(October 7, 2012 at 2:46 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: I didn't ask you to accept my evidence as evidence for you. For one thing, you don't know me or my Guru for beans.

Another point is, you clearly don't want to know that God exists. It would mess up your style if God existed. It would take the fun out of your life. It would mess up the idea that you can do whatever the hell you want. You're clearly not ready to be balanced, detached and objective about the possibility.

That's fine. That's what this world is: an illusion, where rebellious souls can live in the fantasy that there is no God.

You don't know us, either. You have no evidence besides something anecdotal (which isn't really evidence) and you're far, far from objective. You have a vested interest in continuing the God-Fantasy. You think we enjoy knowing that when we die, we're just worm-food? You think that being kept up at night in existential crisis is fun? No. It's better than believing there is some asshole somewhere who is sadistic enough to have "created" the human race.

(October 7, 2012 at 2:56 am)whateverist Wrote: You're in charge of your fantasy of what this world is.

Really? Because in my fantasies I wish I was really rich and famous and that I didn't have to get old and die... Haven't you ever wanted something that you couldn't have?

How come, if you're in charge?

---

(October 7, 2012 at 3:01 am)Annik Wrote: It's better than believing there is some asshole somewhere who is sadistic enough to have "created" the human race.

See? You're really really angry at God. Otherwise, why say he's sadistic and an asshole?

(October 7, 2012 at 3:13 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote:

(October 7, 2012 at 2:56 am)whateverist Wrote: You're in charge of your fantasy of what this world is.

Really? Because in my fantasies I wish I was really rich and famous and that I didn't have to get old and die... Haven't you ever wanted something that you couldn't have?

I never said all fantasies would be equally easy to maintain, silly. I sometimes want things I can't have .. and some of them make GREAT fantasies.

Aki, try to see it this way. (I can only speak for myself on this matter, but I know that a lot of the people here agree with me.)

As of this moment, it doesn't really matter if we can prove or disprove gods. I don't know your god (I will read into it, pinky promise), but I know many others. And even if I was proven one day that I was wrong, I would still not worship. That's what bugs me about most religions, the worshiping part of it.
Most gods are declared to be perfect, to be omniscient, infallible and creators of this realm. We humans are always described as inferior and incomplete. But why should an inferior being automatically bend one knee and be grateful to a deity, which has created such an imperfect world and though it seems interested in the most odd parts of human life, it still allows everything from parasites to war waged in its name. No, I have to go with the deists on this one, if indeed such a being exists, it cares zilch about us.

My stance is this, my field of expertise lies in biology and chemistry and I understand both fields well (I wish I could say the same about physics, though). All I've presented to you here is true and real, the fruit of decades of study and research. What I unfortunately can't do is convey my understanding and knowledge to you in order to be able to interpret it. Or I will ask again, how much of the natural sciences do you know, am I assuming too much and underestimating you? Because to me it seems that your snarky retorts and sarcastic approach points to ignorance.

As for the metaphysical phenomena you think science can't prove/create, you're right. Today we don't know. But there's two paths in front of us, the first being that you're wrong an e.g. a soul does not exist, the other one being that we have to be patient and wait for the answers after research is completed. I've never seen any practical reason for a soul, I am the sum of my DNA and my environment. To me the souls is a concept created by religious leaders in order to ensure fear in their followers in order to have control, fooling people to think that they need an eternal piece to enter heave or to be reborn again. Well, I know that are constantly being 'reborn' everyday as our former atoms and molecules leave us and new ones replace them, e.g. my liver is not quite the same it was seven years ago.

Finally, you are well within your rights to be religious and you may worship any god you see fit. But why Krishna and not Allah, Zeus, Ilmatar or Loki?

(October 6, 2012 at 10:16 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: The modern scientific method is great for a certain field of knowledge. But it's a completely different philosophical assumption to assume that the modern scientific method applies to everything knowable.

There is an old method for spiritual knowledge. Of course the methods for achieving such knowledge are somewhat different than achieving knowledge in modern material science. Attaining spiritual knowledge requires the elevation of one's consciousness. There is a deep science to this, and, just like any dope off the street can't easily realize the truth of quantum physics, it's a category of knowledge that requires serious discipline and is not available to anyone and everyone.

How would I achieve elevation of consciousness. Will standing on a chair help, or do I need to get up on the kitchen table?


(For what it's worth, I've achieved samadhi several times, and I'm still far from convinced that it's not all just Makyo. Do you believe that you can convince me otherwise?)

(October 7, 2012 at 4:45 am)Kayenneh Wrote: Finally, you are well within your rights to be religious and you may worship any god you see fit. But why Krishna and not Allah, Zeus, Ilmatar or Loki?

I realize you said a lot, but the last line is jumping out first.

I want to preface this post by saying that I'm not proving something to anyone. We're just making conversation. You're hearing a little more about my theory. Because you're asking.

As far as I understand Allah, He is the supreme lord, the primeval cause of all causes, the supreme, cosmic consciousness pervading all of reality. God with a capital "G." In that case, it's the same entity, the same fundamental truth, however you name it. Like in German, the sun is called "sonne", in Dutch "zon", in Spanish "sol." Same thing, different names in different languages and cultures. So Allah and Krishna are the same supreme person. The supreme God of other monotheistic traditions are, again, the same God. There can't be more than one of those. I realize that there are Muslims and Christians that won't be happy to agree that our God is the same, but I'm totally fine with that. I say "He who loves God has the best religion."

The Bhagavad Gita says that God reveals Himself from time to time in this world, in different ways, according to people's abilities to appreciate spiritual life. Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism (and maybe others) are all revelations meant for a particular time and place. People think those ideas are in conflict, but I don't think so. While people argue over externals, there is a tremendous amount that is really the same at the heart of those traditions.

Personalities like Zeus, Ilmatar or Loki are godly beings, heavenly beings, maybe powerful beings. But no one has ever claimed they're God - at least none of their wikipedia entries say that. Someone can worship those beings, and they may derive some benefit from such worship. But the highest benefit will always be in worshiping the supreme God.

A side note - Zeus, king of heaven, seems like he might be the same as Indra, who shows up in Vedic scripture. They seem to have a lot in common. I'm sure other Greek gods are similar to other demigods mentioned in Vedic culture.

There's more to say, but I'll just let you disagree with this and then maybe keep going later.

---

(October 7, 2012 at 4:57 am)apophenia Wrote: (For what it's worth, I've achieved samadhi several times, and I'm still far from convinced that it's not all just Makyo. Do you believe that you can convince me otherwise?)

No, I won't convince you of anything.

(October 7, 2012 at 5:21 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: I want to preface this post by saying that I'm not proving something to anyone. We're just making conversation. You're hearing a little more about my theory. Because you're asking.

Yes I asked, and thank you for answering. Your stance on the matter was what I thought it would be, a nice notion, but unfortunately I think we both know that all the sides can't play nicely in the same sandbox even if their lives depended on it.

Quote:A side note - Zeus, king of heaven, seems like he might be the same as Indra, who shows up in Vedic scripture. They seem to have a lot in common. I'm sure other Greek gods are similar to other demigods mentioned in Vedic culture.

Interesting that you should mention this, because it's not the first time nor the last when a culture has borrowed gods from an older one.

(October 7, 2012 at 5:21 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote:

(October 7, 2012 at 4:57 am)apophenia Wrote: (For what it's worth, I've achieved samadhi several times, and I'm still far from convinced that it's not all just Makyo. Do you believe that you can convince me otherwise?)

No, I won't convince you of anything.

Oh, c'mon. Can't you even give me a hint? Won't you tell me your path? You came all this way. What is a path if it doesn't lead someplace?

(October 7, 2012 at 5:27 am)Kayenneh Wrote:

(October 7, 2012 at 5:21 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: I want to preface this post by saying that I'm not proving something to anyone. We're just making conversation. You're hearing a little more about my theory. Because you're asking.

Yes I asked, and thank you for answering. Your stance on the matter was what I thought it would be, a nice notion, but unfortunately I think we both know that all the sides can't play nicely in the same sandbox even if their lives depended on it.

Quote:A side note - Zeus, king of heaven, seems like he might be the same as Indra, who shows up in Vedic scripture. They seem to have a lot in common. I'm sure other Greek gods are similar to other demigods mentioned in Vedic culture.

Interesting that you should mention this, because it's not the first time nor the last when a culture has borrowed gods from an older one.

People can't play nicely because they don't have genuinely spiritual conceptions. Their spiritual conceptions are tainted by worldly ideas and aspirations. So they end up using religion as an excuse to fight over material objects. There may be genuine spiritual ideals in their traditions, but without living saints, people end up acting out their material motivations in the name of religion.

One of the reasons I've chosen the path I have is because of the uncompromising purity of it's ideal. And once you understand that, all the other messy stuff makes sense.

It could be the Greeks "borrowed" Zeus from the Vedas. It could be both cultures interacted with him. I'll let you decide ...

---

(October 7, 2012 at 5:31 am)apophenia Wrote: Oh, c'mon. Can't you even give me a hint? Won't you tell me your path? You came all this way. What is a path if it doesn't lead someplace?

I've already told you my path - I'm a devotee of Krishna. I don't understand what you want me to say.

(October 7, 2012 at 5:37 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: People can't play nicely because they don't have genuinely spiritual conceptions. Their spiritual conceptions are tainted by worldly ideas and aspirations. So they end up using religion as an excuse to fight over material objects. There may be genuine spiritual ideals in their traditions, but without living saints, people end up acting out their material motivations in the name of religion.

I'm not surprised that they do. After all, materia is all we can be certain of and we need materialistic stuff in order to survive. Ideals on the other hand are fleeting and doesn't necessarily make for a better life. I would just appreciate if people could be upfront about it, instead of hiding behind their imaginary friend.

Quote:One of the reasons I've chosen the path I have is because of the uncompromising purity of it's ideal.

Here I would like you to elaborate, what do you mean by pure?

Quote:It could be the Greeks "borrowed" Zeus from the Vedas. It could be both cultures interacted with him. I'll let you decide ...

In the sense that the gods are real for their followers, I can agree with you. But a hallucination is only that, real for the one experiencing it, but doesn't exist outside of the person. So yeah, I say borrowed