Comparative Religion Overload?

[Mindmaster]

As far as they go, they're not exactly faith-based concepts in and of themselves - more of an attribution(s) to aspects of the self, the universe (micro and macro) and to the logical way things effect each other. I think with Hinduism though, there is a general vagueness overall which the "religion" is known for, where such concepts are often interpreted (literalism vs metaphoricalism, divine vs mundane etc) to extremely far extents - which does make it a unique "religion" (as it's a shared pantheon of separate religions like Abrahamism), blah blah.

I agree with you, skepticism is always a basis of my thinking - however positive or negative it may be.

When I said those things I didn't mean them in the context of applying logic to them or making sense, but rather that no amount of sense-making will do. Our brain largely categorizes things by limitations... How is that which is limitless or infinite going to be understood by the mind? We can describe things like Brahman or Atman via metaphor like poetry, but ultimately those are beyond description like true love. They must be experienced, no other mechanism conveys the truth completely.

As far as skepticism, even that can be carried too far. Prove me this, prove me that, when the thing sought after is a subject without an object it becomes impossible to use these methods to gain the knowledge. Thus, I was trying to shift the impetus from your intellect to awareness. What you know via awareness is far more important than anything you've rationalized, believe, or read. Logic in this realm in particular can be an asset as long as these limitations are fully understood, if they are not it's a tar pit. It can lead you to the proper course as much as it can betray you. So, careful application is necessary...

 

[TransmutingSoul]

At some point, I find that I either start developing beliefs that I, myself would otherwise find absurd or conversely I start outright rejecting everything. I think I am starting to reach that point at the moment.
Out of both of those extremes (really out-there metaphysical/cosmological beliefs and atheism), I don't think I am able to accept either.

The balance is to be found between the extremes with Science and Religion.

"....religion, without science, soon degenerates into superstition and fanaticism, while science without religion becomes merely the instrument of crude materialism. “Religion,” according to the Bahá’í writings, “is the outer expression of the divine reality. Therefore, it must be living, vitalized, moving and progressive.” 1 “Science is the first emanation from God toward man. All created things embody the potentiality of material perfection, but the power of intellectual investigation and scientific acquisition is a higher virtue specialized to man alone. Other beings and organisms are deprived of this potentiality and attainment.”2

(1 & 2 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace)

Regards Tony

 

[sayak83]

This is quickly becoming a blurb place for each person's own religion..

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This is quickly becoming a blurb place for each person's own religion..

That life his full of choices, is great!

Regards Tony

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. if you understand what I was getting to.

I understand and that is why I gave you a like.

"Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child etc" Luk 18:17; "Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake." Jn 14:11.

Yeah, monotheistic religions do not like scrutiny. It is actually outlawed, illegal. "I have said and that is it."

Would adaivatism (?) embrace the cessation of opposites?

Advaita has two levels of reality, Absolute Truth (Parmarthika Satya) and Pragmatic Truth (Vyavaharika Satya - perceived, observed). At absolute level there are no opposites. They exist only at the pragmatic level.

 

[Aupmanyav]

As far as they go, they're not exactly faith-based concepts in and of themselves - more of an attribution(s) to aspects of the self, the universe (micro and macro) and to the logical way things effect each other. I think with Hinduism though, there is a general vagueness overall which the "religion" is known for, where such concepts are often interpreted (literalism vs metaphoricalism, divine vs mundane etc) to extremely far extents - which does make it a unique "religion" (as it's a shared pantheon of separate religions like Abrahamism).

People have different level of knowledge, different environments/experiences in life, different needs. Hinduism caters to all in their own particular way. It has been consciously constructed/forged that way. Hinduism is not an random accident.

We can describe things like Brahman or Atman via metaphor like poetry, but ultimately those are beyond description like true love.

No, MM. Brahman is as concrete as physical energy, being the substrate of all things in the universe. That is what we started with at the time of Big Bang. It is not a metaphoric or poetic construction.

The balance is to be found between the extremes with Science and Religion.

They are not extremes or opposites. They are a part of the same system. What is true in one must be true in another too, otherwise it is false.

 

[tayla]

Has this ever happened to anyone here?

Yes. Finally settled in on my current views.

 

[Vinayaka]

Would adaivatism (?) embrace the cessation of opposites?

Yes it does. (I'm no advaitin.)

 

[Rational Agnostic]

I have been studying a diverse range of religions for quite some time, for a while even thinking that I identified as something specific. I was an atheist at one point, then I became an agnostic, then I became a theist (or pantheist), now back in agnostic territory. What I've found is that after a while, the detail of the information that stays in your mind decreases and it starts to feel 'samey' but not in a good academic sense, but that religion, philosophy and science just becomes a headache.
Has this ever happened to anyone here?

At some point, I find that I either start developing beliefs that I, myself would otherwise find absurd or conversely I start outright rejecting everything. I think I am starting to reach that point at the moment.
Out of both of those extremes (really out-there metaphysical/cosmological beliefs and atheism), I don't think I am able to accept either.

[But from my studies of Hinduism, I think several concepts such as Brahman, Atman, Om and some form of Karma are still heavily within my own thinking (and they sort of where to an extent before I even began studying religion and philosophy anyway). ]

I agree that religion and philosophy are a headache, which is why I have spent less time on this forum as of late. I much prefer mathematics, as there is always a clear way to prove that a mathematical proposition is correct. Studying religion and philosophy is frustrating, because the claims of philosophers and religious individuals cannot be validated. Also, dare I say, most modern-day "philosophers" are pseudo-intellectuals. They say a lot of nothing, while using inordinately large words that few people understand, in order to appear intelligent while going absolutely nowhere in their arguments.

 

[BSM1]

I understand and that is why I gave you a like. Yeah, monotheistic religions do not like scrutiny. It is actually outlawed, illegal. "I have said and that is it."Advaita has two levels of reality, Absolute Truth (Parmarthika Satya) and Pragmatic Truth (Vyavaharika Satya - perceived, observed). At absolute level there are no opposites. They exist only at the pragmatic level.

Thanks. Could you explain the Absolute Truth (or suggest some very basic reading material) in simple terms that even I can understand?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes it does. (I'm no advaitin.)

Post for BSM1 and not a reply to Vinayaka. He already knows it well.
In advaita, there is no concept of a second, therefore no opposite too (no one to oppose), at the Absolute level. 'Eko sad, dwiteeyo nasto' (What exists is one, there is no second), 'Sarvam khalvidam Brahma' (All things here are/is Brahman).

Thanks. Could you explain the Absolute Truth (or suggest some very basic reading material) in simple terms that even I can understand?

Physical energy in the universe. Just an undulating field. No divisions like waters in oceans.

Tao of Physics: Fritzof Capra The Tao of Physics - Wikipedia

From the criticism of Frizof Capra's book:
"Leon M. Lederman, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and current Director Emeritus of Fermilab, criticized both The Tao of Physics and Gary Zukav's The Dancing Wu Li Masters in his 1993 book The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?"

Aup says: The question is whether it is eternal or arises from absolute nothing? Are existence and non-existence just phases?

 

[Nicholas]

I have been studying a diverse range of religions for quite some time, for a while even thinking that I identified as something specific. I was an atheist at one point, then I became an agnostic, then I became a theist (or pantheist), now back in agnostic territory. What I've found is that after a while, the detail of the information that stays in your mind decreases and it starts to feel 'samey' but not in a good academic sense, but that religion, philosophy and science just becomes a headache.
Has this ever happened to anyone here?

At some point, I find that I either start developing beliefs that I, myself would otherwise find absurd or conversely I start outright rejecting everything. I think I am starting to reach that point at the moment.
Out of both of those extremes (really out-there metaphysical/cosmological beliefs and atheism), I don't think I am able to accept either.

[But from my studies of Hinduism, I think several concepts such as Brahman, Atman, Om and some form of Karma are still heavily within my own thinking (and they sort of where to an extent before I even began studying religion and philosophy anyway). ]

Sounds more like Study Overload, which would happen no matter the subject. Intellectual blockage and/or confusion results from taking in, in, in, with little or no application, digestion or break from study.

 

[Frater Sisyphus]

Sounds more like Study Overload, which would happen no matter the subject. Intellectual blockage and/or confusion results from taking in, in, in, with little or no application, digestion or break from study.

Yes, this may be the case. Studying has been quite hardcore I guess in the past few months, which may have made me disillusioned by it.
I have been greatly affected by several aspects of several religions in particular, so it hasn't been all for nothing.

I'm starting a new job today, which has later hours - so perhaps that will give me a lot more time for my mind to savor that studying again? and obviously get my mind focused on smaller areas of existence

 

[TransmutingSoul]

They are not extremes or opposites. They are a part of the same system. What is true in one must be true in another too, otherwise it is false.

That is what I said, but in another way. Science and Religion are paths to the same Truth and they are both needed as the balance of all extremes.

Regards Tony

 

[sealchan]

I have been studying a diverse range of religions for quite some time, for a while even thinking that I identified as something specific. I was an atheist at one point, then I became an agnostic, then I became a theist (or pantheist), now back in agnostic territory. What I've found is that after a while, the detail of the information that stays in your mind decreases and it starts to feel 'samey' but not in a good academic sense, but that religion, philosophy and science just becomes a headache.
Has this ever happened to anyone here?

At some point, I find that I either start developing beliefs that I, myself would otherwise find absurd or conversely I start outright rejecting everything. I think I am starting to reach that point at the moment.
Out of both of those extremes (really out-there metaphysical/cosmological beliefs and atheism), I don't think I am able to accept either.

[But from my studies of Hinduism, I think several concepts such as Brahman, Atman, Om and some form of Karma are still heavily within my own thinking (and they sort of where to an extent before I even began studying religion and philosophy anyway). ]

Many of these beliefs rest in the context of epic stories and, I believe, the best way to feel invested in any sort of belief is to understand it in the context of a rich and meaningful story. If you switch your emphasis from moral codes and metaphysical assertions and just enjoy the stories, you might find yourself not only pleasantly contained in belief, but searching out for more such creative expressions of divine knowledge.

 

[Cateau]

At one time. But now I am a strong advaitist (and a strong atheist).

What....is that.....isnt it an oxymoron jk

 

[Buddha Dharma]

What is a advaitist anyway?

Someone that follows the Vedantic school of Hinduism known as Advaita, which holds that there is no real difference between the Supreme Reality and Atman. Everything is Brahman at it's fundamental core and difference is only seeming. Not real.

This is somewhat in contrast with Bhedabheda Vedanta, which while holding Brahman is the Atman- allows for difference in it's view.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What .. is that .. isnt it an oxymoron jk

No. It is not. Hinduism has few philosophies which discount the existence of God or are luke warm about it. Samkhya, Vaisesika, Yoga and Purva Mimamsa.

 

[Cateau]

No. It is not. Hinduism has few philosophies which discount the existence of God or are luke warm about it. Samkhya, Vaisesila, Yoga and Purva Mimamsa.

I was referring to being a "strong atheist," just a joke....or is it lol.

 

[dfnj]

I have been studying a diverse range of religions for quite some time, for a while even thinking that I identified as something specific. I was an atheist at one point, then I became an agnostic, then I became a theist (or pantheist), now back in agnostic territory. What I've found is that after a while, the detail of the information that stays in your mind decreases and it starts to feel 'samey' but not in a good academic sense, but that religion, philosophy and science just becomes a headache.
Has this ever happened to anyone here?

At some point, I find that I either start developing beliefs that I, myself would otherwise find absurd or conversely I start outright rejecting everything. I think I am starting to reach that point at the moment.
Out of both of those extremes (really out-there metaphysical/cosmological beliefs and atheism), I don't think I am able to accept either.

[But from my studies of Hinduism, I think several concepts such as Brahman, Atman, Om and some form of Karma are still heavily within my own thinking (and they sort of where to an extent before I even began studying religion and philosophy anyway). ]

I was an atheist for years. When the USENET came along (pre-internet), I used to argue the pro-atheist position on Christianity vs Atheism forum. I did it for a number of years. Then one day I was getting bored arguing the atheist position. I decided to try to argue the pro-theist position. Arguing the pro-theist position is MUCH more challenging!!! After about 10 years of trying to beat the atheists in an argument, a very strange thing happened. At some point, I started to actually believe my own pro-theist arguments!!!!

I'm still sympathetic with they atheists but not as much. Although from time to time people practicing their own brands of Christianity irritates me to the point where I become an atheist again.