Poeticus
| abhyAvartin |
So, you create a tread to say you have put people on your ignore list... Uh... Ok so what ? That's nice. I ate shrimp chips today by the way.
Do you like Tandoori Shrimp?
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So, you create a tread to say you have put people on your ignore list... Uh... Ok so what ? That's nice. I ate shrimp chips today by the way.
Do you like Tandoori Shrimp?
Aupmanyav said:Why did Sankara not accept Ishwara at the Paramarthika level.
Ratikala, I am not that loving and patient.
you know ? or you have assumed that you know ?I know where they are coming from, and I know the why also.
even here you impute the undestanding you wish to find on both Buddha and Adi Shankaracharia ,But that is not my way. Buddha is my guru. Why did he not accept atma or Paramatma? Why did Sankara not accept Ishwara at the Paramarthika level.
here there is a very great possibility that you are using the Kalama sutta to support your own arguement ...In the same way there are things that I can in no way accept.I will blame Buddha and Kalama Sutta for that.
Kalama sutta suggests that we examine everything it is not giving you an '' allowed to '' and a 'not allowed to' , what Buddha is suggesting is much more subtle he is saying examine everything and when you find it to be true you accept it ..... he did not say argue the point of your realisation with others ...after all your realisations may be incomplete and another may come to another realisation .....only Buddha who has complete realisation is qualified to do this .....but because he is a fully realised soul he finds a far superior method to approach others , this is called skillfull meansIt does not allow me to ditto teachers and scriptures where I differ in my views, whoever or whichever they are.
there are many times here when I feel like I am trying to carry water in a sive because the person to whom I am replying dosent allways want to listen , but from these futile conversations come conversations with others that are worthwhile , thus we should discuss what appears to us as important without the wish for any particular result , we should do what we belive to be our dharma without any form of attatchment .Otherwise also, the discussions were futile, leading nowhere - so the best is to put an end to them. There is no objection from my side for different views, I thought that others also will be equally accommodating, but I was unfortunately wrong.
Namaste
A sense of humor is symbiotic to Hindu Forums. That should be one of the (sub)-rules for any Hindu Forum - that you must have a sense of humor or be banned.....
......So a rule should read, "If you post to a Hindu forum for 7 posts or more, but have not demonstrated a sense of humor, you are put on restriction. Upon the 9th post of no sense of humor, you are banned. "
When Hinduism consists of one leader and 3 billion followers, it will no longer be Hindu.
Om Namah Sivaya