• 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!

Life before birth

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Nah. Some link is not necessary because it will never represent each person in the world. It won't even represent every angle of a single theology. Your methodology is way too shallow so it cannot be engaged with.

So RF, a forum about religion, isn't a large enough study group for you, but my personal experience in how others define God is. Got it.

Try to be a little more sophisticated since you are trying to discuss Hindu philosophy in comparison to a whole world full of philosophies.

Thank you for the condescending remark, but I don't need to meet up to your standard of sophistication to make a point.

You would do well to stick to the topic instead of doling out personal insults if you want to have a productive discussion with someone and actually learn something.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Nirguna Brahman can still be God. It is not Aguna or saguna/suguna, it is nirguna. I understand what you speak of. Maybe you should be aware that even Christian philosophers, and many Muslim philosophers have afforded very similar "mirror" of God to use one of the most famous philosophers.

Maybe you should read up a bit on it.

I'm quite aware of what some Christian and Muslim mystics and philosophers have to say on the subject, and some will have definitions that agree with how Nirguna Brahman is defined.

However, this is not at all representative of the majority in these religions.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
So RF, a forum about religion, isn't a large enough study group for you, but my personal experience in how others define God is. Got it.



Thank you for the condescending remark, but I don't need to meet up to your standard of sophistication to make a point.

You would do well to stick to the topic instead of doling out personal insults if you want to have a productive discussion with someone and actually learn something.

Please read up. You can take it as insults if you really want, but its not meant that way. Just getting a web link with one particular view without any research whatsoever is not valid. But if that is your methodology I am only saying it is not enough.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I'm quite aware of what some Christian and Muslim mystics and philosophers have to say on the subject, and some will have definitions that agree with how Nirguna Brahman is defined.

However, this is not at all representative of the majority in these religions.

So why should it be representative of any majority? This is why I told you several posts above that you are trying to do an ad populum.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Just getting a web link with one particular view without any research whatsoever is not valid.

This is a problem, and why I likely will avoid discussion with you going forward. You don't actually read what people give you to read. You assume you know more than that other person and simply dismiss what they say.

Had you bothered to click the link, you would see it was more than "one particular view." It currently stands at around 20 particular views.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
So why should it be representative of any majority? This is why I told you several posts above that you are trying to do an ad populum.

I wasn't "trying" to do anything. I was explaining to you how calling Brahman God is problematic for me.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Are those pre human spirits immortal?
A spirit is always immortal. A spirit is nothing more than a life force. It can exist apart from a body or it can reside in a physical body, giving it life. I believe that at birth, the spirit that has existed independently of a body up until then, enters into the physical body, giving it life. When it leaves the body, death occurs, but the spirit continues to exist. Then, at the resurrection, the spirit re-enters the same body that it gave life to during mortality, giving renewed, immortal life to that newly perfected body. And at this point, it will never leave the body again.
 

Bird123

Well-Known Member
I was thinking earlier if our parent aborted us early, "we" would have never existed. Which sounds common sense, of course, but from a, I guess, philosophical perspective I wonder if this where the case we would have another chance at existence from other parents. Kind of like being stuck in a maze with multiple exits. Some are fake exits while others are not.


We are all Spiritual beings in our true natures. We are not installed in our physical bodies until after birth.

This doesn't mean I am for abortion. There is a lesson in responsibility around this issue.

I think religion is going about trying to stop abortion in the wrong way. Instead of trying to force the issue, religions could offer money for the children to be carried to term. How many of the mothers would take the cash? More than none.

With so many parents who can't have children crying to have some, they would solve the parenting and raising problem.

Let's not kid ourselves, religions have plenty of money to at least make an effort. On the other hand, perhaps the money is more important than solving the problem.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
So why cant this physical energy be God? Is it because you have a picture of another idea of God that you keep speaking about? How do you know if God is not just "physical energy" which you inferred upon the existence?

Psst. Just FYI, YHWH means "he exists". Ironically quite similar isn't it? ;) Now that's gonna set you off on a different tirade.
You have a 'God/Allah' fixation because of your religion and culture, I do not have that. I have transcended that. At one time, I too was a theist for half of my life.
It is quite simple. Brahman is never addressed as 'he'. It is always 'it'.
Nirguna Brahman can still be God. It is not Aguna or saguna/suguna, it is nirguna.
Inherent properties do not count as 'gunas'. It is the default state. Any additional ascribed properties are counted as Gunas, like God/Allah helps its devotees who are in trouble.
 
Last edited:

firedragon

Veteran Member
This is a problem, and why I likely will avoid discussion with you going forward. You don't actually read what people give you to read. You assume you know more than that other person and simply dismiss what they say.

Had you bothered to click the link, you would see it was more than "one particular view." It currently stands at around 20 particular views.

Can "ego" be God?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
You have a 'God/Allah' fixation because of your religion and culture

Strawman. And you should know that it is YOU who has that fixation, because I didnt introduce 'Allah" to this discussion, it is you who is obsessed.

It is quite simple. Brahman is never addressed as 'he'. It is always 'it'.

It is only affecting you because you are comparing with other peoples references. Also in many languages, "He" doesnt necessarily mean a gender. "O" is you but "Ohu" is considered "He" but it does not mean "he" etymologically. It is a plural of a genderless reference that has been used to refer to a "he".

Anyway, that's not relevant. Like you said, I think you are fixated on other peoples Gods. ;)
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
"Shari'ah law states that the punishment for murder, adultery and denying Islam is the death penalty."
Capital punishment - Crime and punishment - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

"The Prophet, peace be upon him, said: The blood of a Muslim who confesses that there is no god but Allah and that I am the messenger of Allah cannot be shed except in three cases: a life for life, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and the one who turns away from Islam and leaves the community."

Hadith and Apostasy - Public Discourse

There are social pressures in Islam that you cannot repudiate Islam, belief in Allah and Mohammad as the messenger of Allah, though you have yourself admitted that you have no proof for both the things. Repudiating Islam in some countries will mean beheading, in some countries you will be killed by extremists, in other countries you will face social boycott. Hindus do not have this kind of pressures. I can be an atheist or an atheist Hindu or a theist worshiping any God or Goddess of the pantheon, and be very comfortable about it.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Strawman. And you should know that it is YOU who has that fixation, because I didnt introduce 'Allah" to this discussion, it is you who is obsessed.

It is only affecting you because you are comparing with other peoples references. Also in many languages, "He" doesnt necessarily mean a gender. "O" is you but "Ohu" is considered "He" but it does not mean "he" etymologically. It is a plural of a genderless reference that has been used to refer to a "he".
It is perfectly OK since I was describing my view of Brahman. IMHO, it is necessary to clarify the difference between Brahman and any God or Goddess. This, since you say that Brahman is not different from a personal God. That is what started the discussion.

Whatever, I said I always believe and describe Brahman as 'it'. And that it is always singular, since IMO, nothing other than that exists. It is physical energy, heat, light, magnetism, etc.
 
Last edited:

firedragon

Veteran Member
It is perfectly OK since I was describing my view of Brahman. IMHO, it is necessary to clarify the difference between Brahman and any God or Goddess.

Thats for you. Because you really really want to make that distinction. If you dont find it in scripture, you will try to find it in the moon. :)


This, since you say that Brahman is not different from a personal God.

Nah. I didnt say that. You just made that up.

Whatever, I said I always believe and describe Brahman as 'it'. And that it is always singular, since IMO, nothing other than that exists. It is physical energy, heat, light, magnetism, etc.

Yeah. That could easily be described as "God".
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
A spirit is always immortal. A spirit is nothing more than a life force. It can exist apart from a body or it can reside in a physical body, giving it life. I believe that at birth, the spirit that has existed independently of a body up until then, enters into the physical body, giving it life. When it leaves the body, death occurs, but the spirit continues to exist. Then, at the resurrection, the spirit re-enters the same body that it gave life to during mortality, giving renewed, immortal life to that newly perfected body. And at this point, it will never leave the body again.

I have similar views except for the pre existence of all of us.
I believe Jesus pre existed and that God knew us before we existed because God is God and knows the future and can do that sort of thing. It doesn't say that we knew God then.
I can't help but think John 3:13 which seems to be saying that only Jesus came from heaven.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Because you really really want to make that distinction. :)
Nah. I didnt say that. You just made that up.
I do not need to make any distinction since the two are totally different.
If your God is not personal, then why he calls you as his servant? Are you not a servant of Allah?
That is 'shirk'. Accept what you are and your relationship with Allah. Fear God, He knows all.
"Say ˹O Prophet, that Allah says˺, “O My servants who believe! Be mindful of your Lord." Quran 39.10
You are not being mindful of your God.
 
Last edited:

firedragon

Veteran Member
I do not need to make any distinction since the two are totally different.
If your God is not personal, then why he calls you as his servant? Are you not a servant of Allah?
"Say ˹O Prophet, that Allah says˺, “O My servants who believe! Be mindful of your Lord." Quran 39.10

Thats such a red herring attempt mate. Lol.

So who is so obsessed with Islam, Allah, and Quran etc??? Its irrelevant, though you are in love with it. :)
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
If human sex was only a choice then abortion would be wrong. As we are formed to create babies via the sex act.

Humans consciously want humans to continue and don't rationally think differently.

No sex no conception.

Therefore by human actions abortion owned a consideration only due to human behaviour.

If sex activates the process of human growth then it does.

No sex no human is the real answer.
 
Top