Krishna is a deity or an incarnation of a deity. Maybe there was a real person tue figure was based on, but the Krishna of religion is mythological. And, no - mythological doesn't mean non-existent.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I hope you found what you looking for.
- Thread starter Spirit of Light
- Start date
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
"satya" is truth
"dharma" is righteousness
"swa-dharma" personal dharma
For a warrior killing is his dharma
For Ghandi killing was not his dharma
Dharma of Christian is to follow Jesus
Dharma of you is to follow .....
So there is not 1 Dharma for all
Or maybe "Dharma" to follow conscience
Last edited:
I can't pursue anything as lofty as "righteous".
I just have my preferences....which are apparently "deplorable".
Cooky
Veteran Member
Interesting, I thought Zoroastrianism (Zoroaster) predated Judaism (Abraham).
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Thank you. All these concepts do make it difficult to really know what the other means. Spiritual life is because of this much more tricky than material life to communicate.
To me:
Krishna is an Avatar: incarnation of the Divine with more Divine Attributes then "normal" people, who lived ca. 5000 years ago.
Deity and mythology is all confusing to me. Too many different definitions.
Deity = God
I like this definition. Keeps it simple. Though God is still beyond definition
Myth:
1) a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.
2) a widely held but false belief or idea.
So according to 1) a Myth can be true, although when involving "super natural" beings, impossible to grasp for "normal natural beings" (if super means beyond), it might be hard to believe to be true
So according to 2) a Myth is false
Confusing, but nice that all options are open. All can choose what to believe. That's what belief is about anyway
Reading all this I do remember why I like Advaita so much
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
I thought so too.
But no clue why I thought this
Maybe the long beard and fire
Or maybe because The East was far away
Most probably because history was never my favorite
Change the 3 to 40, and that's me.I have been happy in my faith for nearly 3 years now and no sign of change
I thought so too.
But no clue why I thought this
Maybe the long beard and fire
Or maybe because The East was far away
Most probably because history was never my favorite
Historical dates are all over the map, depending on who is presenting the information. It gets more vague the further back you go. I don' think it's wise to read something (anything) and believe it outright.
A lot of historians, because of ego doing its job, in my view, will claim their version as factual. Personally I don't care. It is today that matters.
Last edited:
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
"deplorable" according to who? you?
"swa-dharma" is personal Dharma. Your way.
Check the Aghoris: Their swa-dharma is not mine (at all)
BUT, I don't judge their way; I love it. It's great.
You think Aghori preference tops yours in terms of "deplorability"?
Those who still steam over my having voted for Trump.
I'm not even all that great at being delplorable, eh.
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
I understand what you mean. They missed out on the meaning of "Freedom to vote"
One man steamed about me "not voting". He would not accept this. I "MUST" vote
When people "steam" usually they have unsolved suppressed anger issues.
I would not have voted for Trump though. He's not my type. Most candidates are not my type though
(Hence my "not vote choice") Aghoris always help me to see things from different angle. Took me a while though to "not judge their behavior"
When I hear things I disagree with, I findI understand what you mean. They missed out on the meaning of "Freedom to vote"
One man steamed about me "not voting". He would not accept this. I "MUST" vote
When people "steam" usually they have unsolved suppressed anger issues.
I would not have voted for Trump though. He's not my type. Most candidates are not my type though
Aghoris always help me to see things from different angle. Took me a while though to "not judge their behavior"
it more interesting to discuss them.
Condemnation is so....unenlightened.
Goodman John
Active Member
I have been trying to codify some sort of 'Catharism for Dummies' document as both an academic and religious exercise in order to explore this faith that I have felt drawn to for some time. Unfortunately, there is so little factual evidence to with- and so much romanticism piled on legend- that I fear I'm falling into the trap of 'making up crap as I go' in trying to sort this faith out. There are so many gaps in the history and unknowns that I'm grasping at the proverbial straws to find this piece to make this other piece fit, but it doesn't fit with that one over there so which piece goes- or do all of them go? At this point I just don't know and I feel like I'm pretty much inventing a new religion- which is exactly what I did NOT want to do.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Dang it, I wish Baha'i could separate itself a little more from Islam. The antigay bias and women having to pray 95 times during their period, or something like that, just seems to leave a bad taste in my mouth. Otherwise, I think it's pretty cool.