I used to be a hindu

[Maya3]

We should love Osama, Hitler, a rapist, a serial killer...everyone. Only their actions are wrong. They, as divine parts and parcels of God, are same as us, and should be loved. Is it not?

I will not engage in a discussion to compare loving consenting adults to rapists, serial killers and such.

I'm leaving this discussion now.

Maya

 

[Me Myself]

Because I am not in agreement with something mentioned in the scriptures, does not make it wrong. Our non-adherence to the scriptural injunctions, due to our shortcomings, does not qualify them as wrong.



Yes. We should love all 'souls', why just persons...birds, trees, animals...everybody. I agree with that. Still, what is incorrect as per the scriptures, is incorrect.

We should love Osama, Hitler, a rapist, a serial killer...everyone. Only their actions are wrong. They, as divine parts and parcels of God, are same as us, and should be loved. Is it not?

I am not saying that homosexuals should be hated. At the level of soul, all should be loved. But, homosexuality, or even heterosexuality for that matter, are material sense gratification activies and certainly are not at the spiritual level. So no parallel can be drawn between these activities and the activities of loving a soul.

I find that to be, at the very very least, unimaginative.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

I will not engage in a discussion to compare loving consenting adults to rapists, serial killers and such.

I'm leaving this discussion now.

Maya

You did mention that all are parts of God and should be loved. So, I concluded you are talking of universal love at the level of soul.

If you mean physical love, then you are talking of 'lust'. I love you because you gratify my senses, this is not love, it is lust, directed at sense gratification.

Love, is universal and for ALL parts and parcels of God.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

I find that to be, at the very very least, unimaginative.

I just explained my view in the previous post. Lust, for our own sense gratification cannot be compared to unconditional love.

 

[Me Myself]

I just explained my view in the previous post. Lust, for our own sense gratification cannot be compared to unconditional love.

Lust and love are not incompatible.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Lust and love are not incompatible.

Can you substantiate your claim with an example please?

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Much of this anti gay stuff is very recent in the history of Hinduism. Old commentaries on the Kama Sutras talk of gay marriage. There are ancient Hindu Temples in India that have carvings depicting gay sex on the outside. Hinduism has more diversity then any other faith. So you will find bigots and saints of all strips.

Could you please provide the old commentaries from Kama Sutra that you are talking about.

Also, the details of the carvings of gay sex on temples that you are mentioning.

 

[Vinayaka]

I'm leaving this discussion now.

Maya

I can't force myself into such discussions either. My view (pretty orthodox Saiva) is to neither condemn nor condone sexual behaviour, for it really is none of our business. But I agree that this kind of nasty homophobic rhetoric has no place in one of the most tolerant religions on the planet. Yet I am not surprised either. Its not just the gay people, its also all other branches of Hinduism except this particular one. But there is no use having this kind of discussion. He's right, and the rest of us are all wrong. Period. The end.

 

[George-ananda]

Why limit God. My view is just do your sadhana. For every step you take toward God. God will take ten to you.

I don't understand this reply to my post #26. I was just saying old souls want to devote their attention to self-realization and not be drawn into physical cravings.

How is that limiting God???

 

[Jainarayan]

I can't force myself into such discussions either. My view (pretty orthodox Saiva) is to neither condemn nor condone sexual behaviour, for it really is none of our business. But I agree that this kind of nasty homophobic rhetoric has no place in one of the most tolerant religions on the planet. Yet I am not surprised either. Its not just the gay people, its also all other branches of Hinduism except this particular one. But there is no use having this kind of discussion. He's right, and the rest of us are all wrong. Period. The end.

It's virtually impossible to change such a person's mind. So why :banghead3 ? I'm slowly learning. It's from all the handkerchiefs I go through wiping the blood off my forehead and nose.

 

[Riverwolf]

Vedic knowledge is infallible because it comes down through the perfect disciplic succession of spiritual masters, beginning with the Lord Himself. Since He spoke the first word of Vedic knowledge, the source of this knowledge is transcendental. The words spoken by the Lord are called apauruṣeya, which indicates that they are not delivered by any mundane person. A living being who lives in the mundane world has four defects:

1. He is certain to commit mistakes
2. He is subject to illusion
3. He has a propensity to cheat others
4. His senses are imperfect.

No one with these four imperfections can deliver perfect knowledge. The Vedas are not produced by such an imperfect creature. Vedic knowledge was originally imparted by the Lord into the heart of Brahmā, the first created living being, and Brahmā in his turn disseminated this knowledge to his sons and disciples, who have handed it down through history.

A lot of scriptural things may not sound dharmic. To an alcoholic, 'no intoxication' as a scriptural injunction may seem inappropriate. Does that make the scripture imperfect, or is the judgement of the person imperfect, because of his addiction?

There is a prescribed method for everything. To cure a disease, I must take the medicine as prescribed by the doctor and not based on my intelligence and likes/dislikes. Similarly, there is a method of purification for reaching the divine.

Lord Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad Gītā says:

ajñaś cāśraddadhānaś ca
saḿśayātmā vinaśyati
nāyaḿ loko 'sti na paro
na sukhaḿ saḿśayātmanaḥ
​

But ignorant and faithless persons who doubt the revealed scriptures do not attain God consciousness; they fall down. For the doubting soul there is happiness neither in this world nor in the next.[B.G.4.40]

I asked what Scripture you quoted earlier. It's certainly not the Bhagavad Gita.

Only the Vedas themselves, however they may be defined, are infallible because they are beyond even the verses which bear the name. Every other Scripture is subject to error, since they are of human origin. Surely you've heard of the telephone game? Well, it applies nowadays even moreso than it used to, so disciplic succession isn't as trustworthy as it may have once been.

That verse is refers to the Vedic scriptures, not just any Scripture related to Hinduism, and is actually incorrect. Happiness can be achieved without any Scripture. I've observed it.

 

[Riverwolf]

Can you substantiate your claim with an example please?

Myself.

I both love my girlfriend with all my heart and soul, and feel sexual lust for her periodically. Our sexual relationship is a great expression of the love we have for each other, like the carvings of the sexual activities of Shiva and Parvati on the Temples.

 

[themo]

I asked what Scripture you quoted earlier. It's certainly not the Bhagavad Gita.

Only the Vedas themselves, however they may be defined, are infallible because they are beyond even the verses which bear the name. Every other Scripture is subject to error, since they are of human origin. Surely you've heard of the telephone game? Well, it applies nowadays even moreso than it used to, so disciplic succession isn't as trustworthy as it may have once been.

That verse is refers to the Vedic scriptures, not just any Scripture related to Hinduism, and is actually incorrect. Happiness can be achieved without any Scripture. I've observed it.

Can you just tell which scriptures exactly are authentic? For example, which Upanishads/Samhitas/Puranas are authentic and which ones are fake?

 

[Me Myself]

Can you substantiate your claim with an example please?

Is not necesary. If you think love can be diminished by lust you underestimate love.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

I asked what Scripture you quoted earlier. It's certainly not the Bhagavad Gita.

I quoted from the Srimad Bhagavatam. It is mentioned there, along with the verse.

Only the Vedas themselves, however they may be defined, are infallible because they are beyond even the verses which bear the name. Every other Scripture is subject to error, since they are of human origin.

You can choose to believe that every other scripture except the Vedas is subject to error. I KNOW that scriptures are transcendental knowledge, and are accepted by great rīṣīs, sages and transcendentalists, free from the four defects of conditioned souls, as said earlier. So, I choose to go with them on the matter than to speculate with my limited intelligence.

Surely you've heard of the telephone game? Well, it applies nowadays even moreso than it used to, so disciplic succession isn't as trustworthy as it may have once been.

Padma Purana tells us that there are four authorized disciplic successions in this age of Kaliyuga. So, a scripturally accepted disciplic succession imparts transcendental knowledge, beyond defects of conditioned humans and is trustworthy.

That verse is refers to the Vedic scriptures, not just any Scripture related to Hinduism, and is actually incorrect. Happiness can be achieved without any Scripture. I've observed it.

We can choose to conveniently believe or not believe the scriptures. That still does not make the scriptures 'wrong' and us 'right'.

Because scriptures interfere with 'mental speculation' on Hinduism, many persons want to turn a blind eye towards them. Remarks like 'he knows....we do not' or end up banging their heads against a wall, does not change the fact that not one single scriptural evidence has been made to support these claims. At one time, majority of west believed that earth was flat, did it make the earth flat?

Wanting to exploit the vastness of Hinduism, keeping one's shallow knowledge over the infallible scriptures, mental speculation and teaching others the same, is beautifully described below:

"Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them; they are blind guides [of the blind]. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."
— Matthew 15:13-14

"Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher."
— Luke 6:39-40

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Is not necesary. If you think love can be diminished by lust you underestimate love.

So, it cannot be substantiated.

Love is doing something for the others, without expecting anything in return; lust is to do things for one's own sense gratification. Two are diametrically opposite. Both love and lust exist, yet they do not exist simultaneously. It is like saying night and day can happen at the same time.

 

[Me Myself]

So, it cannot be substantiated.

Love is doing something for the others, without expecting anything in return; lust is to do things for one's own sense gratification. Two are diametrically opposite. Both love and lust exist, yet they do not exist simultaneously. It is like saying night and day can happen at the same time.

Love comes from emphaty and sympathy. Lust doesn´t reduce emphaty nor sympathy.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Myself.

I both love my girlfriend with all my heart and soul, and feel sexual lust for her periodically. Our sexual relationship is a great expression of the love we have for each other, like the carvings of the sexual activities of Shiva and Parvati on the Temples.

You mean you have never thought of anyone else, never lusted for someone else or had a relationship with someone else because, you 'love' your girlfriend and do not want to make her unhappy? For her happiness you have sacrificed everything and she has done so for you.

Are you kidding me?!!

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Love comes from emphaty and sympathy. Lust doesn´t reduce emphaty nor sympathy.

Love comes from empathy and sympathy. Such feelings are like a bright sunny day.

Lust is the serpentine of sensual cravings and desire. It is like a dark moonless night.

Both exist and either does not reduce the other. I agree.

Still, both are mutually exclusive and cannot exist simultaneously; just like bright sunlit day and dark moonless night cannot exist simultaneously.

 

[Me Myself]

Love comes from empathy and sympathy. Such feelings are like a bright sunny day.

Lust is the serpentine of sensual cravings and desire. It is like a dark moonless night.

Both exist and either does not reduce the other. I agree.

Still, both are mutually exclusive and cannot exist simultaneously just like bright sunlit day and dark moonless night cannot exist simultaneously.

you analogy immidiately shows the depth of your incoherence.

Night and day cannot cohexist, but love and lust can (you said one does not reduce the other).

Then love and lust cannot be compared to night and day.