Best of both worlds

[sravna]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear Sravna:

What makes you think that "the human race itself is going to perish someday?".

As an eternal optimist, I don't think the human race will perish at all. Even if your God wills! Lol.

Waves and bubbles appear and disappear according to the laws of physics and chemistry (like surface tension, and the interface of water and air etc)...

If you assume that the underlying ocean "is your God", that's your FANTASY... an ILLUSION.

I don't subscribe to what you believe as "Eternal" The God, as described in the Holy Books of Koran, Bible or Vedas.

I believe that Sun will be the Eternal Source of Energy, and Nature will be our Eternal Thing... all living being including humans will survive eternally...

I don't need to subscribe to any TRADITION, FEAR or Superstition.

Peace.

Don't build your foundations on just beliefs. Ironical for one who doesn't accept beliefs when it comes to religion.

Any way you need to think and work a lot harder if you are to work towards your dream of immortality which anyway will not materialize

 

[Yamaka]

Hello ALL:

People may ask why I actively debate the Theists in this Forum.

As I said, around age 20, I got the "Revelation" or the "Eureka Moment" that the idea of GOD is a LIE... I talked about it to my Seniors in Madura College, Madurai, TN.

They laughed at me and said, "Life is very very hard... you have just started the journey... God is the driving force, without which YOU will never move even an inch....God's mercy is REQUIRED every step of the way... you will realize very very soon... Talk about Atheism only AFTER you have grown up successfully in life"

I took this to my heart... that's AFTER I have grown up successfully in life, I must talk about Atheism and the LIES that Theists propagate everyday...

That's what I am doing when I am 60 years of age, AFTER marrying a TB an Agno-Theist, AFTER raising two excellent kids and AFTER achieving the social, political and financial FREEDOMS.

What for am I writing all this?

For the sake of the Younger generation who are looking for some guidance, and who are asking the question "Is a Belief in God necessary to lead a successful and peaceful life?"

My writings would perhaps answer some of their questions!

That's all.

Cheers.

ps. For a long time, I have been a very private person; lately, I have opened up my life and write about it to the consternation and jealousy of many of the Theists! Lol

 

[sravna]

Hello ALL:

People may ask why I actively debate the Theists in this Forum.

As I said, around age 20, I got the "Revelation" or the "Eureka Moment" that the idea of GOD is a LIE... I talked about it to my Seniors in Madura College.

They laughed at me and said, "Life is very very hard... you have just started the journey... God is the driving force, without which YOU will never move even an inch....God's mercy is REQUIRED every step of the way... you will realize very very soon... Talk about Atheism only AFTER you have grown up successfully in life"

I took this to my heart... that's AFTER I have grown up successfully in life, I must talk about Atheism...

That's what I am doing when I am 60 years of age, AFTER marrying a TB an Agno-Theist, AFTER raising two excellent kids and AFTER achieving the social, political and financial FREEDOMS.

What for am I writing all this?

For the sake of the Younger generation who are looking for some guidance, and who are asking the question "Is a Belief in God necessary to lead a successful and peaceful life?"

My writings would perhaps answer their questions!

That's all.

Cheers.

Weird reasoning

 

[Yamaka]

Don't build your foundations on just beliefs. Ironical for one who doesn't accept beliefs when it comes to religion.

Any way you need to think and work a lot harder if you are to work towards your dream of immortality which anyway will not materialize

Dear Sravna:

You yourself rely on "a Belief in Super-Natural" God, standing somewhere in the Milkyway and governing you!

I believe in Sun, Nature and the ability of man to clone himself and provide immortality! I even explained the methodology of Human Cloning - many Sravna's can be cloned, believe me.

Where's the problem?

 

[sravna]

Dear Sravna:

You yourself rely on "a Belief in Super-Natural" God, standing somewhere in the Milkyway and governing you!

I believe in Sun, Nature and the ability of man to clone himself and provide immortality! I even explained the methodology of Human Cloning - many Sravna's can be cloned, believe me.

Where's the problem?

The problem with your argument is we act based on our beliefs but you do that only after confirming physical evidence.

 

[Yamaka]

Weird reasoning

Perhaps, much better reasoning than your "Enjoying best of both worlds with a hypocrisy".

To tell you the truth, I liked you starting this Thread.. and asking people to live a Double Life.. and also conceding that it is "weird and hypocritical".

But what amused me is your spin on the word "hypocrisy"! You brought an oxymoron to your rescue or escape with "positive hypocrisy"!!

As others point out, can there be "good evil"?

Enjoy your hypocrisy, whether it's good or bad!

 

[sravna]

Perhaps, much better reasoning than your "Enjoying best of both worlds with a hypocrisy".

To tell you the truth, I liked you starting this Thread.. and asking people to live a Double Life.. and also conceding that it is "weird and hypocritical".

But what amused me is your spin on the word "hypocrisy"! You brought an oxymoron to your rescue or escape with "positive hypocrisy"!!

As others point out, can there be "good evil"?

Enjoy your hypocrisy, whether it's good or bad!

Another weird stuff. Responding to opponent's criticism by not answering the criticism but criticizing him on a totally different issue!

 

[C RAVI]

ps. For a long time, I have been a very private person; lately, I have opened up my life and write about it to the consternation and jealousy of many of the Theists! Lol

Jealousy of many Theists???

Being jelous with other's success has nothing to do with oneself being theists or atheist. Jealousy is one of the many feelings of human beings irrespective of their belief and life style. It's all pervading some way.

You seem to be confusing yourself with those theists who are confused lots. Who could not know all about what is God, what is spirituality and what is Karma theory. I agree that some of those theists may be jelous of your success and peace similar to many of Atheists, all as mere human beings.

Such jelous folks may step into some adventures inspired by your advices, beyond certain possibilities and get destorted. May the GOD bless them with some wisdom, pateince and clarity. I wish and pray that such folks should not go unethical to be successful thinking they will be at peace at last having acheived what they want the way they could make out. Because all people who come to you for advices and guidance can not be expected to be similar to your caliber, qualities and destiney. Can not expected to have luck to work in favor of them towards their accomplishments.


But for sure Thesits with clarity of concepts of God, spirituality and karma theory can help confused and struggling lots to lead a righteous life with peace and harmony.

This is not my imaginary conclusion based on my EGO. There are many real life stories where many got to realize the reality and got themselves rehabilitated with the help of true spirituality.

 

[C RAVI]

As others point out, can there be "good evil"?

Offcourse!!!!! There can be good evil and there is...

Evil tendencies may be forced to be acquired by good tendencies with wich alone the evils can be destroyed to uphold the dharma..

No wrong if a righteous person had to make an attempt to kill a terrorist or any other human who is attempting to brutally rape a woman or murder a innocent person.

You see, that's why it is said that - "It is too bad to be too good"

 

[Yamaka]

"You seem to be confusing yourself with those theists who are confused lots. Who could not know all about what is God, what is spirituality and what is Karma theory. I agree that some of those theists may be jelous of your success and peace similar to many of Atheists, all as mere human beings." post 109

Dear Ravi:

One confirmed Theist here commented once "Yamaka's bragging of his life is sickening". I always write about my "earned bragging points" to tell the Younger generation that bragging is okay as long as you "earned it".

There are very many very confused Theists around. They all have their own explanation of Religion, God and Janma Poorva Karma; more so of what they think is "Sanatana Dharma" etc.

One apparently a devout Hindu once wrote, "We must ask for an Eye for an Eye" and "Someone should have shot EV Ramasamy - the Periyar"..

I know for a fact that killing Periyar would have created a humongous mayhem in TN, mostly against the TBs.

This is the mayhem I have been writing about....that Religiosity and the Conflicts they bring forth plunge Society into chaos and pandemonium..

More later...

 

[C RAVI]

"You seem to be confusing yourself with those theists who are confused lots. Who could not know all about what is God, what is spirituality and what is Karma theory. I agree that some of those theists may be jelous of your success and peace similar to many of Atheists, all as mere human beings." post 109

Dear Ravi:

One confirmed Theist here commented once "Yamaka's bragging of his life is sickening". I always write about my "earned bragging points" to tell the Younger generation that bragging is okay as long as you "earned it".

There are very many very confused Theists around. They all have their own explanation of Religion, God and Janma Poorva Karma; more so of what they think is "Sanatana Dharma" etc.

One apparently a devout Hindu once wrote, "We must ask for an Eye for an Eye" and "Someone should have shot EV Ramasamy - the Periyar"..

I know for a fact that killing Periyar would have created a humongous mayhem in TN, mostly against the TBs.

This is the mayhem I have been writing about....that Religiosity and the Conflicts they bring forth plunge Society into chaos and pandemonium..

More later...

Shri Yamaka,

We can talk anything to justify our points. Cherry picking some fierce statemets out of anger and frustrations due to suppressions and humiliation created in the society, that were mentioned by theists here with clarity of what God, spirituality, poorva janma karma all about is., to support your theory against god, spirituality and poorva janma karma is not withstanding.


Many Hindu theist at times tend to get aggressive unbearable to the attocities of oppressions, suppression, humiliations, terrorisations etc.etc. That's the human nature irrespective of one is theist or atheist, in order to uphold civil right, justice and peace.


Highlighting human feelings, emotions etc arising out of objections against attrocities and cruelty can not withstand your theory against God, Spirituality and Poorva Janma Karma of Hinduism.


This can not make your point clear and valid to dismiss the concept of god, spirituality and poorva janma karma with your repeated statements against these realities with clear proof and LOLs..


As far as bragging is concerned, its individual choice of a successful person, irrespective of his/her ways of success.


If some one says that your bragging is sickning than your counter statement should address to that individual's sickeness, with your valid justification, IMO. But cherry picking those statements and expressions arising out of frustruations (as loosers due injustice), caliming your theory valid against God, Spirituality and Poorva Janma Karma as a subject matter is not withstanding at all, IMHO.

 

[Nara]

There are two , vyavariha and paaramaarthika sathyam. Theists believe in both...

This is not true, all theists do not believe in both, only the Advaitins do. All other theists reject this two-fold reality you are talking about.

You need to get your facts straight before giving expansive comments about this birth, next birth, etc.

Cheers!

 

[sangom]

Your arguments don't sound convincing.

My point is when the reality is gone just like universe coming to an end, all that happened whether in dreams or otherwise is nothing more than a bubble emerging and bursting.

Shri Sravna,

I know it will be difficult to convince a person who has already found something unconvincing, for whatever reasons may be. But still, since it involves an interesting point, may I ask why reality should not/cannot have an end? Is there any logical basis for that except the religious tenets which say that the reality is everlasting? AFAIK, the concept of Absolute Brahman is that it is omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent, but not immortal - am I right?

Can the upanishadic sentence 'satyam jnaanam anantam brahma' not be interpreted as 'Brahman is truth, infinite knowledge' and not necessarily as 'truth, knowledge and endless'? Kindly let me know your views.

 

[sangom]

Offcourse!!!!! There can be good evil and there is...

Evil tendencies may be forced to be acquired by good tendencies with wich alone the evils can be destroyed to uphold the dharma..

No wrong if a righteous person had to make an attempt to kill a terrorist or any other human who is attempting to brutally rape a woman or murder a innocent person.

You see, that's why it is said that - "It is too bad to be too good"

Dear Shri Ravi,

Righteous person killing a terrorist is not evil tendency; it is a cruel act and perhaps the sin of murder. Hence the examples given by you do not bring out "Evil tendencies may be forced to be acquired by good tendencies with wich alone the evils can be destroyed to uphold the dharma."

Dharma is a very confusing concept even it was for Dharmaputra who admitted that it was "mahajano yena gatassapanthaaH", the path trodden by the illustrious. Today's illustrious people include personalities like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Richard Dawkins; so is there any dharmalopa if some people wish to follow the path trodden by these illustrious people, instead of those who went purely by God, theism and positive hypocrisy?

 

[Yamaka]

"Afterall, you can't say atheists live a life full of strife,quarrel and sorrow. They may just do their duty without accepting the concept of God because HE is not visible to the naked eye. For all you know, they may reach the destination earlier than theists. We may not know where Mr.X will be in his next birth or where we will be in our next birth." post 95.

A TB friend who knows me and my family very well for a long time (he is the one that critiques my life a lot) once said jokingly,

"If there is a Heaven, Y will get admission FIRST, for he is clean and straight forward; he does not live "Double Life" like many of the Theists, who mostly do things forgetting God, and then hastily perform too many poojas, prayers and bhajans to nullify their perceived sins and guilt". Lol.

As far as I know, most Atheists live calm and peaceful, very ethical and moral life.

On the other hand, Hemamalini, MP (BJP) is officially a Muslim but she says she is protecting the values of Hinduism!

What does that tell you? Fraud and Hypocrisy!!

More later....

 

[sravna]

Shri Sravna,

I know it will be difficult to convince a person who has already found something unconvincing, for whatever reasons may be. But still, since it involves an interesting point, may I ask why reality should not/cannot have an end? Is there any logical basis for that except the religious tenets which say that the reality is everlasting? AFAIK, the concept of Absolute Brahman is that it is omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent, but not immortal - am I right?

Can the upanishadic sentence 'satyam jnaanam anantam brahma' not be interpreted as 'Brahman is truth, infinite knowledge' and not necessarily as 'truth, knowledge and endless'? Kindly let me know your views.

Dear Shri Sangom,

If something is omniscient or has infinite knowledge then it has knowledge to be omnipotent and immortal.

Reality should not have an end because transient realities or realities that have an end like dreams and physical reality do not possess the essence of reality. You say something is real when it exists but realities that themselves vanish cannot be totally real. That is the reason Sankara calls physical world as a relative reality.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

On the other hand, Hemamalini, MP (BJP) is officially a Muslim but she says she is protecting the values of Hinduism!

What does that tell you? Fraud and Hypocrisy!!

On the same note, can it be said that those who have renounced their religion and stopped being hindu or brahmin but also claim that they are well wishers of hindus and/or brahmins be considered frauds and hypocrites?!!!

Why should a separate rule apply to HM and poorvashrama hindus?!

 

[கால பைரவன்]

No one asked them to leave.

It is their choice and their choice alone. We cannot stop people from leaving.

Views are going to be opposed, sometimes in a light way and sometimes in a very hard way. Thats fact of life and it happens every where and in every walk of life.

This forum is quite clear on where it stands and time and again i have said it is you, members, who decide on the actions and who are the backbone of this site.

So if the forum has a problem then its the members who have a problem and if the members have a problem, then what can i say...

Perhaps the choice of my words "hounded-out", which incidentally was borrowed from Sangom, could have conveyed a wrong meaning! I am very well aware that the members I quoted who don't write here anymore were not banned.

While it is undeniable that they left on their own volition, it is also true that they left because of certain reasons: that they deem a good number of discussions in this site to be anti-hindu and anti-brahmin. These are not my imagination; Some of them were quite vocal about it. They expressed their displeasure before quitting this forum. Now, it is okay for the group that is criticized thus to not take cognizance of these accusations. But for members of the same group to turn around and indulge in self-victimization (claims of themselves being hounded out) is abominable. There is no proof for such claims. Their group is intact. It is the other side that is being hounded out. On top of it, members of this group routinely vouch for freedom of speech and write how they do not wish to see this forum being reduced into a MAS (mutual admiration society). But if they truly believed in it, they will introspect and see whether there is any truth in the accusations piled upon them. Otherwise, they can be only deemed as hypocrites - a term they liberally use to describe others.

I understand that moderation is not an easy job. And I do not mean to put any blame on Praveen or any other forum admin. I agree that the users define the forum and that members are ultimately responsible.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Out of the 5 names you have given above, at least four exhibited condescension towards those whom you have called "brabas" or "bbs" or some such acronyms. IMHO, none of these atheists or agnostics show such an attitude in their posts. Moreover, none in the atheist camp is trying, even remotely, to convert any believer; what they are trying to say is that life has become simpler and more enjoyable for them once they left the "old man of the sea" (sinbad's version) clinging on to their shoulders and clasping their neck - religion and God. It is for each reader to judge for himself or herself to decide what to follow and how much to follow.

I am sorry to say this but Sangom's observations in this passage are far from truth.

Isn't calling theists fools and irrationals condescending? Isn't projecting one's goal of participating in this forum to relieve others' of ignorance condescending? In fact, it is often claimed that atheists are only trying to protect the unsuspecting theists from getting exploited by religion. If this is not condescending, what else is? Theists are accused of being selfish. Theists are blamed for poverty. I do not know what else is left to be said! Perhaps, tomorrow the theists would be blamed if an atheist suffers from constipation!

The present problem has arisen because to me at least, it appears that the theist group resorts to ingenious ways of one-up-man-ship and scoring over the opposition, and, lastly, when no other way remained, they have picked upon the use of words such as "inner self" by atheists and by claiming that it is their property, so to say, they want to establish that by using such words, they unwittingly become theists. So, you may very well judge which side is trying to convert which.

I think the present problem came about when Saidevo was accused of using scientific concepts to defend religious ideas. So, you see, it is saidevo who was accused of embracing science first before he accused atheists of embracing religion. This is my opinion.

PS: KB is not the only person to indulge in naiyaandis via acronyms or short forms. Look at all the words routinely used to describe brahmins - tabras, *******, tambarams, TBs, TPs, SPBs, paarppaans, munkudimi, pinkudumi etc. Most of these are used by the group I deem brabas. Imagine some one using words such as muzzies or thulu**** to describe muslims! Compared to brabas, the other side has mostly maintained dignity.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

If something is omniscient or has infinite knowledge then it has knowledge to be omnipotent and immortal.

Reality should not have an end because transient realities or realities that have an end like dreams and physical reality do not possess the essence of reality. You say something is real when it exists but realities that themselves vanish cannot be totally real. That is the reason Sankara calls physical world as a relative reality.

Dear Shri Sravna,

Mine was a simple doubt or question; let us not be limited by the opinion of any Acharya. If a certain Reality disappears, so to say, into some nothingness or some other dimension, is it not eligible for the status of Reality? In what way is it incumbent that any reality has to be immortal?

I also do not understand why, if something is omniscient or has infinite knowledge, then how does it necessarily have knowledge to be omnipotent and immortal. It looks to me that we are bound by certain pre-conceived notions as laid down by the Acharyas.

According to me, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence and immortality, are four distinct and unrelated characteristics; they may exist singly or in whatever combination possible. Again the concept of "Reality" in Vedanta is closely linked to the word "sat" ='that which is, which exists'. But this 'existence' has been interpreted by different Acharyas differently, according to their lights. If the material world of senses is real for one Acharya, it is illusion for another. Thus we may see that a Reality can be made illusory (non-real,and therefore, non-existent) according to one's own view of the matter.

 

[suraju06]

Dear Yamaka,

Your post #102:

I took this to my heart... that's AFTER I have grown up successfully in life, I must talk about Atheism and the LIES that Theists propagate everyday...
That's what I am doing when I am 60 years of age, AFTER marrying a TB an Agno-Theist, AFTER raising two excellent kids and AFTER achieving the social, political and financial FREEDOMS.
What for am I writing all this?
For the sake of the Younger generation who are looking for some guidance, and who are asking the question "Is a Belief in God necessary to lead a successful and peaceful life?"
My writings would perhaps answer some of their questions!
That's all.

Your message gives an impression that you think (1)marrying a TB an agno-theist (2)raising two excellent kids and (3) achieving social, political and financial freedoms forms part of your so called 'success' story. Please confirm if my conclusion is correct.

I need this confirmation before replying further.

Cheers.

 

[C RAVI]

Dear Shri Ravi,

1) Righteous person killing a terrorist is not evil tendency; it is a cruel act and perhaps the sin of murder. Hence the examples given by you do not bring out "Evil tendencies may be forced to be acquired by good tendencies with wich alone the evils can be destroyed to uphold the dharma."

2) Dharma is a very confusing concept even it was for Dharmaputra who admitted that it was "mahajano yena gatassapanthaaH", the path trodden by the illustrious. Today's illustrious people include personalities like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Richard Dawkins; so is there any dharmalopa if some people wish to follow the path trodden by these illustrious people, instead of those who went purely by God, theism and positive hypocrisy?

Shri Sangom,

Correlate my sequence of response with the sequence I have mentioned above...

1) My statement about a righteous person killing a terrorist, rapist while he is indulging in rape, a murderer etc was just an example. If one honestly try to ponder into my referred post, can understand what way I was justifying -"Good Evil". But, if one wants to give a different creative twist than there is no end.

Let me give you some more clear example to justify my claim "GOOD EVIL". May be you can than understand and accept or give a creative twist to it.

1) POLICE ENCOUNTER : There were some politically powered criminals who were plaguing the society to the extreme, were easily bailed out from legal actions by their very creators (politicians-business mafias) for the very purpose. Such criminals ultimately were taken to task by police (with the tact such that they can not be considered as violating Law) and were shot dead in the pretext of ENCOUNTER. By hook and crook the plot was successfully carried out and the people in society were extremely happy about it (though many knows the fact).


Let me narrate one such real life gruesome story in short :


Couple of months before in Coimbatore, a very beautiful, intelligent, loving, friendly, charismatic girl of 10 years was abducted along with her younger brother in a school van, by two miscreants, in the pretext of picking them up to school in the morning. These kids were tortured and the little girl was rapped. When these criminals heard the news of these kids abduction in radio, their criminal mind started working more effectively. They took the kids to a remote isolated area, poisoned them and kicked them to death in a pond, when the kids were permitted to drink water or urinate(I don't remember clearly).

Both the criminals were arrested within 24 hours. One was taken to the spot to demonstrate all the proceedings that took place in the spot leading to killing of the two kids. At this time, the criminal was shot dead under the pretext of ENCOUNTER, with supporting justifications.

The whole city of Coimbatore could feel contented and expressed their appreciation to the police (though people knew the fact). Not just the people of Coimbatore but the whole of TN was contented with such acts of the police.

The police that is supposed to uphold law and order and follow all due legal procedures for any crime/criminal had to resort to such actions to uphold dharma in this kali yuga, for the very betterment of this society and the society acknowledges it with pleasure.

All hook and crook methods, all mental calibers in the same criminal ways need to be adopted in certain circumstances just for the sake of betterment.

All the righteous people in society whether theists or atheists would welcome such actions of betterment.


2) DHARMA - Dharma is confusing? I think, I may be primitive to think what dharma is. So far I could realize that Dharma is something that is justifiable for the actions for the good in common for all in society/group, fair in reasoning and upholds justice. Dhama is something that is common to all theists and atheists.

Dharma may be considered confusing by people when selfish and selfishly tactical minds tries to succeed under the cover of Dharma, giving justifications to the outside world. This confusing dharma is nothing but the misuse of the Dharma that is for a better cause for all.

You call it Dharma or Law. It is common to all theists and atheist. Just because some theist indulge in cheap tactics and violates dharma does not makes hypocrisy a monopoly of theists.

"The path trodden by the illustrious". Let me first clarify the meaning of illustious folks you are talking about -

il·lus·tri·ous adj.
1. Well known and very distinguished; eminent. See Synonyms at noted.
2. Obsolete Shining brightly.



The online dictionary says - Well known and very distinguished; eminent and 2) Obsolete Shining brightly.

1) Do you think that well known, very distinguished, eminent folks are none other that Atheist?
2) Do you think that folks considered as illustrious are those alone who are philanthropists and can do charity?
3) Do you think that Hypocrisy is a monopoly of Theists?
4) Do you conclude that theists who believe in God, spirituality and karma theory are all invariably hypocrites?



Kindly forget about folks with "positive hypocrisy".

Though Shri Sarvna and myself could explain what way we mean casually by "positive hypocrisy", it was not found sensible. And for that we don't consider this expression as zilch.

This term is not a universal idiom. So pointing out on such expressions in negative sense would show nothing but a wrong attempt to justify one's claims. Thus, I kindly request you to avoid reference to this expression any more.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sravna,

Mine was a simple doubt or question; let us not be limited by the opinion of any Acharya. If a certain Reality disappears, so to say, into some nothingness or some other dimension, is it not eligible for the status of Reality? In what way is it incumbent that any reality has to be immortal?

I also do not understand why, if something is omniscient or has infinite knowledge, then how does it necessarily have knowledge to be omnipotent and immortal. It looks to me that we are bound by certain pre-conceived notions as laid down by the Acharyas.

According to me, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence and immortality, are four distinct and unrelated characteristics; they may exist singly or in whatever combination possible. Again the concept of "Reality" in Vedanta is closely linked to the word "sat" ='that which is, which exists'. But this 'existence' has been interpreted by different Acharyas differently, according to their lights. If the material world of senses is real for one Acharya, it is illusion for another. Thus we may see that a Reality can be made illusory (non-real,and therefore, non-existent) according to one's own view of the matter.

Good argument.

Just as your doubt is a simple one, my reply is also a simple one. Let me for the moment concede that there is no eternal reality. then if you and everything else are temporary, what is the meaning to all that you stand for, fight for or even die for? Is there any sense to any of it? It is all going to end in nothingness. Nothing is really affected. It is as good as nothing existing. So, unless there is permanence the essence of a reality will be lacking.

 

[sravna]

Hello ALL:

People may ask why I actively debate the Theists in this Forum.

As I said, around age 20, I got the "Revelation" or the "Eureka Moment" that the idea of GOD is a LIE... I talked about it to my Seniors in Madura College, Madurai, TN.

They laughed at me and said, "Life is very very hard... you have just started the journey... God is the driving force, without which YOU will never move even an inch....God's mercy is REQUIRED every step of the way... you will realize very very soon... Talk about Atheism only AFTER you have grown up successfully in life"

I took this to my heart... that's AFTER I have grown up successfully in life, I must talk about Atheism and the LIES that Theists propagate everyday...

That's what I am doing when I am 60 years of age, AFTER marrying a TB an Agno-Theist, AFTER raising two excellent kids and AFTER achieving the social, political and financial FREEDOMS.

What for am I writing all this?

For the sake of the Younger generation who are looking for some guidance, and who are asking the question "Is a Belief in God necessary to lead a successful and peaceful life?"

My writings would perhaps answer some of their questions!

That's all.

Cheers.

ps. For a long time, I have been a very private person; lately, I have opened up my life and write about it to the consternation and jealousy of many of the Theists! Lol

Dear Shri Yamaka,

Belief in God may not be necessary for a successful and peaceful life. Mainly so because of the yardstick we use for success and because of what makes us happy and peaceful. If you have all that or even more than your neighbor or friend in material possessions you are happy and peaceful. But is that all that is there to happiness and peace? It is not. This is where recourse to God helps. True belief in God makes you humble. And it gives you qualities which you would get if your ego is under check. I mean true belief. I am not talking of hypocrites.

So belief in God:

1) Enhances your quality of life manifold than when without that belief. The absence of ego makes possible peace even under most trying situations. You can never get that otherwise
2) Makes you a loving and loveable human
3) In doing the above it makes your life very fulfilling one

So belief in God even though not necessary to lead a materially successful life at least, is invaluable for the above reasons.

Btw, from your pov your post does make sense and I apologize for the comment I made but from my pov the scope of your logic seems limited.

 

[sangom]

2) DHARMA - Dharma is confusing? I think, I may be primitive to think what dharma is. So far I could realize that Dharma is something that is justifiable for the actions for the good in common for all in society/group, fair in reasoning and upholds justice. Dhama is something that is common to all theists and atheists.

Dear Shri Ravi,

You say

• for the good in common for all in society/group
• fair in reasoning
• upholds justice
• common to all theists and atheists

Kindly permit me to make the following observations:

• Is there anything which can easily fit the first condition? You give two instances of what you perceive of Dharma having been done. The first is a fake police encounter. Your description of it was as follows:

There were some politically powered criminals who were plaguing the society to the extreme, were easily bailed out from legal actions by their very creators (politicians-business mafias) for the very purpose. Such criminals ultimately were taken to task by police (with the tact such that they can not be considered as violating Law) and were shot dead in the pretext of ENCOUNTER. By hook and crook the plot was successfully carried out and the people in society were extremely happy about it (though many knows the fact).

In which way is this "Dharma"? Did it benefit all in the society? What about the people who depended on the said criminals - like their dependent parents, wives and kids; was it not a criminal act on the part of the police hushed up because of the influence of the Police people, just as good or as bad as what you accuse the criminals themselves of? It may be a very good "a tooth for a tooth" or "an eye for an eye", and may be you as the arbiter of all Dharma in this world will approve it. But do we know how "Dharma" operates? Who implements it and enforces its many laws and regulations? At least the group of wise people whom the vast population of undivided india, elected for the Constituent Assembly, did not favour such Dharma implementation and that is why I think the Supreme Court has now stayed the death sentence of Ajmal Kasab.

My humble request to you is only that we do not look at Dharma as what "appeals" to us as justice and fair play. It is very difficult to have justice and fair-play on a universal basis.

Dharma may be considered confusing by people when selfish and selfishly tactical minds tries to succeed under the cover of Dharma, giving justifications to the outside world. This confusing dharma is nothing but the misuse of the Dharma that is for a better cause for all.

Will not the two instances cited by you satisfy this "misuse of the Dharma"? In both cases the Police flouted the rules under which they are supposed to function and implemented their own version of the "Dharma", imo. Perhaps if the extinguished criminals in these cases included some close relative or friend of yours will it be possible for you to view it so equanimously as Dharma implementation? If, by chance, the details of these two cases comes before the Supreme Court it is very likely to view matters in a different light and punish the errant police. That was why even a great character like Dharmaputra says "dharmasya tatvam nihitam guhaayaam"=the essence of dharma is very subtle and secret.
Dharma, in short, justice as per individual pov please.

You call it Dharma or Law. It is common to all theists and atheist. Just because some theist indulge in cheap tactics and violates dharma does not makes hypocrisy a monopoly of theists.

There is some lack of communication here imho. I don't think I have said "hypocrisy a monopoly of theists". What my post/s might have implied is that since a known theist member of this forum advocated all theists to lead a janus-faced life - spiritual inside & materialistic outside, so as to achieve the best of both the worlds - it has naturally become a tenet to be followed with advantage by theists only. Since the atheists don't recognise any inner self and all that they need not make this double-act. This has nothing to do with violating dharma - eithe ryour kind, or the original dharma imo.

1) Do you think that well known, very distinguished, eminent folks are none other that Atheist?
2) Do you think that folks considered as illustrious are those alone who are philanthropists and can do charity?
3) Do you think that Hypocrisy is a monopoly of Theists?
4) Do you conclude that theists who believe in God, spirituality and karma theory are all invariably hypocrites?

My post did not imply any of the above points. What I said was - there are mahaajanaah who were/are atheists agnostics, non-theists, and in today's world we must allow freedom to the younger generation to follow the path shown by such atheist, agnostic, non-theist illustrious people as well. I leave it to the respected readers to judge for themselves.

Kindly forget about folks with "positive hypocrisy".

Though Shri Sarvna and myself could explain what way we mean casually by "positive hypocrisy", it was not found sensible. And for that we don't consider this expression as zilch.

This term is not a universal idiom. So pointing out on such expressions in negative sense would show nothing but a wrong attempt to justify one's claims.

A term which the explanation of which was not found sensible is an insensible word, that is it is senseless (witless). Zich means 'a quantity of no importance', 'zero', 'nothing at all'. I agree that word is not zilch but it sure is witless. Why should the "pointing out on such expressions in negative sense" show nothing but a wrong attempt to justify one's claims? To me it appears to be a perfectly right method to justify that the theist has fundamental difficulty in coordinating his day-to-day, mundane life, with the so-called spirituality which he claims to posses and which he extols no end.

Thus, I kindly request you to avoid reference to this expression any more.

There is a saying which goes "more pious than God". Here the OP, Shri Sravna gracefully accepted that the term "positive hypocrisy' might have been inapt but his supporter feels it necessary to hide this plain request under a barrage of pompous-sounding arguments. Had therre been the humility to make this request plainly and directly I would definitely have said yes to it, but looking at the ego displayed, I am forced to say that "answer reserved".