Some free talk about the flow of religious wisdom

[Jim]

@LuisDantas Do you see yourself doing any Dharma duties in these forums? Some people have said frankly that what they’re doing here is purely for their own entertainment or social interaction. it’s much more than that for me. Is it more than that for you?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yet you go ahead and describe a pantheistic view of God. I don't believe in anthropomorphic "deities" either but I'm a Monotheist. I still have a hard time understanding why you call yourself an 'atheist'.
You seem too stuck in your very secluded worldview to even get what I just said.

Unguru, I am a strong atheist. I do not believe in God/Gods/Goddesses, whether polytheistic, pantheistic or monotheistic. Neither I believe in God sending prophets/sons/messengers/manifestations/mahdis. I do not believe in creation, birth, death, soul, judgment, heaven or hell. My view is very strict 'advaita' (non-duality). If my view is very different from all the rest, that does not bother me at all. I do not know where you have picked up this impression that I am a pantheist. I believe in a non-God Brahman to be the sole entity that exists in the universe. I do not need any other view. I am completely satisfied with my view, 100%.

 

[Jim]

I check the internet for the meaning of 'Be-baha' and they tell me how to become a 'Bahai'.

“Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.”

“All your base are belong to us!”

 

[Terry Sampson]

I check the internet for the meaning of 'Be-baha' and they tell me how to become a 'Bahai'.

Is that something like doing a Google-search for the meaning of "atheist" and all search results are about how to become a Christian?

 

[Aupmanyav]

My people use the word 'Be-baha' for those who do not believe in rule of law or God. But I find that the meaning in Urdu is different (invaluable). That is why I edited out that line from my post.

"Mat'ā-e-be-bahā hai dard-o-soz-e-ārzūmand, maqām-e-bandagī de kar na lūñ shān-e-ḳhudāband."
Allama Mohammad Iqbal, National Poet of Pakistan

 

[Terry Sampson]

Ahhh, ... I think I understand.

 

[Terry Sampson]

I believe in a non-God Brahman to be the sole entity that exists in the universe.

Having been substantially influenced by my very limited exposure to the words "Brahma" and "Brahman" and by my own hodge-podge of beliefs, I think I understand what your "non-God" Brahman is. However, past experience encourages humility, ... so I'll qualify that by adding: I may very well still be "clueless". For purposes of clarifying my own beliefs and worldview, I ask: What, if any, difference is there between your "non-God" Brahman and "the universe" ?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Terry Sampson, you are welcome. If Brahman is considered a God, then we will have the problem of evil. It will have the problem of origin. It will have the problem of numbers; one, two, three, ten or many. It will have the problem of worship. It will have problem of prophets/sons/messsengers/manifestations/mahdis, because many such will crop up. It will have problem of temporary or eternal hell. The normal God problems. A non-God Brahman skips all these problems.

As I and many 'advaitist' Hindus visualize it, it is none of that. It is an entity much like 'physical energy'. It is, like the photons, sub-atomic particles/waves in Quantum Mechanics, not even bound by the rules of existence and non-existence. It will appear and disappear randomly. Its existence gives rise to illusions; creations, birth, death, dissolution, being that. Its non-existence gives rise to 'void'. We call it 'Maya'. A non-God Brahman easily rhymes with science. Your questions now. I hope that you are getting the drift.

 

[Shantanu]

Terry Sampson, you are welcome. If Brahman is considered a God, then we will have the problem of evil. It will have the problem of origin. It will have the problem of numbers; one, two, three, ten or many. It will have the problem of worship. It will have problem of prophets/sons/messsengers/manifestations/mahdis, because many such will crop up. It will have problem of temporary or eternal hell. The normal God problems. A non-God Brahman skips all these problems.

As I and many 'advaitist' Hindus visualize it, it is none of that. It is an entity much like 'physical energy'. It is, like the photons, sub-atomic particles/waves in Quantum Mechanics, not even bound by the rules of existence and non-existence. It will appear and disappear randomly. Its existence gives rise to illusions; creations, birth, death, dissolution, being that. Its non-existence gives rise to 'void'. We call it 'Maya'. A non-God Brahman easily rhymes with science. Your questions now. I hope that you are getting the drift.

That is it: let us avoid all the difficult questions and get the easy way out to live out our lives without problems for humans to consider. But let us still go by truth accommodation as the determinant of dharma, or is that too much to ask man to do?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

@Jim , everyone is a teacher, even if unwillingly. And a student as well.

We do not really have a choice on the matter.

If there is really no choice, then on RF why can one can be sanctioned for being seen as a teacher. A bit of aussie sarcastic humor was needed.

I would agree though, as that is life. We are born and have to learn, we grow old have children and we must teach them what we have learnt.

The choice we do have, is what we eventually choose to teach the next generations, out of all we have learned.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

A non-God Brahman skips all these problems

It is an entity much like 'physical energy'. It is, like the photons, sub-atomic particles/waves in Quantum Mechanics, not even bound by the rules of existence and non-existence. It will appear and disappear randomly. Its existence gives rise to illusions; creations, birth, death, dissolution, being that. Its non-existence gives rise to 'void'. We call it 'Maya'. A non-God Brahman easily rhymes with science. Your questions now. I hope that you are getting the drift.

Its a non God, God. A non God now called "an entity much like 'physical energy'".

Or a non God in tune with science.

A place where we can now make our own rules and break "the rules of existence and non existance"

All this giving rise to a 'Void' called Maya?

I wonder if Abdul'baha anticipated these thoughts in this quote;

."...Know then that, as hath been clearly handed down in the accounts of old, these great orbits and circuits fall within subtle, fluid, clear, liquid, undulating and vibrating bodies, and that the heavens are a restrained wave because a void is impossible and inconceivable. All that may be said is that the celestial bodies and the material bodies of the ethereal regions differ in respect of some of the substances and elements from which they are constituted, the quantities and proportions of these that go into their composition, the peculiar characteristics causing the difference in the outward effects of these bodies, and the properties that emanate from them in rich abundance. The celestial bodies that surround the material bodies also differ one from another in respect of subtlety, fluidity, and weight. It cannot be otherwise for a void is impossible...."

Regards Tony

 

[Terry Sampson]

I hope that you are getting the drift.

You'll let me know when it's clear that I'm not?

A non-God Brahman easily rhymes with science.

I'll leave that claim to others to discuss and/or debate about.

A non-God Brahman ... is an entity much like 'physical energy'. It is, like the photons, sub-atomic particles/waves in Quantum Mechanics, not even bound by the rules of existence and non-existence. It will appear and disappear randomly. Its existence gives rise to illusions; creations, birth, death, dissolution, being that. Its non-existence gives rise to 'void'. We call it 'Maya'.

• Regarding the statement: "A non-God Brahman ... [is] not even bound by the rules of existence and non-existence."
  • Do you have or know of a list of those rules that you refer to?
  • In my worldview,
    • The Universe that exists is the only Universe that exists. Synonyms for it are: the World, the Cosmos, and Reality.
    • It is infinite, or as Anaximander called it,
      "Το Apeiron" ("The Boundless") https://www.iep.utm.edu/anaximan/without boundary, without beginning, and without end.
    • The Universe consists of Space (i.e. absolute space), Time (absolute time), and Masses (also called Atoms), i.e. subsets of which move through Space at a constant speed and, therefore, over some period of Time.
    • The Universe that I believe in is anathema in mainstream science, and is typically rejected by the prevailing majority of those interested in "scientific theories and matters", which at my last estimation constitutes very near everyone alive on earth today.
    • Fortunately for me, I do not depend on or need anyone who objects to or rejects those features of my worldview.
    • The Law of Non-contradiction is important in my worldview. Therefore, Grant Priest's dialetheism has, as far as I know, no place in my worldview. Consequently, if the Law of Non-contradiction is one of the rules of existence and non-existence, your non-God Brahman is bound at least one rule of existence and non-existence.

 

[Terry Sampson]

because a void is impossible and inconceivable"

Spoken like a Parmenidean. Nothing to lose sleep over, however: the void is, in fact, conceivable. I was briefly acquainted with a guy in the early 2000s who could not only conceive of it, but did and affirmed that it was not only possible but was absolutely essential.

 

[LuisDantas]

@LuisDantas do you identify with any particular school of Buddhism?

Not really. My early learning was in Theravada, and I learned to appreciate some of the goals of Jodo Shinshu and the courageous audacity of Vajrayana. Some Soto Zen, too.

In Buddhism there is not much of a need to choose schools. Many well-known instructors have been ordained in more than one.

At the end of the day, we are not nearly so much extensions of the schools as of the whole of our life experiences.

I see that there are some widespread Buddhist communities, for example like the Triratna community. Is there any widespread Buddhist community that you associate with or might want to support more than others?

No. Although I just might come to visit Três Coroas sometime.

If you do a Web search with “Buddhism” and “teacher,” you will see that for some Buddhists, there are special Buddhists called “teachers.” and that finding the right “teacher” is part of what “Buddhism” means to some Buddhists.

There are no special Buddhists, although there may well be special relationships.

Did you really not know that?

About Buddhist teachers being a thing?

If it did not come across to you as something that I knew already, then odds are that I still do not know of that.

I am honestly not sure of what you mean to ask. Why do you imply that I might not have known of that?

@LuisDantas Do you see yourself doing any Dharma duties in these forums? Some people have said frankly that what they’re doing here is purely for their own entertainment or social interaction. it’s much more than that for me. Is it more than that for you?

I have no idea of how I could tell.

 

[Jim]

@LuisDantas Thanks. I think I'm finished here for now.

 

[Aupmanyav]

A place where we can now make our own rules and break "the rules of existence and non existance",
".. The celestial bodies that surround the material bodies also differ one from another in respect of subtlety, fluidity, and weight. .."

I do not think we can make our rules. We can go only as far as science goes. Kindly explain what Abdul Baha meant by celestial bodies surrounding material bodies?

 

[Aupmanyav]

@Terry Sampson
"You'll let me know when it's clear that I'm not?": Yeah sure, I will give it my best try.

"In my worldview,
"The Universe that exists is the only Universe that exists.": There is Multiverse theory, although not many accept it. Any claim for existence raises the question of origin, whether it is the universe or a God. To escape that we have to accept non-existence also (Ex-nihilo).
"It is infinite, or as Anaximander called it": It is flat and expanding.
"The Universe consists of Space (i.e. absolute space), Time (absolute time), and Masses (also called Atoms), i.e. subsets of which move through Space at a constant speed and, therefore, over some period of Time.": All that we observe is subjective. (Vyavaharika)
"The Universe that I believe in is anathema* in mainstream science, and is typically rejected by the prevailing majority of those interested in "scientific theories and matters", which at my last estimation constitutes very near everyone alive on earth today.": I do not think so. Science loves the universe. If it was not for the universe and its mysteries, there would not have been any science.
"Fortunately for me, I do not depend on or need anyone who objects to or rejects those features of my worldview.": Yeah we are entitled to our own world views.
"your non-God Brahman is bound at least one rule of existence and non-existence.": Yeah, it behaves in one way during existence and another way during non-existence. What you term as 'rules' are 'it's ways'. Science is trying to understand it's ways.

* Anathema (Dictionary.com): a person or thing detested or loathed; That subject is anathema to him; a person or thing accursed or consigned to damnation or destruction; a formal ecclesiastical curse involving excommunication; any imprecation of divine punishment; a curse; execration.

 

[Aupmanyav]

@LuisDantas Do you see yourself doing any Dharma duties in these forums? Some people have said frankly that what they’re doing here is purely for their own entertainment or social interaction. it’s much more than that for me. Is it more than that for you?

Ah, you are here to salvage/emancipate others, you are here on a mission, to make the whole world Bahai. I understand, all monotheistic religions do that. Some get paid for it. Well, for me it is entertainment and social interaction. IMHO, it is the same for Luis also.

 

[Jim]

Ah, you are here to salvage/emancipate others, you are here on a mission, to make the whole world Bahai.

((You're welcome to RP it that way if you want to, but that isn't what I think I'm doing. If you'd like to know what I think I'm doing, let me know.))

Well, for me it is entertainment and social interaction.

((That's good to know. Thanks for telling me. It makes good sense to me and looks good to me, to use a social forum like this for social interaction. I'm glad for people to use it for entertainment also. My only problem ever has been my confusion about what people are actually doing.))

IMHO, it is the same for Luis also.

((I can see that as a possibility. If so, maybe he'll tell me so.))

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I do not think we can make our rules. We can go only as far as science goes. Kindly explain what Abdul Baha meant by celestial bodies surrounding material bodies?

I have read The Tablet of the Universe quite a few times now, but I must admit I will need to read it many more times before I could unravel that question in any shape or form (It is a provisional Translation)

The quote is in the 20th paragraph down at this link, Tablet of the Universe

The gist of it starts in the 19th Paragraph the 2 paragraphs after give further explanation.

I hope one day that I may understand.

Regards Tony