I used to be a hindu

[Riverwolf]

I agree and accept.

Good. Here's the One-On-One debates section:
One-on-One Debates - Religious Education Forum

 

[Me Myself]

Please quote where I said that love and lust can be felt at the same time.

Well:

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

Night reduces day and day reduces night. If one does not reduce the other, then both can exist at maximum in the same time.

If you say that there are eight things about a woman that I love, and there are two things about her I lust for, it still is not pure love. Nature of those 8 things (selfless giving) is incompatible with the nature of those two things (selfish desire).

You contradict yourself again:

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

If one does not reduce the other, then you can have pure love for her and also feel pure lust. Because you yourself said one does not reduce the other.

About this sexy woman you turned down, it was your conscience and fear of bad karma (for yourself) that restrained you. To me, it does not seem to have anything to do with love or lust...just conscience and karma.

No fear. Simply choice inspired by love.

But I´ll leave it there, it is true we are in a DIR.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

You must back your claim with appropriate scriptural evidence, justifying the authenticity of your claim

.

That will no doubt happen many times over the course of our debate. I notice, however, you do not apply this same standard to your own claims.

Site the appropriate verse from smriti claiming the fallible nature of smriti.

It's relatively common, if not constant, in puranas to find a mention of their bowing to the authority of the Vedas/shruti. I currently have only one purana in e-copy, and searching it, we find:

Nârada said :-- “O Muni! The S’âstras are not one, they are many and they lay down different rules and contradictory opinions, How then Dharma is to be followed? And according what Dharma S’âstra?” Nârâyana said :-- S’ruti and Smriti are the two eyes of God; the Purânam is His Heart. Whatever is stated in S’ruti, the Smriti and the Purânams is Dharma; whatever else is written in other S’âstras is not Dharma. Where you will find differences between S’ruti, Smriti and Purânas, accept the words of the S’rutis as final proofs. Wherever Smriti disagrees with the Purânas, know the Smritis more authoritative.

-Shrimad Devi Bhagavatam, Book 11, Chapter 1, 21-24

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Besides, why do you not address the fact of the mathematical error in the Vayu Purana? Here it is:

In each of its seven continents, he made seven Varshas (sub-continents). ...
There are forty Varshas in all the continents together.

As you can see, this is incorrect; 7^7 does not equal forty at all. How could a great Sage such as Vyasa make such a basic error?

Veda Vyāsa wrote eighteen Puranas.

From Padma Purana we see the eighteen puranas are:

'Lord Shiva says Parvati:

vaisnavam naradiyanca tathabhagavatam
subham garudanca tathapadmam varaham
subhadarsane sattvikanipuranani vijneyani
subhani vai brahmandam brahmavaivartam
markandeyam tathaiva ca bhavisyam
vamanam brahmam rajasani nibodhame
matsyam kaurmam tathalaingam saivam
skandam tathaiva ca agneyam ca sadetani
tamasani nibodhame.​

O beautiful lady (Parvati), know that the Visnu, Narada, Bhagavata, Garuda, Padma and Varaha Puranas are sattvika; the Brahmanda, Brahma-vaivarta, Markandeya, Bhavisya, Vamana and Brahma Puranas are rajasika; and the Matsya, Kurma, Linga, Siva, Skanda and Agni Puranas are tamasika.'

Vayu Puran is not included in the list of these eighteen puranas compiled by Veda Vyāsa.

 

[Jainarayan]

You are right, homosexuality is natural. I am not debating that.

What I am saying is that Rāvana, Kumbhakarana, Hiranyakaśyapu were born with demonic nature. Such demoniac nature is a reaction of the past actions - law of karma. It would be inappropriate to call it natural and so 'acceptable' from a religious point of view.

In other words, even demons are created by God. Does that mean religious scriptures should accept demoniac propensities as being 'correct'?

But what is the scriptural verse that outright says homosexuality is demonic or even adharmic in nature?

And actually Hiranyakashipu and Ravana were redeemed and forgiven, even though their offenses were against God Himself. Moreover, I don't think it needs to come from a white western convert to remind anyone that the word demon in Hinduism does not necessarily denote evil. Prahlada, after all, was a demon also.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Besides, why do you not address the fact of the mathematical error in the Vayu Purana? Here it is:

In each of its seven continents, he made seven Varshas (sub-continents). ...
There are forty Varshas in all the continents together.

As you can see, this is incorrect; 7^7 does not equal forty at all. How could a great Sage such as Vyasa make such a basic error?

Namaste

That the error is so glaring suggests to me that something else is being said here.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Vayu Puran is not included in the list of these eighteen puranas compiled by Veda Vyāsa.

Different puranas give different lists. There are 20-24 mahapuranas listed where there should be 18. Also, Vayu Purana is generally regarded as one of, if not the, oldest.

 

[Me Myself]

Seriously, if we are going to keep arguing we need another thread in a non DIR section.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Well:



Night reduces day and day reduces night. If one does not reduce the other, then both can exist at maximum in the same time.




You contradict yourself again:




If one does not reduce the other, then you can have pure love for her and also feel pure lust. Because you yourself said one does not reduce the other.



No fear. Simply choice inspired by love.

But I´ll leave it there, it is true we are in a DIR.

Your quote:

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

My quote (reply):

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.

Your interpretation of my quote:

Night reduces day and day reduces night. If one does not reduce the other, then both can exist at maximum in the same time.

My quote:

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]

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/same-faith-debates/135499-hinduism-sexuality.html#post2998886

My answer there

 

[Vrindavana Das]

.

That will no doubt happen many times over the course of our debate. I notice, however, you do not apply this same standard to your own claims.

If you make a claim, either back it up, or accept that you cannot back it up.

It's relatively common, if not constant, in puranas to find a mention of their bowing to the authority of the Vedas/shruti. I currently have only one purana in e-copy, and searching it, we find:

-Shrimad Devi Bhagavatam, Book 11, Chapter 1, 21-24

For one, you had said smriti claims the fallible nature of smriti.

Secondly, what is written is "Where you will find differences between S’ruti, Smriti and Purânas, accept the words of the S’rutis as final proofs."

Here it is said 'difference' and not 'contradiction' between scriptures. Meaning, if Śruti says Kṛṣṇa should be worshipped and Śmriti says Śiva should be worshiped, we should accept the word of Śruti as final and worship Kṛṣṇa. It does not mean that Śiva should not be worshiped. It simply means that the worship of Kṛṣṇa is higher that worship of Śiva.

 

[Me Myself]

This is not the place to debate.

For replying in a debating manner, I made another thread so we can continue the discussion

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/same-faith-debates/135499-hinduism-sexuality.html#post2998886

 

[Badran]

***Mod post***

Please put in mind that this is the DIR; debating is not allowed here, as stated in rule 10. Some posts that did not abide by that have been deleted, and future posts that do so will be subject to the same.​

 

[themo]

Riverwolf, I know it`s not directly related to the subject but why did you choose to be "vedic explorer"? Nothing is definitive in Sanatana Dharma. I mean even some verses in Rig Veda or Chandogya upanishad could be wrong... After all, there is no God to "protect" them according to Hinduism. As far as I can understand, it`s people`s responsibility to protect the scriptures not God`s in Hinduism.

For example, islam is the most definitive religion on earth. Every word in Quran and even every dots in it are from God and God alone gave the promise to protect it. But there is no such thing in Hinduism.

 

[Riverwolf]

Veda Vyāsa wrote eighteen Puranas.

From Padma Purana we see the eighteen puranas are:

'Lord Shiva says Parvati:

vaisnavam naradiyanca tathabhagavatam
subham garudanca tathapadmam varaham
subhadarsane sattvikanipuranani vijneyani
subhani vai brahmandam brahmavaivartam
markandeyam tathaiva ca bhavisyam
vamanam brahmam rajasani nibodhame
matsyam kaurmam tathalaingam saivam
skandam tathaiva ca agneyam ca sadetani
tamasani nibodhame.​

O beautiful lady (Parvati), know that the Visnu, Narada, Bhagavata, Garuda, Padma and Varaha Puranas are sattvika; the Brahmanda, Brahma-vaivarta, Markandeya, Bhavisya, Vamana and Brahma Puranas are rajasika; and the Matsya, Kurma, Linga, Siva, Skanda and Agni Puranas are tamasika.'

Vayu Puran is not included in the list of these eighteen puranas compiled by Veda Vyāsa.

The Vayu Purana was the Siva Purana at one time. The current Purana that is called "Siva Purana" is not the same one, and likely reached its current form as late as a few centuries ago.

 

[Riverwolf]

Riverwolf, I know it`s not directly related to the subject but why did you choose to be "vedic explorer"? Nothing is definitive in Sanatana Dharma. I mean even some verses in Rig Veda or Chandogya upanishad could be wrong... After all, there is no God to "protect" them according to Hinduism. As far as I can understand, it`s people`s responsibility to protect the scriptures not God`s in Hinduism.

For example, islam is the most definitive religion on earth. Every word in Quran and even every dots in it are from God and God alone gave the promise to protect it. But there is no such thing in Hinduism.

That's not what the Vedas are.

The Vedas are all knowledge. Therefore, there is much of them we still do not know, and may never know. The Vedas weren't "revealed" directly to anyone, so much as they were "unveiled" by the Sages in deep meditation. Therefore, I call myself a "Vedic explorer" because I am exploring the Great Forest that is the Veda.

...besides, yes we do have such things in Hinduism:

Glitter, glint and gleam your temples. Clean them well.
These are the twinkle that is seen by those who do not see.
Guard the gilded throne of Siva's stall.
Keep it well lit and open.

No night doth fall upon His Holy Form.
He is the Sun, both cold and warm.

Piercing vision of deep, inner spinning wheels
pierces through the twinkle and the clinkle of your temple Ferris wheel.
These enjoy the darshan flooding out. Those caught in chain-like
discs of darker hours see only glitter and the flowers.

When we come, as puja calls, we hardly see those
who cannot see. We see those who can, clear and
crisp, their wasp-like form in the temple,
they adorn lovingly the floors.

I tell you this, Saivite brahmin souls,
have no fear to shine the sparkle all the year.
Gild the gilded forms anew so that your temples
appear just built. Appeal to every chakra wheel; one spins one and then the other.

Gild -- the base, the rudder, the anchor of it all -- doth stimulate.
And sound, the one that hears. Smell, the controller of the glands.
And so, when chakras spin all through,
your temple will be always new.

Once you realize that some see, and others do not condescend to kneel, but stand and look with open mouth as sight and sound rush in along with drainage from the bath, be not afraid to open wide the door. Those who enter will eventually prostrate on the floor.

Keep it clean, and gild and glint anew.
That is your job, what you have to do.

Love,
Lord Ganesha

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

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

Thats easy the early ones first dozen or so are all authentic.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

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

In Jayamangala (12 century) commentary on the Kama Sutra he states "Citizens with this kind of homosexual inclination, who renounce women and can do without them willingly because they love one another, get married together, bound by a deep and trusting friendship."

The Kama Sutra also talks about svairini or lesbians

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

I personally saw a carving of a sadhu giving somebody a blow job, And two women going down on each other in Bhubaneswar. I have have also seen it in Khajuraho and I have read about Gwalior and Bagali, Karnataka with gay carvings on their temple. All of this is really well documented.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Riverwolf, I know it`s not directly related to the subject but why did you choose to be "vedic explorer"? Nothing is definitive in Sanatana Dharma. I mean even some verses in Rig Veda or Chandogya upanishad could be wrong... After all, there is no God to "protect" them according to Hinduism. As far as I can understand, it`s people`s responsibility to protect the scriptures not God`s in Hinduism.

This is false. When it comes to the Vedas. They had very advanced Mnemonic Devices.

Vedic chant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Jainarayan]

Most societies and cultures that have oral traditions have this. I read somewhere that Vedic Sanskrit may have been more tonal in nature. Think about how you can memorize the lyrics of a song based on the rhythm and metre.