posted by vishvahetu
No sane man can say it is not wrong [to eat meat] with conviction, and can only say it dishonestly........I have been over this many times.

You are misusing the word "dishonestly", vishvahetu.

As for what you claim "No sane man can say", I will interpret your attempt to frame our disagreement in terms of mental health issues, as an indicator of your fervour and sincerity, rather than as an indicator of your intelligence, humanity and credibility.

Originally posted by FMF
Now that we have established that we have a different spiritual take on the rights and wrongs of eating meat, we can move on to your explanation of how and what life there is on or in our Sun. Why not have a go, even if you'd prefer to see yourself as directing your comments at vegetarians?

I'd prefer it if we could get him focused on the apology he owes me.

In light of comments on another thread started by vishva, and in light of his refusal to change his damaging ways, I think the title to this thread seems more and more ironic.

I have heard some intelligent posters point out to him time and time again his repugnance.

I still have compassion for the guy, but it seems foolish for me to support him any furthur than that.
I still wouldn't ban him though, my reasoning being twofold: 1. Its just a screen with words on it. It cant really hurt you. 2. The spirituality forum has always brought out the best and worst in people. Why not continue to try to make Vishva become more civil and keep him included, despite his misguidedness?

Just sayin my piece.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I still have compassion for the guy [...]

I still wouldn't ban him though, my reasoning being twofold: 1. Its just a screen with words on it. It cant really hurt you. 2. The spirituality forum has always brought out the best and worst in people. Why not continue to try to make Vishva become more civil and keep him included, despite his misguidedness?

I still have some compassion for him too. It manifests itself in me trying to get him to use words correctly so that he might start to be held in less derision and become a real community member.

I wouldn't ban him. Not at all.

It is just a screen, as you say, and it doesn't really hurt. I agree.

Perhaps the rather dramatic wheels falling off (and bouncing up and mashing spectators) day after day in the last week or two is some kind of bizarre step along the way to a New Civility.

I'm still ever so slightly curious about how he thinks there is life on the Sun

5% of me still thinks he is a brilliant satirist.

Originally posted by FMF
[b]I still wouldn't ban him though, my reasoning being twofold: 1. Its just a screen with words on it. It cant really hurt you. 2. The spirituality forum has always brought out the best and worst in people. Why not continue to try to make Vishva become more civil and keep him included, despite his misguidedness?

I still have some compassion for him too. ...[text shortened]... how he thinks there is life on the Sun

5% of me still thinks he is a brilliant satirist.[/b]

The only way you can sweep the error under the rug, is by denying your error.

This is like the child who has been caught scribbling on the wall, and even though they are standing there with the crayon in their hand, they say "It was not me".

You can believe in any falsity you like....... but as soon as you say the falsity is not falsity, you become dishonest like the child with the crayon.

You are not a theist, because a true theist does not subscribe to animal slaughter.......and at best you are a pseudo theist.