Best of both worlds

[saidevo]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

namaste everyone.

This is in response to Sangom's post #15.

The main fallacy in Sangom's argument is the assumption that the external world is common to everyone, and is given to us by Nature.

• Unlike in the ancient external world where things appeared fairly common and natural to the people of a specific region, man has today made his own external world more and more as a replica of his internal world, driven by his ego and negative desires, which is why we come across scores of situations where two people do not agree on how they see or what they think of an object, place, person or event in the external world.

• It is only wishful thinking that there is no internal world because had it been one, Nature would have given us a common internal world.

• Nature has indeed made all normal people common in their physical bodies with latently identical capabilities. If religion is what brings out the worst in people corrupting their minds, why do the agnostics, atheists and scientists differ, often widely, in their views, even within their own groups?

• The reason is the human mind. If it is said that no two things can be made completely identical in the physical world, it can be said that no two minds can be made to agree with each other, even where the subject is mundane--not religious or spiritual.

IMO, it is foolhardy to think that religions and their leaders exploit the internal world of man. All the teachings of religion and spirituality, within their own limits, are meant to refine the internal world by urging the followers to purify their own mind by giving them graduated concepts of deities and rituals. Such purification of the mind, would in turn bring about a common external world for everyone.

The play of politics between religions, their leaders and followers is nothing different than the politics involved in the life of the atheists, agnostics, scientists and other non-believers.

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Yamaka,

If there is only one life, what is the point of all that one achieves during one's life? If everything is going to perish what is the significance of creation? There is really no point in all what one does. Is it going to matter in the final analysis? Unless you think you can be immortal . But I do not think physical immortality is possible. Anything physical will eventually perish. So don't build castles in the air.

Dear Sravna:

1. I know ALL human beings have only ONE life..limited by Biology. No Rebirth, No Reincarnation of soul.

2. During that life, Man creates so many things and leave that for the future generations to keep and enjoy. In that sense, what we learnt at the beginning of Time, we keep it and cherish.

3. This is going on endlessly...

4. Man also lately figured out that by Human Cloning he can keep himself IMMORTAL also...there can be another Sravna and Yamaka going eternally...

5. You always confuse yourself by distinctions of "Physical and Spiritual (Religious)"..

Atheists have been demonstrating that Spiritual/Religious is totally UNNECESSARY unless your are very TRADITIONAL and/or FEARFUL and/or Superstitious.

Theism itself is the Castle in the Air, a FANTASY and a FICTION... Lol.

 

[saidevo]

Nara,
your 'smoking weed' question did not seem rhetorical to me. It seemed more like a practical joke suggesting that Sravana's ideas seem as weird as the words of a someone smoking weed. Carl Marx might have called religion opium, but this should not mean that its followers are smoking weed.

Yamaka,
Nara once used the world 'emancipated' and I pointed out to him that it was a starkly religious word. In the same way, I point out that you cannot help using the phrase 'inner self', which is starkly spiritual.

If it is "Human brain and the neurocircuitry connecting the specialized Sensory Neurons only create the sense of "Consciousness, Inner-Self, the "I"-ness, the Sense of Right or Wrong",

why not use the phrase inner sense, to distinugish the scientist and atheist in you, since you want nothing in common with the theists and believers, right?

 

[sravna]

1. As others have said, hypocrisy IS hypocrisy. There's no two ways about it... You claim "Both are being pragmatic in their own way but the spiritual person sees that from a higher perspective."

I feel you are only projecting here the EGO of the spiritual person who sees that "from a higher perspective

I said higher perspective because thinking that the spiritual person is naive is itself naive.

2. What are your timeless values, any way? As I have said before, we ALL have "Conscience and inner self" to tell us what's right and what's wrong, irrespective of being Religious or NOT.

Now you are making me curious about your notion of conscience and inner self?!

3. Clearly, I see your attempt to give "a twist" to peel away from the core Belief of Hinduism.

Hindus core believe is FATALISM derived from Reincarnation & Rebirth and Janma Poorva Karma!

You keep turning a deaf ear even as myself and others repeatedly point out that hinduism doesn't promote fatalism

 

[Nara]

I understand that the use of the phrase "positive hypocrisy" is a bit confusing. A bit of elaboration:... I thought I would clarify.

sravna, sorry, no amount of elaboration and clarification can make hypocrisy a positive trait. If we say fragrant H2S, it won't make H2S smell any less nasty. I may be able to help you coin a phrase for your stated purpose, perhaps "pragmatic spiritualism" will work, it will cover up the smell of spiritualism -- sweet or nasty may depend on the individual -- under the cloak of pragmatism.

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

Nara,
your 'smoking weed' question did not seem rhetorical to me. It seemed more like a practical joke suggesting that Sravana's ideas seem as weird as the words of a someone smoking weed.

Saidevo, what is bad taste about this? Coining a phrase like "positive hypocrisy" that tends to make him look like a hypocrite is weird, like someone smoking weed, not that there is anything wrong with smoking a little weed now and then. What is so in bad taste about this comment I made to sravna?

Carl Marx might have called religion opium, but this should not mean that its followers are smoking weed.

Saidevo, now you are expanding the net to include all religious followers. My comment was made to sravna, and sravna alone, not that I don't agree with Karl Marx's comment on religion, but that is irrelevant in the present context.

Cheers!

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Nara,

I agree that the term is not very apt. But I think you got the message I was trying to convey though of course after adding your own colorings to it

 

[Nara]

.... though of course after adding your own colorings to it

When I am helping the "other" side I have to have my pound of flesh, no

I am glad you took it with a smile, I appreciate it ...

 

[Yamaka]

Steve Jobs became a Zen Buddhist and remained so early on... later he was not practicing any religion or praying any God for anything.... he didn't have time for anything else... only his Apple mattered in his life...

Perhaps, Steve was fascinated by the life of Siddhartha who just walked away from his Princely life, and his opposition to the Oppressive Casteism that Hinduism was preaching...

WSJ called him "The Secular Prophet" Steve Jobs, the Secular Prophet - WSJ.com

___________________________________________

In his Stanford Speech -

The real dig for the Theists was, "even those believe in Heaven did NOT want to die"!!!

The lesson youngsters can take away from his life is "listen to your inner call" and NOT to some mindless blather of your religious parents and others in the Society!

 

[sangom]

Post #7 of Sangom:
Although a declared agnostic, are you not doing the same thing yourself that you accuse the theists of: watching the milk and the cat at the same time? You have said that you believe in God and pUrva janma karma, you are well-versed in the ancient scriptures that you explain when people ask you to, and yet you are dead against brAhmaNa dharma and its AchAryas. At the same time you are in the fond hope that science would have all the answers ultimately. Where does this fit in, in your milk and cat example?

Shri Saidevo,

I understand the milk-cat saying to mean that a person takes up the job of guarding the milk though, secretly, he wishes that the cat drinks it and will connive for that. If this understanding is not correct, I apologize and shall request Shri Praveen to remove that portion (saying).

What I wrote in post #7 was in the context of the word "positive hypocrisy". I understood it as telling as follows:-

"In this case what he says is enjoy all the comforts, conveniences, pleasures and advantages arising out of science and the materialistic view of the universe—a view which does not relegate anything to God but feels Man must be able to crack the code, but side by side, do whatever you feel necessary so that you can self-hypnotize yourself as a very devout and pious person lest you lose the chance of entering the heaven or merging with the supreme, unconditioned Reality, if at last piety is the criterion for those things. This reminds me of the saying பாலுக்கும் காவல் பூனைக்கும் தோழன்"

I have already made it clear in this forum that my Hindu religious inclinations which I held on to for more than 3 score years, somehow did not convince my conscience. Hence I tried to learn what the other major religions say, teach and expect from the followers. It was then that I found out that the religions are no more than indoctrinations of human mind, or, conditioning of people's mindset so that they unquestioningly obey whatever the religion preaches. Beyond this the religions do not have any rational or logical grounds to establish the existence of God and all the rules framed on that basis.

But my turning agnostic cannot wipe out whatever I have learned so far. So, I answer doubts about the customs and practices and try to give out what is given in the relative texts. wherever interpretations are allowed I have been giving my views, not that of the othodoxy. I am not here to proselytize and convert people out of their religious beliefs but I try, to the best of my ability, to provide the agnostic pov so that readers can make their own judgment. I don't categorically assert that science will have "all the answers" but I do not believe that religion will be able to get answers for even a fraction of the problems which science will solve successfully.

I think, therefore, that I am neither guarding any milk (I try to make it clear that it is not even potable water) nor taking up the function of the cat's friend. Hope I have made my position clear enough for you.

 

[Yamaka]

Nara,
your 'smoking weed' question did not seem rhetorical to me. It seemed more like a practical joke suggesting that Sravana's ideas seem as weird as the words of a someone smoking weed. Carl Marx might have called religion opium, but this should not mean that its followers are smoking weed.

Yamaka,
Nara once used the world 'emancipated' and I pointed out to him that it was a starkly religious word. In the same way, I point out that you cannot help using the phrase 'inner self', which is starkly spiritual.

If it is "Human brain and the neurocircuitry connecting the specialized Sensory Neurons only create the sense of "Consciousness, Inner-Self, the "I"-ness, the Sense of Right or Wrong",

why not use the phrase inner sense, to distinugish the scientist and atheist in you, since you want nothing in common with the theists and believers, right?

Saidevo:

Why do you want to take ownership of words like "emancipation" "inner self" etc?

I have said that at around age 20,

"I had Revelations (or Eureka Moment) of that there is NO God and Religion is unnecessary for modern civilization and purposeful, moral and ethical life"

You may forbid me using "Revelation"!!!

Is that part of your EGO?!!!!

Lol

 

[Nara]

...
Nara once used the world 'emancipated' and I pointed out to him that it was a starkly religious word.

Saidevo, I don't remember this, but, in any case, it is news to me that emancipation is a starkly religious word, in which religion please?

Here are some dictionary meanings of the word emancipate:

• to free from restraint, control, or the power of another; especially to free from bondage
  

• to release from paternal care and responsibility and make sui juris
  

• to free from any controlling influence (as traditional mores or beliefs)

In the U.S. "emancipation" has a special meaning, it refers to the declaration President Lincoln signed to free the "slaves".

The word may be used in a religious sense, of course, but it is certainly not a starkly religious word by any measure.

Cheers!

 

[Yamaka]

Fatalism and Hinduism: What is it exactly?

Of the about 1.2 billion Indians, about a billion are practicing some 'form' of Hinduism.

Of this, about 800 million people follow a "Basic form of Hinduism" which believes in Fate and Destiny and the Janma Poorva Karma; these people are mostly locked inside "the Gates of Hell of Poverty".

What exactly is "Fate & Destiny"? :

My dictionary says "It's the Belief that everything is pre-determined and man can't change anything".

What's the Janma Poorva Karma?

Again, it is the Belief that a person's life quality (good or bad) is according to his deeds in previous births.

Putting these two together, the Basic Hinduism IS preaching FATALISM...

This bothers SOME of the 200 million or so "mostly affluent Hindus" who are connected by broadband and who want the Best of Both Worlds via their Hypocrisy....(here they want to freely consume the fruits of Science, Engineering & Technology for their jobs, profession and healthy life AND simultaneously follow a form of Hindu Belief or called Sanatana Dharma!)

That's an interesting new phenomenon....

Where is the Solution to the pathetic lives of those 800 million Hindus who believe in "Basic Hinduism of Fate, Destiny & Janma Poorva Karma"?

More later....

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

Thiru.Yamaha,
After reading your post No.63,I am having a doubt.Are you speaking for yourself or speaking on behalf of some agency.
Have you satisfied yourself that the followers of other religions in different parts of the world are all very prosperous economically.
Sometimes I wonder why you take the liberty of criticising only the followers of 'Hindu' faith but not followers of other religions.

 

[Yamaka]

Thiru.Yamaha,
After reading your post No.63,I am having a doubt.Are you speaking for yourself or speaking on behalf of some agency.
Have you satisfied yourself that the followers of other religions in different parts of the world are all very prosperous economically.
Sometimes I wonder why you take the liberty of criticising only the followers of 'Hindu' faith but not followers of other religions.

Dear Krish Sir:

I am pre-occupied a lot about what's happening in India... therefore I am forced to think about the major religion in India...more precisely what's happening in TN or in Ramanathapuram Tk and District!

When ever I write about problems in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East, I write about the major religion there!

That's all... believe me I am NOT against just Hinduism ... I am against ALL religions.

I can NEVER be bought by any Agency!

Cheers.

 

[renuka]

Thiru.Yamaha,
After reading your post No.63,I am having a doubt.Are you speaking for yourself or speaking on behalf of some agency.
Have you satisfied yourself that the followers of other religions in different parts of the world are all very prosperous economically.
Sometimes I wonder why you take the liberty of criticising only the followers of 'Hindu' faith but not followers of other religions.

Dear sir,

Those belonging to agencies are rather discreet in their hidden agendas.
They never really reveal their mind.
Non agency members just get a satisfaction... some sort of "high" feeling writing what they "feel"stirs up the hornets nest.
Its some sort of cyber contraction of the pubococcygeus muscle.

 

[prasad1]

There are various reasons for people to be alienated by religion, God, a particular practice in a religion.

I am against certain practices in Hinduism because it is wasteful, meaningless, and inconvenient.
I have chosen an advaita philosophy, and most of the rituals do not interest me.
Some people have had expectation from god and are disappointed andthen start to blame their life on God. They then start to deny God, as if that solves their problem.
Some know enough to be dangerous and declare them selves as emancipated, and then talk as if totally liberated from all religion.
I have no argument with anyone. We are all adult and lead our life as we want, and should.
Of course there are the other kind who do not know anything. That is the only group that can be helped.
You can wake up a person who is sleeping, you can wake up person who awake.

 

[renuka]

There are various reasons for people to be alienated by religion, God, a particular practice in a religion.

I am against certain practices in Hinduism because it is wasteful, meaningless, and inconvenient.
I have chosen an advaita philosophy, and most of the rituals do not interest me.
Some people have had expectation from god and are disappointed andthen start to blame their life on God. They then start to deny God, as if that solves their problem.
Some know enough to be dangerous and declare them selves as emancipated, and then talk as if totally liberated from all religion.
I have no argument with anyone. We are all adult and lead our life as we want, and should.
Of course there are the other kind who do not know anything. That is the only group that can be helped.
You can wake up a person who is sleeping, you can wake up person who awake.

Dear Prasad,

You wrote :

You can wake up a person who is sleeping, you can wake up person who awake

Well some are in deep slumber rocked by the Supreme Anesthetist(Maya) and believe all their dreams are true.
Its the Rapid Eye Movement(REM) of their dreams that give a concussion to their minds so all vision is distorted upon waking.

 

[saidevo]

<edited>
Plz refrain from constantly pointing out - you said this here, now you are saying this here... discussions and replies vary from topic to topic. if you would like to constantly hound one person or a group of individuals, i suggest you find a different website to do so. i will let this continue for long.

 

[sangom]

Shri Yamaka,

I notice that you have joined this forum only in February this year. Here there is a "holy caucus", self-appointed to enforce their version of brahmin way of looking at the world and everything under it. Even non-brahmin members who have proved that they have sufficiently 'emancipated' to the caucus' prescribed qualifications will be deemed brahmins; but NB memeders not satisfying this condition will be hounded out. I am able to stick here thanks to my parents both of whom happened to be Kerala Iyers.

So, instead of arguing, rebuting arguments, etc., the method now used has entered a new phase - most probably a loosening of someone's pubococcygeus muscle getting weaker . And words and phrases are claimed as patented. At this rate an atheist will not be able to write here "God does not exist" because god is the monopoly possession of the caucus.

I wish Shri Praveen lays down some guidelines in this regard and stops this line of fault finding and one-upmanship by Shri Saidevo & his cohorts.

 

[praveen]

I wish Shri Praveen lays down some guidelines in this regard and stops this line of fault finding and one-upmanship by Shri Saidevo & his cohorts.

I will soon, even it means i will have to ban them to stop this ruckus.

 

[renuka]

Shri Yamaka,

I notice that you have joined this forum only in February this year. Here there is a "holy caucus", self-appointed to enforce their version of brahmin way of looking at the world and everything under it. Even non-brahmin members who have proved that they have sufficiently 'emancipated' to the caucus' prescribed qualifications will be deemed brahmins; but NB memeders not satisfying this condition will be hounded out. I am able to stick here thanks to my parents both of whom happened to be Kerala Iyers.

So, instead of arguing, rebuting arguments, etc., the method now used has entered a new phase - most probably a loosening of someone's pubococcygeus muscle getting weaker . And words and phrases are claimed as patented. At this rate an atheist will not be able to write here "God does not exist" because god is the monopoly possession of the caucus.

I wish Shri Praveen lays down some guidelines in this regard and stops this line of fault finding and one-upmanship by Shri Saidevo & his cohorts.

Dear Sangom,

You know no one actually starts a thread targeted at Atheist.
In fact most of us dont even know how to spell that word cos its not in our mind.
Respect is mutual..No one is disrespecting the believe of an Atheist but Atheist also should respect Theist.
If you see most post here..everyone is just trying to explain to a Non Believer why Religion is useful and God Exists.

Coming to your line:

Even non-brahmin members who have proved that they have sufficiently 'emancipated' to the caucus' prescribed qualifications will be deemed brahmins;

I dont think any Non Brahmin members here have been given Dwija status by any Brahmin here.
Everyone is just a username and password here.

Dear Sangom..more later I need to get back to my Kegels!!LOL

BTW:the muscle functions in the Purusha too and not only in the Stri.
Nice Kink..oops sorry I mean Link you provided.

 

[praveen]

Let me make even more clearer.
if you are going to uphold your edition of brahminism by constantly hounding a few members, target each and every one of their posts, then i am afraid this website is not for you.
I suggest you leave this website and find some other website for your issues/activities.

I have not mentioned names, but then i am very sure whom we are talking about. Either you stop those silly activities and participate decently or just get out.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sangom, Shri Yamaka

What is the point again in contributing to humanity if the human race itself is going to perish someday? How different are you from a bubble or a wave that appears and disappears? Without the underlying ocean it does not make any sense? It is only sensible to assume that there is something eternal and all the transcience emerges from and merges into that eternal thing. That is the only way one can possibly make sense of our existence.

 

[saidevo]

<edited and removed>