22 Jan 12
After you take away all the mumbo jumbo science talk............and present what the science people are teaching to our children in plain english - then this is what they are saying.....
There was an explosion a long time ago and nothing became something - and this something created a cosmos with gravity, universes, solar systems, suns, moons and a planet called earth which had its own sun to give life to all the people who would eventually live there - and the earth provided all those people with thousands of delicious healthy foods which just grew out of the dirt.
The atmosphere gave all these people fresh water from the sky and salty water for our oceans to preserve it - and millions of species of life to entertain man.
Some of those species gave us wool to keep warm - milk to give to feed our babies -and bullocks to work our fields.
The planet also gave us "ourselves" along with intelligence - so as to know how to capture all the resource in the ground to satisfy every desire man could have.
The planet gave man/species the ability to reproduce.
And all this by accident/random chance...............without cause/plan/intelligence -
This teaching from science is criminal and absurd and dishonest.............and the absolute height of child abuse.
There is nothing at all the science person can say to save his face from this disgrace.
And he gives himself a Phd for this nonsense.
A Phd in foolishness.
OH......*and the option to all this - is not Christian Creationism which is just as absurd as the science folly.
Vedic knowledge/teachings is the only option to explain life/origins.
Vedic teachings/knowledge/religion/spirituality are eternal and perfect.
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by Dasaoh right, we should believe the cosmos was created by a thousand-headed monstrosity.
After you take away all the mumbo jumbo science talk............and present what the science people are teaching to our children in plain english - then this is what they are saying.....
There was an explosion a long time ago and nothing became something - and this something created a cosmos with gravity, universes, solar systems, suns, moons and a planet ca ...[text shortened]... lain life/origins.
Vedic teachings/knowledge/religion/spirituality are eternal and perfect.
and this beast gave birth to the 4 classes of hindu society. -- one each from its mouths, eyes, thighs and feet.
or wait, there's another one...
first the world was nonexistent, then it came into existence, then it turned into an egg, then egg broke and the silver part became the earth and golden part became the sky. all the beings, sun, etc, were hatched from this egg.
precious.
but it gets better...
brhadaranyaka was lonely, so one day he creates a woman from his body, has sex with her and humans are born. but she became afraid of him and hid by turning into a cow. brhadaranyaka was not fooled, he turned himself into a bull and came onto her again, poor lass. and cattle were born.
she didn't like this one bit so she turned into a mare to hide from him. but brhadaranyaka was not fooled, he turned himself into a stallion and raped her again and the race of one-hoofed animals were born.
this repeats on and on to create all of the animals and insects.
lovely.
there are many more ridiculous and absurd things in the vedic mythos, but i seriously doubt i need to list any more of them.
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritFor your information, Brihadaranyak is the name of the Upanishad. It means the " the great forest upanishad ". The story you are ridiculing is about Brahma, the creator. The said Upanishad contains many exalting thoughts on God, Reality.
oh right, we should believe the cosmos was created by a thousand-headed monstrosity.
and this beast gave birth to the 4 classes of hindu society. -- one each from its mouths, eyes, thighs and feet.
or wait, there's another one...
first the world was nonexistent, then it came into existence, then it turned into an egg, then egg broke and the silver ...[text shortened]... and absurd things in the vedic mythos, but i seriously doubt i need to list any more of them.
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoWhat are your thoughts on dasa's comment:
For your information, Brihadaranyak is the name of the Upanishad. It means the " the great forest upanishad ". The story you are ridiculing is about Brahma, the creator. The said Upanishad contains many exalting thoughts on God, Reality.
Vedic knowledge/teachings is the only option to explain life/origins.
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by divegeesterThere are many paths which lead to realisation of the Ultimate Reality/ Truth / God. All paths are to be revered equally. At the most, one may say that this or that path is more direct or shorter and so on. Even the Vedas do not claim themselves to be THE only answer. There is a saying in the Vedas that " ekam sat viprah bahuda vadanti " meaning " Although only one It ( God ) exists, the learned people give different names to It."
What are your thoughts on dasa's comment:
[b]Vedic knowledge/teachings is the only option to explain life/origins.[/b]
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoIt's good to read that you disagree with him.
There are many paths which lead to realisation of the Ultimate Reality/ Truth / God. All paths are to be revered equally. At the most, one may say that this or that path is more direct or shorter and so on. Even the Vedas do not claim themselves to be THE only answer. There is a saying in the Vedas that " ekam sat viprah bahuda vadanti " meaning " Although only one It ( God ) exists, the learned people give different names to It."
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritMythology can be easily ridiculed and derided in the 21st century. So ? For your benefit, I quote here Fritjof Capra's words from his book " The Tao of Physics ". page 51, Flamingo edition, 1982. "Indian Mysticism, and Hinduism in particular, clothes its statements in the form of myths, using metaphors and symbols, poetic images,similes and allegories.Mythical language is much less restricted by logic and common sense.It is full of magic and of paradoxical situations, rich in suggestive images and never precise, and can thus convey the way in which mystics experience the reality much better than factual language.According to Ananda Coomaraswamy ' myth embodies the nearest approach to absolute truth that can be stated in words.'
oh right, we should believe the cosmos was created by a thousand-headed monstrosity.
and this beast gave birth to the 4 classes of hindu society. -- one each from its mouths, eyes, thighs and feet.
or wait, there's another one...
first the world was nonexistent, then it came into existence, then it turned into an egg, then egg broke and the silver ...[text shortened]... and absurd things in the vedic mythos, but i seriously doubt i need to list any more of them.
Originally posted by DasaIf you don't understand something; if you can't acknowledge that a large process can be explained in terms of numerous little interacting processes; if your mind is too small to acknowledge that the actual, real-life complexity of something is not bounded by your own puny potential to wrap your head round the details, and that the universe doesn't give a sh** whether you or anything else will ever fathom it or not; if you definitely, positively, no questions asked have to tell your wretched spawn something about how it all came to be...
After you take away all the mumbo jumbo science talk............and present what the science people are teaching to our children in plain english - then this is what they are saying.....
There was an explosion a long time ago and nothing became something - and this something created a cosmos with gravity, universes, solar systems, suns, moons and a planet ca lain life/origins.
Vedic teachings/knowledge/religion/spirituality are eternal and perfect.
pin it all on a f***ing sky-fairy instead 😞
Then go round and tell us we're child abusers of the worst kind because we don't do the same.
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoSounds plausible for a brief moment, as long as one does not think about it to much. But then, having considered its sheer sentimentality, one realizes there is absolutely no intellectual or spiritual reason to accept Ananda Coomaraswamy's assertion.
According to Ananda Coomaraswamy ' myth embodies the nearest approach to absolute truth that can be stated in words.'
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by FMFWhat Capra is asserting in this quote is that our words esp. logic is not a perfect tool to describe the Ultimate Reality / Truth / God. Mystics therefore tend to express what they have experienced about Reality or Truth or God in colourful language full of imagery etc. He has quoted Coomaraswamy who, in turn, has asserted that Myth may be closer to Ultimate Truth than logic. Something equivalent to saying that a picture is worth a thousand words.
Sounds plausible for a brief moment, as long as one does not think about it to much. But then, having considered its sheer sentimentality, one realizes there is absolutely no intellectual or spiritual reason to accept Ananda Coomaraswamy's assertion.
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoYes I know what Coomaraswamy said. It's not difficult to understand or deep or anything. What I'm suggesting is that it is just a platitude that does not really withstand scrutiny. The cultural traction that myths have says more about the sentimental attachment to stories and characters that people hear about for the first time when they are relatively young and impressionable, rather than anything at all about "the nearest approach to absolute truth that can be stated in words".
He has quoted Coomaraswamy who, in turn, has asserted that Myth may be closer to Ultimate Truth than logic. Something equivalent to saying that a picture is worth a thousand words.
22 Jan 12
Originally posted by FMFCapra is not discussing here the cultural traction that myths have, esp.over young minds. Capra is talking about the way myths are better able to come closer to reality.
Yes I know what Coomaraswamy said. It's not difficult to understand or deep or anything. What I'm suggesting is that it is just a platitude that does not really withstand scrutiny. The cultural traction that myths have says more about the sentimental attachment to stories and characters that people hear about for the first time when they are relatively young and ...[text shortened]... anything at all about "the nearest approach to absolute truth that can be stated in words".
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoYes, I know you agree with him. But I think his assertion buckles under scrutiny. "Myths are better able to come closer to reality..." than what? Myths are folklore. They don't become "truth" simply because mystics claim it is the best that they convey. They don't become "the nearest approach to absolute truth that can be stated in words" simply because Coomaraswamy or Capra want it to be true and thus say so. They aren't here at RHP to argue the corner. And you can't argue the corner either.
Capra is not discussing here the cultural traction that myths have, esp.over young minds. Capra is talking about the way myths are better able to come closer to reality.
