RE: Do religions represent God?
January 10, 2017 at 1:23 pm
(This post was last modified: January 10, 2017 at 1:38 pm by Angrboda.)
(January 9, 2017 at 5:09 am)Little Rik Wrote:(January 8, 2017 at 2:06 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Yeah, no, you're full of shit here. There are practicing religious and theoretical spiritualists. The distinction you make doesn't exist. Moreover you're simply assuming that what you do is "right practice" whereas what they do isn't. That's just being biased. How do you know that what the religious do isn't "right practice?" You don't. You're just assuming the high ground. Anybody can make an assumption. Assuming that you're doing the right thing and they're not is not providing any reason to believe you. Anyone can just assume.
1) I don't?
Wrong again yog in fact I do know very well indeed.
When you try to think about something or to find a solution to your problems you look within not at the stars.
It is within where the knowledge lie.
Outside there is mainly a lot of illusion.
Any researcher when he-she try to discover something look within and even if he look outside that knowledge still come from someone who previously look within.
You can not go wrong with that.
The routine is the same.
The knowledge only come from within that is why spirituality is a search within unlike religions which search outside.
Religions worship idols, effigy, statues and pray God for the daily bread.
In spirituality all this is totally off.
Once you understand that the real knowledge is within there is no point in wasting the time in external exercises that not only lead nowhere but are also ruining the already acquired knowledge.
Putting religions and spirituality on the same level is unfounded.
(January 10, 2017 at 6:37 am)Little Rik Wrote:(January 9, 2017 at 1:13 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Blah, blah, blah, blah. You're just doing exactly what I said you were doing. And no you don't know.
If you reckon that I do not know then show evidence that the knowledge is external.
Nice job equivocating and changing the subject. The question had nothing to do with any "externality" or not of "knowledge." The question was whether or not you "know" that your approach to ultimate truth ("practice") is right and that the approach of those in religion is wrong. And as usual you have no answer other than just to assert your beliefs and try to change the subject. You may "believe" that your approach is the right approach, but you don't know it. Everybody believes that their way is the right way. But knowledge, true knowing, is amenable to demonstration. If you can't show it, then you don't know it. And there's no way for you to demonstrate that you have the right approach to ultimate truth, even above your distortions about what "religion" entails.
No, you practice "intuitional science," remember? Intuition yields belief, not knowledge. Only reason can deliver knowledge because the reasons for its conclusions can be shared. The conclusions and support for them from reason are transparent in a way that the reasons "behind" intuitional truths is not. If you can't show it, then you don't know it. And you can't show it. A bunch of stories and analogies aren't reasons. That's why you talk about the fruits of your yoga practice in terms of metaphors such as 'gold' and the underneath of an iceberg. You don't have reasons for your conclusions from meditation, you just have "belief" and some warm fuzzies from the experience. You don't "know" jack shit as a result of your meditation.