Anyone who understands- Vedas and Gita (reject, tradition, contradiction, myth)

[Pariah]

Originally Posted by Seyorni

Shruti? When was the Gita ever considered Shruti? Gita is Smriti. I've never heard of it considred Shruti, even among those who hold it at the center of their faith.

The message was from the author, put into the words of The Charioteer.

Shruti - that which is heard (i.e. revelation?)
Smriti - that which is remembered (i.e. tradition?)

Technically, I suppose every Hindu scripture with the exception of the Vedas and the Upanishads are smriti, because all of them draw from these scriptures. As in, the Bhagavad Gita is essentially Krishna reinterpreting the Upanishads for a new age of people in differing political situations.

However, according to the Mahabharata, wasn't Veda Vyasa with Sanjaya when he recited to the Gita to Dhritarashtra? Sanjaya used his powers of clairovoyance in order to transmit the message after which he penned it.

At the same time, I was always told Lord Ganesha wrote it at the behest of Sage Vyasa after the fact, assuming he never stop writing.

My world has all of a sudden been called into question.

[gnostic]

I know I should not be here, but I find this all fascinating. Thank you.

[Pariah]

Originally Posted by gnostic

I know I should not be here, but I find this all fascinating. Thank you.

If Sonic247, who is far-right Christian can post in the Hinduism DIR, I think you can, personally. As long as none of it is harsh criticism, inflammatory, or debate worthy commentary, you, as a Gnostic Agnostic, can post in the Hinduism DIR. Obviously, debates should be taken to General Religious Debates.

[gnostic]

Thanks, Pariah.

ps. I used "gnostic agnostic" as a joke or pun as being an "enlightened agnostic". I was wondering if anyone would catch the contradictory, but double meaning. Even funnier is that it could also mean being "enlightened about knowing nothing".

So far, no one has comment on it. *sigh*

[Pariah]

Originally Posted by gnostic

So far, no one has comment on it. *sigh*

Haha! Hey Gnostic Agnostic, you know what's funny about your name?
It's a pun on being an "enlightened agnostic", plus it has a double meaning, and even funnier is that could also mean "enlightened about not knowing".

I got the joke!

[gnostic]

Figurative speaking.

[Seyorni]

Originally Posted by Pariah

If Sonic247, who is far-right Christian can post in the Hinduism DIR, I think you can, personally. As long as none of it is harsh criticism, inflammatory, or debate worthy commentary, you, as a Gnostic Agnostic, can post in the Hinduism DIR. Obviously, debates should be taken to General Religious Debates.

I second that, Pariah. I'm more interested in the idea than it's source.
I don't care weather a post comes from the Pope, a Sadguru, the Dalai Lama or a red-arsed baboon. If it has something something substantive to contribute it's welcome.

[Hema]

Originally Posted by Seyorni

I don't care weather a post comes from the Pope, a Sadguru, the Dalai Lama or a red-arsed baboon.

ROFL
Hee hee hee hyuk hyuk hyuk kyah kyah kyah ha ha ha heh heh heh

** clears throat and prepares to talk with a serious tone **

I have heard about a red-arsed baboon guru who meditates in the Himalayas and only comes down for the Kumbh Mela procession.

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by gnostic

Thanks, Pariah.

ps. I used "gnostic agnostic" as a joke or pun as being an "enlightened agnostic". I was wondering if anyone would catch the contradictory, but double meaning. Even funnier is that it could also mean being "enlightened about knowing nothing".

So far, no one has comment on it. *sigh*

OT. That's my blog title. Great minds think alike. At the linked post on my site, there's a link to and some excerpts from an essay by Bob Price on agnosticism and gnosticism you might find interesting.

[Don Penguinoini]

I know y'all love the great thread, frubla me now.