God Exists

[Nara]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

....Subsequent comments by Srimathi HH Ji tells me that there are cliques in this Forum.

Dear Shri KRS, I am surprised that you suspect cliques in the forum only now, after seeing Happy's "Like" and comment. Much to my chagrin I have seen "Likes" offered even to most vile of attacks as long as it is directed at a person whose views they disagree with.

Even in this very instance, the post involving the comment in question was not something particularly likeable except at a crass level deriving satisfaction from the humiliation of an "opponent". Yet it attracted the "Like" from fellow members and a comment of appreciation to boot. Is that not an indication of cliques, at least equal to, if not more than, that of Happy's?

BTW, it would be of no use, otherwise I will go back into the archive and show you the innumerable instances of this clique-based likes offered.

Folks, my request to all of you is, please don't take this so very seriously, we are just chatting away in a cocktail lounge with virgin or spiked bloody marys and pina coladas, no need to raise our voices. Let us shoot the breeze and have fun.

Finally, IMHO, the answer is not iron fisted moderation, when moderation is really needed I wish it is applied with a velvet glove through PM, unless the offense continues -- just my two silly cents.

Cheers!

 

[KRS]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

Yes, I know about the 'likes' and the cliques. I have even talked extensively in this Forum.

As Sri Praveen Ji says that Moderation is the final word. By the way it seems he has Moderated a post above.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Servall]

Mr. Nara:

Even in this very instance, the [COLOR=#DA7911 !important][COLOR=#DA7911 !important]post[/COLOR][/COLOR] involving the comment in question was not something particularly likeable except at a crass level deriving satisfaction from the humiliation of an "opponent". Yet it attracted the "Like" from fellow members and a comment of appreciation to boot. Is that not an indication of cliques, at least equal to, if not more than, that of Happy's?

I was one of those people who 'Liked' the comments made by Ashwin and Prasad. The point of my liking was not to depict that I terribly enjoyed the conversation or I get pleasure out of hurting someone's feelings. I just agreed with Ashwin and Prasad to indicate my displeasure of Y's comments, thats all. I guess there are limitations to the 'Like' icon!!

I guess it is time to move on...and Peace out...

 

[prasad1]

Y:

You said this to a fellow member of this forum:



In between all your glorious achievements, 'I' did this accalamations, and hard work depriving yourself of sleep, you may have attempted to learn some culture too!!

From day 1 I joined this forum, you have been saying only one thing, and you have been copying and pasting the same material to every thread. I hope for a change you will say something new and oh, by the way, thank you for showing us the other ugly side of yours!!

I thought you had some class....if you choose to give something back to me Y, bring it on dude, I can give as much as I can take....

The people supporting this person's rude remark are equating it with Renuka's comment are deliberately confusing the discussion. Ms. Renuka's comment about getting pissed had a different connotation. According to the webster's dictionary:

angry, irritated —often used with off


See pissed defined for English-language learners »

[h=2]Examples of PISSED[/h]

• She is pissed at her boyfriend for not calling her.
• I got really pissed when she said that!
• They went to the pub and got completely pissed.

There was no mention of body fluid By Renuka. So please do not equate her comment with the offending comment.

I hope this does not become a ".........." contest.
Let us keep the decorum of the site. I feel that others in the site who think this person is their friend will give him some good advice he needs. So please do not make it a challenge.

 

[ShivKC]

Dear Srimathi Renuka Ji,

Thank you for affirming my impudent remarks to Sri Yamaka, that included you.

As an atheist, he does not even want to acknowledge the role of 'luck' in his life!

So be it. I sincerely hope that his luck generated by his circumstances continue.

Regards,
KRS

sh.krs, it would have been nice, had you presented your view on Luck Vs Atheism, than expecting Yams to blindly acknowledge your thrust.

this point regarding 'luck' was once discussed with yams he, and he responded well in detail before. may be, you would scroll back the posts,soon.

any ways, luck according to atheism is more of probability and chances. may be you should counter him in that way, than expecting a personal submission.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri ShivKC Ji,

That is exactly what I said in my prior posts regarding luck and atheism. I even gave an example of the 'heads or tails'.

I do not want anyone's submission. No one is going to change anyone else's fundamental views here. What we are doing is to banter, with perhaps some interesting angle or information popping out now and then. That's all.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Yamaka]

Hello ALL:

I have to tell you that "bodily fluid" analogy or metaphor or physical literal meaning was NOT introduced by me. Dear KRS, Praveen and others must know this.

Yes, I see our Believer friends going up in arms because of my use of the words "I did it".

Let me clarify this way -

In Yamaka's Dharma ALL responsibilities lie with the individual - the person. If there is any FAILURE (defined whatever way) then "the person must own it"; likewise, if there is any SUCCESS (defined whatever way) then "the person must take credit for it".

In that context only I wrote "I did it" against ALL odds stacked against me by the TRADITIONAL Society, coming from a forgotten little hamlet in the backwaters of rural India.

That's all.

You may label it as an arrogant, intolerable egoistic way of proclaiming "the Success"... It's your CHOICE.

Please do not preach me how I should use my words!

I pray Believers, please show your cards on the following

1. Do you believe in the Super Natural Agent controlling ALL activities ALL the time in this Universe?
2. How do you think that poojas, prayers and bhajans get transmitted to that SNA and how do you get back the response?
3. Do you believe in the Janma poorva Karma? How does it work?

I know this is the CORE issue, none of you dare to address.

Please try.

Regards

Y

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

In a couple of my posts covering what you said above, I said these:

'I did it' is a bit disconcerting to me. Not because I doubt that you did it. Even in your world of no God, you must admit that you were lucky, as the random flip of the coin of life might have landed tails when you called for heads.

But when I carefully examine my life milestones, they all happened despite my efforts.

I did not in anyway intend to minimize your accomplishments. You have every right to them. Just, in my case, I think my life accomplishments are due to providence.

You may call it 'luck'.

My response to you was not to question your belief in atheism. Yet, you grouped all of us as a group of believers and suggested that 'we' all wait for things to happen. My 'impudence' was to point this intellectually indefensible position on your part and suggest that it lacked class and graciousness.

Where sir exactly I am attacking you? Can you quote me in any other way above in my posts that I speak against you as a person?

If you want a discussion on the bottom three questions you have asked above, we can easily have one.

But it will all be in vain as you do not accept Aasthiham as having a rational basis, while BELIEVING that Naasthiham alone does. It is a closed mind view that will not accept even the existence of the primordial force that created the Universe. You vaguely accept this force as 'Nature', but did not pursue the conversation after I asked you since space-time continuum started at this point, what kind on 'nature' you are talking about, in another thread. You casually got off the conversation by saying that Physicists know about these things.

If you want a conversation about God, let us start at this point and go step by step.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Y:

Dear Servall: Ref post 1804

I am curious to know why you go after ONLY Mu Ka, why not J Jaya also?

Why not Arun Jaitley and Yedd'appa of Karnataka also?

On record, I admire Kalaigner Mu Ka for his enormous contribution to Tamilliterature and Tamil Cinema, but I hate him as a Politician for the nepotism inhis Party.

Is he MORE corrupt than J Jaya? Probably NOT...

I like A. Raja and Kani because they were incarcerated against the Constitutionfor whatever "Crime" allegedly they committed...

Regards.

Y

Hi Y: I guess it was lack of your sleep that made you skip some of my previous posts, where I hold MK, JJ and all other politicians in the same category. I speak of TN more as I am from there.

Cry theBeloved Country-3: Post # 3:
How can the morons like MK, chidambaram,Marans, MM and JJ can comfortably sleep when there is so much abject povertyaround?

And # 1804 of the same thread which you quoted!!

Dont we knowevery rupee of the ill-gotten moneyrepresents rivers of tears unwiped, that MKand other TN politicians,conveniently disown...

Dear Y: You may feel elated by all the accomplishments of your beloved leader MK; Or, cry tears of the plight of A. Raja and Kanimozhi. Guess what, with all that ill-gotten money and power, they may even come out of Tihar, unconvicted and unscathed..at which you may gloat more.

But your glee will need to answer those poor human beings whom you get to see on the platforms when you go to India next time. But I am sure, justice will prevail, their conscience will kill them and still there is hope for TN and other parts of India from these morons.

Until then, as in your own words, WAIT & SEE ........

Sorry Y: I am having issues using Reply with Quote:

Dear Servall:

When I read your post 1804, it gave me a FALSE impression perhaps that you think that Mu Ka is the ONLY corrupt person in India. That's why I asked you that question.

Yes, I did not read all of your earlier posts, for want of time.

You asked so many questions in the post above.

I am asking you

1. How come your Super Natural Agent (the Gods of Abraham and/or Gods of Vedas and Pujas) allow nearly 1110 million people (of whom most are Believers doing prayer, poojas and bhajans many times a day) living in abject poverty in India?

2. How come the same Agent has allowed many of the Believers to peddle in extreme corruption in India?

3. How come the same Agent creates serious earthquakes and tsunami to kill and hurt hundreds of thousands of people every time?

Let's have serious discussion.

I have stated Yamaka's Dharma in the earlier post; please state Servall's Dharma and address the above questions in earnest.

Let's start the game now!

Cheers.

 

[biswa]

I am aware of the criticism of "I did it"!!! That's what most of the Believers have told me!!

Mr. Y, do you consider yourself a winner in the context of this forum? Have you achieved what you wanted to achieve? Have you managed to convert all the believers using the sword of your intellect? Do you feel loved, respected, appreciated?

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

In a couple of my posts covering what you said above, I said these:







Where sir exactly I am attacking you? Can you quote me in any other way above in my posts that I speak against you as a person?

If you want a discussion on the bottom three questions you have asked above, we can easily have one.

But it will all be in vain as you do not accept Aasthiham as having a rational basis, while BELIEVING that Naasthiham alone does. It is a closed mind view that will not accept even the existence of the primordial force that created the Universe. You vaguely accept this force as 'Nature', but did not pursue the conversation after I asked you since space-time continuum started at this point, what kind on 'nature' you are talking about, in another thread. You casually got off the conversation by saying that Physicists know about these things.

If you want a conversation about God, let us start at this point and go step by step.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS:

1. I noted what you said about my "I did it". There are many other Believers in this Forum have different reactions to that "I did it" line.

Some are perhaps running a Big Pooja to their Deity to cut Yamaka down! LOL.

Yes, I am an arrogant egoistic persistent son of a gun! That's my problem! Lol.

Let us leave that "I did it" alone for now.. and move on.

2. Yes, I recall we had some discussions of Big Bang and other very early events of the creation of the Universe about 17 billion years ago...

Now, for our discussion here I accept the Super Natural Agent = Nature.

Please answer my questions 2 and 3 using the Nature as the SNA (Refer post 1857)

My answer has been

2. PPB just can't influence Nature, because there are very many laws of Nature (some known and many unknown so far) that make it work in very many "mysterious" ways: like earth quake or sudden tsunami etc. etc.

Therefore, PPB has no USE whatsoever. But Believers may get some psychological "momentary" satisfaction after performing PPB with some devotion and seriousness...However, it can NOT give a long lasting tangible positive effect, IMO.

3. JPK is totally a FALSE idea. This IDEA has brought in FATALISM to India and is the root cause of India's "Backwardness", if any.

Regards.

Y

 

[KRS]

Thanks, Sri Yamaka. If you have noticed, I did not question your egoism etc. on your 'I did it' statement. I questioned how you account for probability in the outcomes. One can control only so much. For example, take your marriage. It obviously took two folks to agree. Since you can not completely control the actions of another, don't you think that you were lucky that she agreed to marry? That was what I was asking.

Now before I answer your questions, I have to again ask. What is the nature of this SNA you are talking about? Is it bound by the laws of cause and effect? what kind of entity is this?

Regards,
KRS

 

[Yamaka]

Mr. Y, do you consider yourself a winner in the context of this forum? Have you achieved what you wanted to achieve? Have you managed to convert all the believers using the sword of your intellect? Do you feel loved, respected, appreciated?

Dear Biswa:

My understanding is there are very many non-participating observers or visitors to this Thread/Forum. Many of them are young (age 20-30 in colleges).

I am assuming that they are asking

"Can anyone live a normal or supra-normal life if he/she rejects Super Natural Agent (the God)?"

I am answering them YES... follow Yamaka's Dharma:

Take full personal responsibility to ALL of your life.
Work hard.
Plan and execute your Plans and Ideas right.
"Success" will come.
Be an Optimist and
Enjoy the life in this world till your natural death.

That's all. I have no way of checking my assumption at this point in time.

Cheers.

 

[Yamaka]

Thanks, Sri Yamaka. If you have noticed, I did not question your egoism etc. on your 'I did it' statement. I questioned how you account for probability in the outcomes. One can control only so much. For example, take your marriage. It obviously took two folks to agree. Since you can not completely control the actions of another, don't you think that you were lucky that she agreed to marry? That was what I was asking.

Now before I answer your questions, I have to again ask. What is the nature of this SNA you are talking about? Is it bound by the laws of cause and effect? what kind of entity is this?

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS:

1. As I wrote many time before, my wife IS an Agno-Theist. Because she answers "I don't know" to all the three questions I asked you in my post above.

But she readily concedes, "It's all what I was indoctrinated into as a child. Tradition, Fear and some dose of Superstition all force me to go to Temple at least a few times a year".

We were friends for 3 years knowing each other very well, before I proposed to her. She readily agreed because "I am a FRESH AIR in her life" LOL.

3. On SNA - here is what I learnt thu Holy Books, my parents and wife:

SNA is mostly a Super-Human like Figure (according to Koran, Bible and Purans) present somewhere and everywhere in this Universe controlling ALL activities of ALL beings here including human beings.

Without this SNA nothing happens, period. Human beings are made by and controlled by this SNA.

Except a few million Neo-Believers who have their own hue of shades of SNA, most Indian Believers think the above is true and correct.

If you want to dwell on this per se, please do... but I am giving you a way out of it by accepting for now SNA = Nature.

You may answer qn 2 and 3 above.

Cheers.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

When I asked this:

Now before I answer your questions, I have to again ask. What is the nature of this SNA you are talking about? Is it bound by the laws of cause and effect? what kind of entity is this?

I did not ask you what others think! . I asked for only your OWN opinion to the above questions.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

When I asked this:

I did not ask you what others think! . I asked for only your OWN opinion to the above questions.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS:

Please read my answer again, and again. I have given clearly my OWN view and how I got that view.

You are reluctant to get to the Core, I see it. Why dancing around the bush? I have declared my position already.

You can declare "I don't know" and move on, if you want to!!!!

Let's ask others to get a crack at the Core of Beliefs and Faiths, as shown in Holy Books and Purans.

Vedas are a different kind... Do you know Sanskrit well? Can you read the Original Texts yourself w/o any help and explain what the intent of the Original Authors was?

Regards.

Y

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Yamaka Ji,

I must be really dense. I went through all your posts above and nowhere can I find your position on SNA vis-a-vis the 3 simple questions I have asked:

1. What is the nature of SNA from your POV.
2. Is it bound by natural laws, that is cause and effect.
3. Based on the above two answers, tell me what kind of entity it is.

Since you agree that there is SNA ("Nature"), you must be able to answer these questions from your rational POV.

This is because, as I have said before, unless you agree that Aasthiham is based on rational thought, we can not go beyond this point. What religions say, or what Vedas say, or whether I know Sanskrit or Aramaic or Arabic or Hebrew are irrelevant now for this discussion. Let us not get in to religious details right now. There is ample time to discuss that later. But we need to start at agreeing on the nature of this SNA first.

Looks to me, you want me desperately to walk away. I would understand if you reply 'I do not know' to the above 3 simple questions. I will never walk away from something where I have valid argument.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Nara]

Dear Shri KRS,

Asthika means those who believe in Vedas. So, an Astika, like Kapila, can be an Atheist, one who rejects the notion of God.

The question we are debating is, is there a God? To answer this question we need to be pretty precise as to what we mean by the word God.

One can say God is that super natural force, the primordial cause, without which the effect we see, namely the material universe, cannot exist. Given this definition of God we can argue whether such a God exists or not. I will say we can't be sure and given such a God is only conjectured without any evidence we have to reject that proposition. You may say where there is an effect there must be cause, and therefore we have no option but to infer a creator God. IMO, this debate can never be resolved.

Now, this thread is not about such a concept of God. The OP, (Brahin was it?) cited the following:

"Ah, barbers DO exist! What happens is, people do not come to me.
"Exactly!- affirmed the customer. "That's the point! GOD, too exist!

​

Such a statement asserts a God who cares about human beings, who resolves problems if only people will come to him, like you can get your hair cut from a barber if only you take the trouble of going to him and pay his fees. That is, if you take the trouble to go to God and pay his fees (prayer) all will be done.

In many ways it is this question that is most relevant in the daily lives of almost all human beings. When we talk about Atheists and Theists, the question is about a God who cares about human existence, not about a primordial force that has no care for humans or other living beings. Very few, too few for anyone to care, are interested in an impersonal God who may or may not preexist time and space and let loose this universe on us. As I said before, a discussion about such a god is hopelessly deadlocked.

So, for our discussions to have any real substance, it must be at the level of personal God who listens to and answers prayers. Do you really think there is a God who cares about humans, and that God has the power to grant what the humans pray for, from passing SSLC exam to moksham? This is the only level that matters in our day-to-day lives. At this level, if I may say so, the three questions you ask are immaterial. And if I may say so further, there is absolutely no evidence or reason to believe such a God exists.

Cheers!

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Sri Yamaka Ji,

I do not believe in doing the Jalra. In fact, I suspect that Srimathi Renuka Ji and I practice different approaches to God. I acknowledged her life's accomplishments, while recounting mine to you when you wrote the 'I did it' post.

My response to you was not to question your belief in atheism. Yet, you grouped all of us as a group of believers and suggested that 'we' all wait for things to happen. My 'impudence' was to point this intellectually indefensible position on your part and suggest that it lacked class and graciousness.

Subsequent comments by Srimathi HH Ji tells me that there are cliques in this Forum. This is not helpful in conducting fair one on one discussions in the Forum. I see right after you have again posted to Srimathi Renuka Ji, probably because of the exhortation. I hope this kind of clique warfare does not continue.

I feel that what Srimathi Renuka Ji posted may be considered to be in the area of something I would not think of, her job as a physician perhaps accounts for bringing up that analogy. And the analogy was about the certainty in cause and effect. Nothing to do with you personally. Subsequently she said 'Shanti' with a clever remark. Yet, you continue with the attack as though her analogy was about you.

This type of endless responses and exhortations end up usually with myself moderating at the end.

I would ask you, Srimathi Renuka Ji and others to stop this line of responses right now. Thanks.

Regards,
KRS

Dear Sir,

Am not sure what "Subsequent comments" of mine suggests there are cliques in this Forum. Kindly clarify.

On the contrary, i thot those who posted from post # 1828 to post # 1833 formed cliques. These posts are in tandem encouraging / hitting below the belt. So i cud not help comparing "class" and "urine" as it appeared in these posts.

Am surprised to see responses to Y's post by various posters. I thot Renu's post # 1829 was crass -- she need not have brought the urine comparison in the first place. Y protested. But instead what have you - he is being moderated and called names indirectly -- like risque, mean, nasty, uncultured, vulgar, hitting below belt, etc.

Btw, all of this wud not have started if yourself had not made an unnecessary comment in post # 1828. If a moderator himself makes a personally insulting comment in a subtle (or indirect way) as "lacks class", does not delete the subsequent urine comparison made by Renu, and even thanks Renu in post # 1831, what else to expect...ofcourse that invariably allows all and sundry to invite themselves, to come along, and make personally insulting remarks like vulgar, risque, etc...

Sir, i hope you realise the conversation between Renu and Yamaka was perfectly fine until you made post # 1828. Therefore i agee with Y's post # 1832 . I do not blame renu fully in this. Sir, am yet to see you commenting on posts by prasad1, suraju, ashwin, etc - surprisingly, you do not call their comments cliques to yours or renu's.

You are free to label this post also a clique. It is rather obvious to readers there are cliques everywhere....so am not sure if cliques (and that too "clique warfare" is an issue).

Okay, tell me what in Srimathi Renuka's analogy is a personal attack on Sri Yamaka? You said and I am paraphrasing, 'Hope you give it to others as much as you receive'. If this is not exhorting, what else? It is a Moderator's job to moderate. It is not your job.

I have explained to Sri Yamaka about my comment about class and it is between him and me as posters.

What gives you the right to insert yourself in the middle?

Regards,
KRS

 

[renuka]

Hi Renuka:

I am very enthralled about your choice of words and the imagery.

I only wish I meet to congratulate your teenage son how proud he must be to have such a fantastic mother who can dish out "<edited and removed>" and Shanti with ease and smile!

Watch out, he may quickly become another Yamaka, all because of the Sanathana Dharma that you follow daily...

Way to go...

With admiration!

ROFL..

please be extra careful as this is a public forum.

You are a funny guy Yams..


My son will surely feel very very happy with his mum(we dont use the word "proud" at home cos pride always comes with prejudice) becos he knows that his mum is capable of anything.He always says that!!
He knows I can sing bhajans,teach him sanskrit and at the same time enjoy dancing with him to the song "I'm Sexy and I know it"

Well coming to my son becoming another Yamaka..future I dont know.
But I doubt he will turn out like you cos at our home we encourage the child to get any doubt answered and we help him understand life and religion better.

I dont give answers like "dont ask me why we worship Shiva Linga..Just follow it without asking"
If I dont know something..I tell him I will read up and answer him later.So he has all his doubts cleared.
The other day he was asking me is there a state in between solid and liquid(which he was coining his own term Solquid) to which I didnt know and I also didnt know existed and finally I looked up on line and found that it actually existed and physicist Chia Fu Chou discovered a thermodynamic state between solids and liquids.

He also asked me last week "what is it that directs the body to function the way it should? Its impossible for it to be without a higher energy guiding it"

He has an open mind..so I doubt he will turn out to be another Yamaka!LOL

Anyway none one of us can actually always make things happen the way we want it but those who know this fact just leave everything to the Almighty and life goes on.
So I dont really worry too much of tomorrow.If we live today well..tomorrow should not be much of a problem.


Anyway my dear Yams..urine is a by product of nature..and Shanthi is a feeling of peace.
Why view things at the opposite end of the spectrum?
Everything in this world is from the 5 elements.
Thanks to my training in Sanathana Dharma I am able to appreciate that.

This shloka will make you understand better to not to view life in pairs of opposites.
BTW its in Sanskrit which you say its complicated but you are Yamaka..the guy who can make Things Happen!!! So I guess nothing is impossible for you to learn and know.


Drushadvichitratalpayor bhujanga mauktikasrajor
Garishtharatnaloshthayoh suhrudvipakshapakshayoh
Trushnaravindachakshushoh prajamahimahendrayoh
Sama pravartayanmanah kada sadashivam bhaje I

 

[KRS]

Dear brother Nara Ji,

Ah, I can always count on you to clarify things, even though we are poles apart on many topics.

First of all, let me say, yes you are correct. Strictly speaking I should not have used the words Aasthika and Naasthika to represent Theists and Atheists.

Having said that, my three questions are not only relevant for the discussion, you have answered them:

One can say God is that super natural force, the primordial cause, without which the effect we see, namely the material universe, cannot exist. Given this definition of God we can argue whether such a God exists or not. I will say we can't be sure and given such a God is only conjectured without any evidence we have to reject that proposition. You may say where there is an effect there must be cause, and therefore we have no option but to infer a creator God. IMO, this debate can never be resolved.

Why is this relevant? Because it forms the foundation for the Theistic philosophies. Once you then accept an impersonal God's existence then an argument can not be made that a theory of personal God can not stem from it. This is very logical.

In fact many theistic traditions point to a formless entity as God, with pathways to know that entity through personal Gods, because this entity is our source. Now the aim is to allow for any human being with the combination of cultural/emotional/intellectual to access this entity. But they have also evolved in that fashion of letting a human being to choose the way.

I personally do not believe in a personal God. But based on a person's spiritual quotient (many Atheists seem to have zero for this quotient) there is nothing wrong if they think that their Gods doll out favors. I think spirituality as a human condition will always exist and can not just be wished away.

All this, only if one agrees with what you term as my argument for the first question about the primordial entity.

Thanks.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Sri Yamaka Ji,

I must be really dense. I went through all your posts above and nowhere can I find your position on SNA vis-a-vis the 3 simple questions I have asked:

1. What is the nature of SNA from your POV.
2. Is it bound by natural laws, that is cause and effect.
3. Based on the above two answers, tell me what kind of entity it is.

Since you agree that there is SNA ("Nature"), you must be able to answer these questions from your rational POV.

This is because, as I have said before, unless you agree that Aasthiham is based on rational thought, we can not go beyond this point. What religions say, or what Vedas say, or whether I know Sanskrit or Aramaic or Arabic or Hebrew are irrelevant now for this discussion. Let us not get in to religious details right now. There is ample time to discuss that later. But we need to start at agreeing on the nature of this SNA first.

Looks to me, you want me desperately to walk away. I would understand if you reply 'I do not know' to the above 3 simple questions. I will never walk away from something where I have valid argument.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS:

1. In my view, the SNA (the God - as described by the Holy Books of Puranas, Koran and Bible) is non-existent. It's the creation of man-made Religions, period.

2. Because of my answer to Qn 1, this Qn 2 is irrelevant.

3. Based on the above, the Super Natural Agent - the God - is totally absent in my mind and thoughts. That's that Entity is just a FICTION in the minds of the Believers.

You know I have been saying that I am a self-proclaimed Atheist - a Non-Believer.

Please note, my definition of God given in 1 above. That's very important.

Where is your argument? You have not stated your answers at all!

Regards.

Y

 

[renuka]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

I wish you do not add to the melee.

Please go back and read Srimathi Renuka's first words on this. Yes it deals with waste. But it was an analogy, not an attack.

Let us not talk about 'believers' and 'non believers'. Let us see members as individuals and not belonging to any clique. Thanks.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS Ji,

Thanks this post. Yes it was an analogy..It comes natural to any doctor.
I also inject humor in what I write most of the while.
I was just trying to stress that in life there are situations where we have to wait and I thought the act of urination is the best example cos thats nature.

I am suprised many people think citing "human waste" is demeaning.
Thats part of our body function and nothing to be shy about.
But anyway as you suggested we will let this case rest and peace to the forum once again.

 

[biswa]

follow Yamaka's Dharma:

Take full personal responsibility to ALL of your life.
Work hard.
Plan and execute your Plans and Ideas right.
"Success" will come.
Be an Optimist and
Enjoy the life in this world till your natural death.
Cheers.

These all seem reasonable. I don't see why theists would mind following Yamaka's dharma. As long as you don't demand exclusivity of course. Surely there is a lot in common among the great religions (including Yamaka's dharma).

 

[Nara]

.... Because it forms the foundation for the Theistic philosophies. Once you then accept an impersonal God's existence then an argument can not be made that a theory of personal God can not stem from it. This is very logical.

Dear brother KRS, this is not only not very logical, it is very illogical. Even if there was a purposeful SNA that set in motion what we call creation -- note, this is only an evidence free speculation -- there is no logical basis to think this SNA has any special interest in human beings or the prayers they offer.

In fact a purposeful SNA, if such an entity exists, would take prayers as an insult to its own judgement about what is right or wrong. Saying this differently, any SNA who is persuaded by a little prayer is no different from Kim Jung Ill and is certainly not worthy of the prayer of any self respecting individual.

On the other hand, if you mean a belief in an impersonal SNA is but a logical step away from belief in a personal God, then I do agree, and I insist that it is the very reason why we must nip it in the bud and not accede to even this impersonal SNA, otherwise, we may inevitably descend into the irrational notion of a personal God who cares to assist you if only you pray to it in a sycophantic manner.

Cheers!