tks, do you think your two word comment was mature in your maturity continuum? Do you think whatever you consider as immature is ipso facto immature and therefore, calling it stupid is quite mature?
I have not been able to get a straight answer for the comment you made -- your skill in dodging and diverting is impressive -- and you want me to comment on some other post that you thought was intelligent? This is another diversionary tactic, the question I want to raise is your comment, which was irrational, immature, and far from the spirit of fair discussion. I had no interest in challenging you about what you considered intelligent, not because it was not challengeable, but because I couldn't get an answer from you even for a straight forward question about what you said, i.e. your own words, what chance do I have of getting one on a much more nebulous topic like what you consider intelligent.
In any case, since you ask, I will comment. The two examples that were cited in that post have rational explanations, and therefore they don't throw any light on the irrational idea that throwing water at the sun will reach their ancestors. I don't find anything intelligent in that post, and neither do I think the Guru Nanak story narrated stupid or immature. To call it stupid was immature.
BTW, there is a story about Adi Shankara and Baja Govindam with some parallel to this one, do you consider that story to be stupid too?
Nara - Happy New year!
Please review the thread of interaction around this topic. I said a story as a 'stupid story' characterizing it as immature.
Now I do not remember in any interaction that you were seeking an explanation out of just the need to understand.
Instead I sensed that you already passed a judgement at which point I did not feel the need to correct.
I offered to explain but explained my concerns that it may not be taken well by you.
If you had said "hey we are all adults, no need for any hesitation - just bring it on " or something like that then it would be a simple thing to get into the contents along with my view on why you were making the statements you were making. I was going to make observation about how you were and are processing information - I did not want to make that statement because it would be going away from content to person which you do all the time (and it is the one that results in ineffective discussion in my view).
I can share more about your style and how that cuts off discussion not only with me but others as well but I will do so only if you ask for that.
The words by themselves do not constitute maturity. Also any teacher regardless of who it is including Sri Sankara does not automatically make me look up to them.
It is the content of their teaching , soundness of logic, appropriateness of context and intent behind the statements that make me look up to a teacher. I do not look up to anyone playing the teacher role as just another person but as a symbol of knowledge in the teaching context .
A story can have great impact to teach something or it can be totally inappropriate.
There are many reasons why I called that story as a 'stupid story'.
Let me just explain at least one of the reasons here.
Mature persons respect others and treat them as they would like to be treated. There is a continuum here but let us use this as a basic starting point that many people are likely to agree though the description of maturity is obviously not complete.
Established religions with their ritualistic traditions have profound reasons and symbolism. I may or may not agree with the reasons and/or the symbolism. But if they are not causing harm to me or others by their actions knowingly or unknowings I think the mature thing is to be respectful of their traditions. This has nothing to do with whether I follow that religion or not.
I think it is immature to throw stones and mock their ritualistic traditions even if they are not seemingly well founded by our 'autobiography'.
In fact our reasoning is irrelevant since our attitude has to be one of respect.
If a religion is causing harm there are respectful ways to deal with those - example would be fights, religious conversions etc. that need to be discussed and acted upon. Rajiv Malhotra takes such an approach. The very act of research into all that is claimed to agree or refute is a scholarly thing to do.
Mocking is immature. Supporting any mocking that happens is equally an immature behavior.
So what is wrong with the story though as a style I am really not all that fond of stories? Nothing but what is wrong is in the context.
The original poster has been mocking many traditions in this thread without making an effort to understand what might be the profound reason of its followers even if he cannot agree. Let me reiterate that understanding here does not mean agreement.
If someone has a question there are respectful ways to raise the question. So in this long series of these posts here is one more about a story with intent to mock and that too out of ignorance of what might be possible explanation.
Immaturity is stupid to put it mildly. My critique was on the specific post and story and not on the person...
It is easy to get answers from me for what I say if the question was a true question to understand (not to agree necessarily) and if the question is asked without prior judgment.
Regards
