Spirituality vs Materialsim

Originally posted by poker87
Finally at last someone who is presenting a quality thread [thankyou ] and Deepak is good reading for someone wanting to wet their appetite with spirituality but they will have to eventually embrace the Vedas when they are ready and are wanting to know more.
The only criticism of Deepak is that he does not have complete spiritual knowledge and in fact he ...[text shortened]... the Deepak finishes.
But anyway the best thread in this forum for a long time. [5 stars xxxxx]

You dont need to study Vedic literature to find your path.
Some may need to, but as a blanket statement, I would say you are in error.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
He has no right to misguide the seekers then, if he is not taking himself seriously. The Hindu Gurus down the ages have been Sannyasins i.e.those who have given up this world and its attractions and are to live by begging from not more than 5 households once a day. They should not stay at a place for more than 3 days. They are not to talk of spiritualism ...[text shortened]... been tried and tested by them as being fit for this path. But these times are the modern days !

And "modern days" call for "modern answers" - despite the age old truths that have long been overlooked by westerners.
I believe some scientists (quantum theorists) are now discovering that eastern mysticism was right all along about the nature of matter.
There is a wealth of new scientists exploring, and possibly adding to these well -worn , age-old ideas.

Originally posted by FMF
What a bleak view of the world and of humanity you have! Good grief. In the previous post you claimed the book in question helped you arrive at "a whole new and fresh way of perceiving the world and life". And yet you seem so utterly pessimistic. Personally I am much more positive and optimistic and much more impressed with the human spirit than you seem to be. ...[text shortened]... s it inure you to all the "wretched lives" that you perceive are being lived all around you?

I see dasa/poker's views similar to some of the christians here. Basically they are trying to "round up" everyone to eventually believing in the truth of the Vedas. Whereas the christians are trying to round up everyone and trying to get them to "bow down" to Jesus and the God of the christian bible.

There are no winners here.

I reckon we should just try to add to our collective knowledge rather than trying to convert anyone here.
It is plainly obvious from the main proponents of these "hardcore posters" that their efforts are in vain ,(Dasa and RJHinds)

And after those posts, I would like to add that a "debate" can be held at anytime.
We dont necessarily need the book.

In fact, i would like a "debate" where everyone just says what they think-whatever the results are.

And when someone is obviously wrong (global flood,etc.) , lets try to work with what we believe to be the facts.
There are always plenty of internet surfers who will (nearly) instantly provide a link to where the poster is "obviously wrong".

So I will say that I agree with Deepak where he says that there is no time.

In my words I would say that :"time is an act of measurement" and nothing more.
It is merely there to provide ourselves with a framework to get our minds around certain ideas. We work through these ideas (whatever they may be), but at the end of the day , I would conclude that time is merely a human construct,(like many other spiritual ideas), to work stuff out. In the end,in my calculations, I would have to factor in that time was only a construct to help us learn about it's non-existence- or something like that.

Similarily , I would say that the universe is LIKE a living organism. Well , I would treat it like one, anyway.
If you look outside all you find is death and decay(2nd law of thermodynamics), but if we turn out attentions inwards, then all I can see is "life". ( "It's life Jim, but not as we knot it 😀 "😉

Originally posted by karoly aczel
And after those posts, I would like to add that a "debate" can be held at anytime.
We dont necessarily need the book.

In fact, i would like a "debate" where everyone just says what they think-whatever the results are.

And when someone is obviously wrong (global flood,etc.) , lets try to work with what we believe to be the facts.
There are alwa ...[text shortened]... wards, then all I can see is "life". ( "It's life Jim, but not as we knot it 😀 "😉

"It's life Jim, but not as we know it" - (too late for an edit ....eeek...connection probs)

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Whereas the christians are trying to round up everyone and trying to get them to "bow down" to Jesus and the God of the christian bible.

Really, where is any evidence of this sweeping generalisation?

Originally posted by divegeester
Really, where is any evidence of this sweeping generalisation?

Many a christian poster would say it on here.

I've had christians come up to me and say such things. . Maybe "bow down" is not the correct term, but it means the same thing.
I'm not sure how you practice your christianity, but unless you admit that Jesus is the only way and accept Him into your heart as THE ONLY saviour , then you wont get to heaven. Sound familiar?

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Many a christian poster would say it on here.

I've had christians come up to me and say such things. . Maybe "bow down" is not the correct term, but it means the same thing.
I'm not sure how you practice your christianity, but unless you admit that Jesus is the only way and accept Him into your heart as THE ONLY saviour , then you wont get to heaven. Sound familiar?

Yes I believe that. But where's the corollation between me believing that, and "rounding people up and making them bow down"?

Originally posted by divegeester
Yes I believe that. But where's the corollation between me believing that, and "rounding people up and making them bow down"?

Well wouldn't that be one way of putting it? After all , you do refer to people as a "flock" , do you not? So it only follows that you would want to "round them up" to come to believe what other christians believe.

Of course there is a huge inconsitency of what you actually believe within the christians, but I'm not too worried about that at the moment. My point is that Jesus is the only way,(or so christians contend), and the unbelievers need to be converted.

Really, I did not think this to be a very contentious point at all.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Well wouldn't that be one way of putting it? After all , you do refer to people as a "flock" , do you not? So it only follows that you would want to "round them up" to come to believe what other christians believe.

Of course there is a huge inconsitency of what you actually believe within the christians, but I'm not too worried about that at the mom ...[text shortened]... ed to be converted.

Really, I did not think this to be a very contentious point at all.

I didn't think it was contentious either, just a poor generalisation without substantive evidence in this forum. I never refer to other Christian's as a flock, although I believe Jesus did.

I find the continued revelation of your latent irrational dislike of Christians interesting and amusing.

Originally posted by divegeester
I didn't think it was contentious either, just a poor generalisation without substantive evidence in this forum. I never refer to other Christian's as a flock, although I believe Jesus did.

I find the continued revelation of your latent irrational dislike of Christians interesting and amusing.

I find myself in an overwhelmingly christian culture. I just try to tell it like I see it.
There are flaws for christians to find in hinduism, should a christian find him/herself in a predominantly hindu society.
I have decided to become hindu in order to balance this "one size fits all" mentality that religion has to it around these parts.