The origin of God (Brahma)

[Samana Johann]

Thought that many of your might wonder about the origin of (their) God, their inclination and religion, my person will here share how such came about, for those interested:

from: Brahmajāla Sutta: The Brahmā Net

...“There are some contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds.[7] And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds?

5. “There ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos devolves. When the cosmos is devolving, beings for the most part head toward the Radiant (brahmās). There they stay: mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time. Then there ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos evolves. When the cosmos is evolving, an empty Brahmā palace appears. Then a certain being—from the exhaustion of his life span or the exhaustion of his merit[8]—falls from the company of the Radiant and re-arises in the empty Brahmā palace. And there he still stays mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.

“After dwelling there alone for a long time, he experiences displeasure & agitation: ‘O, if only other beings would come to this world!’

“Then other beings, through the ending of their life span or the ending of their merit, fall from the company of the Radiant and reappear in the Brahmā palace, in the company of that being. And there they still stay mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.

“Then the thought occurs to the being who reappeared first: ‘I am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer & Ruler, Father of All That Have Been & Shall Be.[9] These beings were created by me. Why is that? First the thought occurred to me, “O, if only other beings would come to this world!” And thus my direction of will brought these beings to this world.’ As for the beings who reappeared later, this thought occurs to them: ‘This is Brahmā… Father of All That Have Been & Shall Be. We were created by this Brahmā. Why is that? We saw that he appeared here before, while we appeared after.’ The being who reappeared first is of longer life span, more beautiful, & more influential, while the beings who reappeared later are of shorter life span, less beautiful, & less influential.

“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘We were created by Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. He is constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But we who have been created by him—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’

“This is the first basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

6. “As for the second: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There are, monks, devas called Corrupted by Play.[10]They spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because they spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, their mindfulness becomes muddled. Because of muddled mindfulness, they fall from that company of devas.

“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘Those honorable devas who are not corrupted by play don’t spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because they don’t spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, their mindfulness doesn’t become muddled. Because of unmuddled mindfulness, they don’t fall from that company. They are constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But those of us who were corrupted by play spent an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because we spent an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, our mindfulness became muddled. Because of muddled mindfulness, we fell from that company and—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’

“This is the second basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

7. “As for the third: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There are, monks, devas called Corrupted by Mind. They spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another.[11] Because they spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another, their minds become corrupted toward one another. Because they are corrupted in mind toward one another, they grow exhausted in body & exhausted in mind. They fall from that company of devas.

“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘Those honorable devas who are not corrupted in mind don’t spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another. Because they don’t spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another, their minds don’t become corrupted toward one another. Because they are uncorrupted in mind toward one another, they don’t grow exhausted in body or exhausted in mind. They don’t fall from that company. They are constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But those of us who were corrupted in mind spent an excessive amount of time staring at one another. Because we spent an excessive amount of time staring at one another, our minds became corrupted toward one another. Because we were corrupted in mind toward one another, we grew exhausted in body & exhausted in mind. We fell from that company and—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’

“This is the third basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

8. “As for the fourth: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is a logician, an inquirer. He states his own improvisation, hammered out by logic, deduced from his inquiries: ‘That which is called “eye” & “ear” & “nose” & “tongue” & “body”: That self is inconstant, impermanent, non-eternal, subject to change. But that which is called “mind” or “intellect” or “consciousness”: That self is constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity.’[12]

“This is the fourth basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos, they all do so on one or another of these four grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

“With regard to this, the Tathāgata discerns that ‘These standpoints, thus seized, thus grasped at, lead to such & such a destination, to such & such a state in the world beyond.’ That the Tathāgata discerns. And he discerns what is higher than that. And yet, discerning that, he does not grasp at it. And as he is not grasping at it, unbinding [nibbuti] is experienced right within. Knowing, as they have come to be, the origination, ending, allure, & drawbacks of feelings, along with the escape from feelings, the Tathāgata, monks—through lack of clinging/sustenance—is released.

“These, monks, are the dhammas—deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise—that the Tathāgata proclaims, having directly known & realized them for himself, and that those who, rightly speaking in praise of the Tathāgata in line with what is factual, would speak.

May it be of many's support for good undertakings and wise choices headed upward and toward release.

 

[The Anointed]

Thought that many of your might wonder about the origin of (their) God, their inclination and religion, my person will here share how such came about, for those interested:



May it be of many's support for good undertakings and wise choices headed upward and toward release.

The root to the word “BRAHMAN” originally meant “SPEECH”, much the same as the “LOGOS” is said to mean ‘WORD.

The “LOGOS=BRAHMAN,” is the essential divine reality of the Universe, the eternal spirit=mind from which all being originates and to which, all must return. The LOGOS is today as it always was, and will be into all eternity. It is the only true constant in that it is constantly evolving. Show to me a mind that has ceased to evolve, and I will show to you a mind that has ceased to exist...

The term, “LOGOS” pertains to the very plan from the outset. [The creation of a universal body in which a Supreme mind or personality of Godhead to that body, develops.] In Sanskrit the similar meaning is given in the use of the word 'vach.' Vach means word. But in Sanskrit teachings of the Sanatana Dharma, vach has many levels. Including where the word is first considered as being in the mind as a thought, not as the spoken word or speech.

John 1: 1; In the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was God. And the supreme personality or controlling mind to have developed within the invisible eternal body of ever evolving information, was “THE LIGHT OF MAN” All the information, knowledge, wisdom and insight, gained from the body of mankind, the MOST HIGH in the previous creation, who was the Light and life of that ever-growing body of information, which is called God. All things came into existence through him, by him and for him. Without him, nothing exists.

You the invisible mind that has developed within that created body are the controlling godhead to that body, with which you are one being, [body, soul and spirit]. But our words or our speech, is merely the expression of the thoughts that are stored in the minds that are we.

The Logos/word, should be seen as the gathered information of past aeons that is waiting to be expressed. The LOGOS is in fact, the invisible living universal mind, in which is gathered all of the information of every universal body throughout all eternity and should be seen as the essential divine reality of the universe, the eternal spirit from which all being originates, and to which all must return.

At the close of this period of Universal activity, it is Krishna, who enters into Brahman as the supreme personality of Godhead.

To the Christian, it is Christ who enters into the Logos as the light and life, or supreme personality of Godhead within the ever evolving Logos.

 

[SA Huguenot]

I do not understand these theories.
Is there not a simpler method to explain where Brahma came from?

 

[Samana Johann]

Did even one read before replay? Not that it would be demanded, but possible would help for clearance, if such is looked for.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Yes I read it, but it is a lot of Jibberish and stuff that dont make sense.
Just look at the first few sentences.

.“There are some contemplatives & brahmans (What is this?)who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, (What is this?)who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds.(What is this?)And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds? (WTF)

5. “There ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos devolves(What is this?). When the cosmos is devolving, beings for the most part head toward the Radiant (brahmās)(What is this?). There they stay: mind-made(What is this?), feeding on rapture(What is this?), self-luminous(What is this?), coursing through the air(What is this?), established in beauty for a long stretch of time(What is this?). Then there ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos evolves (again?). When the cosmos is evolving(What is this?), an empty Brahmā palace (What is this?)appears. Then a certain being—from the exhaustion of his life span (What is this?)or the exhaustion of his merit(What is this?)—falls from the company of the Radiant and re-arises in the empty Brahmā palace(What is this?). And there he still stays mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.(again?)

“After dwelling there alone for a long time, he experiences displeasure & agitation: ‘O, if only other beings would come to this world!’(What is this?)

To me this sounds like a lot of high poligh hogwash, spoken with the tone of some silly hash-smoker pretending to be full of knowledge no one can understand if not high himself.

Please give us a simple explanation on where Brahma comes from.
The above is realy jello on steroids.

 

[Samana Johann]

It's good to ask, if something is not cleared, Sadhu. However, It's not good to say "makes to sense" without "for me", householder @SA Huguenot . Anyway, my person will try to give him different perceptions, words, he might cling to and able to make use.

* contemplatives & brahmans
religious ascetics/meditator/recluse/monks & (householder) prophets, priests
* eternalists
people believing in eternal existance (of soul, cosmos)
* partially non-eternalists
people believing in eternal existance (of soul, cosmos) under certain conditions
* four grounds
four reasonings, arguments, bases (as later single explained)
* There ultimately comes a time when, with thepassing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos devolves(What is this?).
when the cosmos shrinks, the opposite of expands, similar decays, or breath out after breath in.
* head toward the Radiant (brahmās)(What is this?).
Toward seeking refuge in shining Gods, like flies go after light, people in darkness follow light.
* mind-made(What is this?)
Being(s) nourishing on mind made substance, no gross form is infolved into coming into being, existing.
* feeding on rapture(What is this?),
Feeding on satisfaction, joy, they had accumulated (as if householder has done good ready and then rejoices while resting)
* self-luminous(What is this?),
not shining as a matter of reflection or external power
* coursing through the air(What is this?),
are not bound to gravity and able to move in the sphere
* established in beauty
do not appear with outwardly strains, to give a simile, like purified gold.

(akku now empty, and sun down, possible later on)

 

[Samana Johann]

* cosmos is evolving(What is this?),
the space expands (say marked, if householder knows business)
* an empty Brahmā palace (What is this?)appears.
A sphere which is empty and of use to take a stand with ones merits (say a new oppotunity for business opens, as one sees a stand to create a religious forum, as example, similar)
*Then a certain being—from the exhaustion of his life span (What is this?)
When ones life, existance ends. Death. (Or when one gets banned on facebook, loses his account, has no more access, to make a further simily)
* or the exhaustion of his merit(What is this?)
When one can no more hold ones stand, saycan no more pay the rent, one has to move after other place, or when leaving Facebook, no more joy to be found to go on, as sample.
* falls from the company of the Radiant and re-arises in the empty Brahmā palace(What is this?).
"rebirth", or say one leaves Facebook, falls out, and on search finds Religious forum, is able to take an account, as substance for becomings has been given.

Does that help further, householder @SA Huguenot ? Or is he still not capable to try to perceive birth and death, becoming and decay, take on and abounding?

 

[SalixIncendium]

The root to the word “BRAHMAN” originally meant “SPEECH”...

I don’t think this is accurate. Please cite your source.

Brahma comes from Sanskrit Brahma, nominative of Brahman, chief god of the trinity Brahma-Vishnu-Siva in post-Vedic Hindu religion.

brahma | Origin and meaning of brahma by Online Etymology Dictionary

 

[atanu]

The root to the word “BRAHMAN” originally meant “SPEECH”, much the same as the “LOGOS” is said to mean ‘WORD.

The “LOGOS=BRAHMAN,” is the essential divine reality of the Universe, the eternal spirit=mind from which all being originates and to which, all must return. The LOGOS is today as it always was, and will be into all eternity. It is the only true constant in that it is constantly evolving. Show to me a mind that has ceased to evolve, and I will show to you a mind that has ceased to exist...

The term, “LOGOS” pertains to the very plan from the outset. [The creation of a universal body in which a Supreme mind or personality of Godhead to that body, develops.] In Sanskrit the similar meaning is given in the use of the word 'vach.' Vach means word. But in Sanskrit teachings of the Sanatana Dharma, vach has many levels. Including where the word is first considered as being in the mind as a thought, not as the spoken word or speech.

John 1: 1; In the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was God. And the supreme personality or controlling mind to have developed within the invisible eternal body of ever evolving information, was “THE LIGHT OF MAN” All the information, knowledge, wisdom and insight, gained from the body of mankind, the MOST HIGH in the previous creation, who was the Light and life of that ever-growing body of information, which is called God. All things came into existence through him, by him and for him. Without him, nothing exists.

You the invisible mind that has developed within that created body are the controlling godhead to that body, with which you are one being, [body, soul and spirit]. But our words or our speech, is merely the expression of the thoughts that are stored in the minds that are we.

The Logos/word, should be seen as the gathered information of past aeons that is waiting to be expressed. The LOGOS is in fact, the invisible living universal mind, in which is gathered all of the information of every universal body throughout all eternity and should be seen as the essential divine reality of the universe, the eternal spirit from which all being originates, and to which all must return.

At the close of this period of Universal activity, it is Krishna, who enters into Brahman as the supreme personality of Godhead.

To the Christian, it is Christ who enters into the Logos as the light and life, or supreme personality of Godhead within the ever evolving Logos.

brahman and brahmA are not same. BrahmA is creator god, the universal mind. Brahman is the immutable ground of Being, wherein the universal mind evolves and devolves.

brahmA is vachaspati, Lord of Word, known as Saraswati (vak or vach).

Brahman is the Truth-Infinite-Knowledge.

 

[SA Huguenot]

How can there be people when the cosmos still did not exist?

 

[SalixIncendium]

How can there be people when the cosmos still did not exist?

The same way there can be people in your dreams.

There is no evidence to support that the reality we perceive is base reality.

 

[Samana Johann]

How can there be people when the cosmos still did not exist?

Even the topic here did not exist before, householder took existence, resistance, here. And nobody forced him. As the food here might not nourish him in his tendency, unusuall and not pleasant for him as to refined, he will soon break away and become in another Brahma-realm, one that seems to have more material food.

Often when beings become "accidentally" in higher realms, by the break off appear in low, hellish worlds and resist there for long time.

 

[SA Huguenot]

The same way there can be people in your dreams.

There is no evidence to support that the reality we perceive is base reality.

So, people existed when there was no people to realise people existed?
Now that there are people in existance, we know they existed.

Therefore God existed when there was no people to know He existed.
then it actually means there was God before there was God to realise god existed.
Now that God exists, he knows there was God.

It makes perfect sense.
God came into being once man became concience.
So we thought God into existance, and he created people.
Now why did I never think of this before.

Damn, this is wisdom beyond comprehension.

 

[dybmh]

 

[Jainarayan]

Here we go again! Pounding a square peg into a round hole. Thor's hammer could not make it fit.

The root to the word “BRAHMAN” originally meant “SPEECH”, much the same as the “LOGOS” is said to mean ‘WORD.

Yeah, uh... no. Brahman does not, never has, never will mean "speech". Wishing something to be does not make it so.

At the close of this period of Universal activity, it is Krishna, who enters into Brahman as the supreme personality of Godhead.

Yeah, uh... no. Krishna is Brahman.

 

[paarsurrey]

The origin of God (Brahma)

Does one mean that Buddha believed in God/Brahma, please.

Regards
_____________
Brahmajāla Sutta: The Brahmā Net

 

[The Anointed]

Here we go again! Pounding a square peg into a round hole. Thor's hammer could not make it fit.



Yeah, uh... no. Brahman does not, never has, never will mean "speech". Wishing something to be does not make it so.



Yeah, uh... no. Krishna is Brahman.

Shabda Brahman From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shabda Brahman or Sabda-brahman or Nada brahmin means transcendental sound (Shatapatha Brahmana III.12.48) or sound vibration (Shatpatha Brahmana Vi.16.51) or the transcendental sound of the Vedas (Shatpatha Brahmana Xi.21.36) or of Vedic scriptures (Shatpatha Brahmana X.20.43).

Nada Brahmin Tradition

Shabda or sabda stands for word manifested by sound ('verbal') and such a word has innate power to convey a particular sense or meaning (Artha). According to the Nyaya and the Vaisheshika schools, Shabda means verbal testimony; to the Sanskrit grammarians, Yaska, Panini and Katyayana it meant a unit of language or speech or vac. In the philosophical terms this word appears for the first time in the Maitri Upanishad (Sloka VI.22) that speaks of two kinds of Brahman - Shabda Brahman ('Brahman with sound') and Ashabda Brahman ('soundless Brahman'). Bhartrhari speaks about the creative power of shabda, the manifold universe is a creation of Shabda Brahman (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad IV.i.2). Speech is equated with Brahman (Shatpatha Brahmana 2.1.4.10).The Rig Veda states that Brahman extends as far as Vāc (R.V.X.114.8), and has hymns in praise of Speech as the Creator (R.V.X.71.7) and as the final abode of Brahman (R.V.I.164.37). Time is the creative power of Shabda Brahman.

Bhartrhari speaks about the creative power of shabda,(Brahman with sound) the manifold universe is a creation of Shabda Brahman ​

The Rig Veda states that Brahman extends as far as Vac and has hymns in praise of 'SPEECH' as the creator.

Is your Brahman, the creator of the universe?

Please say again; "Brahman does not, never has, never will mean "speech.".

 

[Road Warrior]

Thought that many of your might wonder about the origin of (their) God, their inclination and religion, my person will here share how such came about, for those interested:



May it be of many's support for good undertakings and wise choices headed upward and toward release.

"If you meet Buddha on the road, kill him". Same goes for god, eh?

 

[The Anointed]

Here we go again! Pounding a square peg into a round hole. Thor's hammer could not make it fit.



Yeah, uh... no. Brahman does not, never has, never will mean "speech". Wishing something to be does not make it so.



Yeah, uh... no. Krishna is Brahman.

At the close of each period of universal activity, the most high to have developed within that generation of the universe, enters into Brahman/Logos as the supreme personality of Godhead within the eternal.being, who has neither beginning or end.

Krishna is the eighth avatar of the deity Vishnu the savior.

According to the ancient cultures, we live in an eternal oscillating universe that expands outward and contracts back to its beginning in space time, a living universal being who is all that exists, and in who, all that is, exists. A universe that exists in the two states of seemingly visible matter and invisible energy=anti-matter.

“Universe after universe is like an interminable succession of wheels forever coming into view, forever rolling onwards, disappearing and reappearing; forever passing from being to non-being, and again from non-being to being. In short, the constant revolving of the wheel of life in one eternal cycle, according to fixed and immutable laws, is perhaps after all, the sum and substance of the philosophy of Buddhism. And this eternal wheel has so to speak, six spokes representing six forms of existence.” ---- Mon. Williams, Buddhism, pp. 229, 122.

The days and nights of Brahma are called Manvantara, or the cycle of manifestation, ‘The Great Day,’ which is a period of universal activity, that is preceded, and also followed by ‘Pralaya,’ a dark period, which to our finite minds would seem as an eternity, or but a moment in time.

‘Manvantara,’ is a creative day as seen in the six days of creation in Genesis, ‘Pralaya,’ is the evening that proceeds the next creative day. The six periods of Creation and the seventh day of rest in which we now exist are referred to in the book of Genesis as the “GENERATIONS OF THE UNIVERSE.”

The English word “Generation,” is translated from the Hebrew “toledoth” which is used in the Old Testament as ‘births,’ or ‘descendants,’ such as “These are the generations of Adam,” or “these are the generations of Abraham, and Genesis 2: 4; These are the generations of the Universe or the heavens and earth, etc. And the ‘Great Day’ in which the seven generations of the universe are eternally repeated, is the eternal cosmic period, or the eighth eternal day in which those who attain to perfection are allowed to enter, where they shall be surrounded by great light and they shall experience eternal peace, while those who do not attain to perfection are cast back into the refining fires of the seven physical cycles of endless rebirths that perpetually revolve within the eighth eternal cosmic cycle.

Enoch the righteous, wrote that God created an eighth day also, so that it should be the first after his works, and it is a day eternal with neither hours, days, weeks, months or years, for all time is stuck together in one eon, etc, etc, and all who enter into the generation of the Light beings, are able to visit all those worlds that still exist in Space-Time, but not in our time.

A series of worlds following one upon the other-- each world rising a step higher than the previous world, so that every later world brings to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in the former, and itself then prepares the seed for the universe that will follow it. This is the true resurrection in which all from the previous cycle of universal activity, who still have the judgmental war raging within them, are born again into the endless cycles of physical manifestation, or rebirths.

 

[usfan]

I do see a lot of vague, new age type terminology, that seems to be selected to give ambiguity to descriptions. This is not the traditional 'rationalist' approach, but is more eastern and abstract.

But i understand the gist of what is being said, and while my faith is more pragmatic and grounded in western rationalism tradition, i accept these beliefs, and admire the courage to express them in a hostile, belligerent environment..