User Tag List

First 4121314151624 Last

Results 131 to 140 of 352

  1. #131
    Senior Member Justin of Flavia Neapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    871

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angel Cake View Post
    All right, I'll bite.

    The reason I'm not calling it a religion is that the original name for Hinduism is "Sanatan Dharma". It literally means "Way of Life". Foreigners who came to India called us Hindus, and so it stuck with us along with the rest of the world, and this became "Hinduism", or the doctrine of Hindus. Which isn't all wrong, but that in itself shows an incomplete and narrow view.

    Yes, this all-encompassing philosophy (as I'll call it now as was originally intended) allows for many branching sects. Because we believe the entity you call God (we call it the Supreme Being or the Divine) is an omnipresent and omniscient entity. It is formless and yet can take on many forms. It is simultaneously male, female and non-gender. Everything that exists, has ever existed, and will exist, all find their source in the Divine. To put it this way, we're all like drops in a vast and endless ocean, having our own individual properties yet connected as one.

    All these deities you see is our limited way of trying to understand the concept of a limitless God - one Being, infinite manifestations. And it doesn't matter who or what you worship, because it all leads back to the Divine. That is why I believe that all religions, theologies and philosophies have the right to stick around. They're all just different paths guiding us towards the same destination.
    Yes, I understand that in describing God, we must use both apophatic and cataphatic languages.

    What is the theistic nature of Brahma?

  2. #132
    The Quiet Rebel Firebird 8118's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    279 sx/so
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    3,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Isk Stark View Post
    Yes, I understand that in describing God, we must use both apophatic and cataphatic languages.

    What is the theistic nature of Brahma?
    Cool, we're on the same page so far I like that.

    Brahma is the Creator, the first of our Trinity (which include Vishnu - the Preserver of Life, and Shiva - the Destroyer). I find it interesting to note here that the highest social class of priests are called 'Brahmins', in fact.

    (I have to get ready for a job interview now, but I'll be back later to answer any more questions - thanks for the discussion so far! )
    “The world breaks everyone, then some become strong at the broken places.” ~Ernest Hemingway

    Johari: https://kevan.org/johari?name=~MS*ANGEL~
    Nohari: https://kevan.org/nohari?name=~MS*ANGEL~

    Quote Originally Posted by Nijntje View Post
    "And then, raising my lids slowly and looking out from underneath my lashes, i captured him with my eyes"

  3. #133
    Phase-shifted beam Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    27,212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angel Cake View Post
    Everything that exists, has ever existed, and will exist, all find their source in the Divine. To put it this way, we're all like drops in a vast and endless ocean, having our own individual properties yet connected as one.


    What do you see as the difference between a religion and a philosophy? Either can inform a way of life, if embraced and sincerely followed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Isk Stark View Post
    Yes, I understand that in describing God, we must use both apophatic and cataphatic languages.
    I find it interesting that your comments often involve applying esoteric labels to things - by that I mean terminology that others won't be familiar with. How important is this to your own spiritual understanding, and your attempts to share that with others? Is this common in your church - that is, would you be readily understood by your fellow congregants?
    Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth. ~ Buddha
    Likes Firebird 8118 liked this post

  4. #134
    Senior Member Justin of Flavia Neapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    871

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angel Cake View Post
    Cool, we're on the same page so far I like that.

    Brahma is the Creator, the first of our Trinity (which include Vishnu - the Preserver of Life, and Shiva - the Destroyer). I find it interesting to note here that the highest social class of priests are called 'Brahmins', in fact.

    (I have to get ready for a job interview now, but I'll be back later to answer any more questions - thanks for the discussion so far! )
    It's neat that the third person of your Trinity is a destroyer.

    We say God the Father/Mind is both Creator and Destroyer, as we normally come to the decision to create or destroy through our minds.

    My question about what theistic nature is Brahma was more like: Is he a pantheistic nature? Pansychic?

    We say God is of a weak-panentheistic nature.

    Good luck on your job interview.

  5. #135
    Senior Member Justin of Flavia Neapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    871

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I find it interesting that your comments often involve applying esoteric labels to things - by that I mean terminology that others won't be familiar with. How important is this to your own spiritual understanding, and your attempts to share that with others? Is this common in your church - that is, would you be readily understood by your fellow congregants?
    It's pretty common in The Church, proper, especially among converts because the catechism is much more rigorous. Although, a lot of this mystical theology is lost on many Western, low-church congregations, or rather they emphasize the cataphatic aspects of God which angers atheists so.

  6. #136
    The Quiet Rebel Firebird 8118's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    279 sx/so
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    3,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Isk Stark View Post
    It's neat that the third person of your Trinity is a destroyer.

    We say God the Father/Mind is both Creator and Destroyer, as we normally come to the decision to create or destroy through our minds.

    My question about what theistic nature is Brahma was more like: Is he a pantheistic nature? Pansychic?

    We say God is of a weak-panentheistic nature.

    Good luck on your job interview.
    Thanks seems it went well yesterday.

    Okay, so I don't think I can answer this question, but I did find an article on Hinduism that may help explain why it cannot be defined through any particular label(s):

    Is Hinduism a Monotheistic Religion ? – American Institute of Vedic Studies
    “The world breaks everyone, then some become strong at the broken places.” ~Ernest Hemingway

    Johari: https://kevan.org/johari?name=~MS*ANGEL~
    Nohari: https://kevan.org/nohari?name=~MS*ANGEL~

    Quote Originally Posted by Nijntje View Post
    "And then, raising my lids slowly and looking out from underneath my lashes, i captured him with my eyes"

  7. #137
    Senior Member Justin of Flavia Neapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    871

    Default

    @Coriolis,
    For the higher we soar in contemplation the more limited become our expressions of that which is purely intelligible; even as now, when plunging into the Darkness that is above the intellect, we pass not merely into brevity of speech, but even into absolute silence of thoughts and of words. Thus, in the former discourse, our contemplations descended from the highest to the lowest, embracing an ever-widening number of conceptions, which increased at each stage of the descent; but in the present discourse we mount upwards from below to that which is the highest, and, according to the degree of transcendence, so our speech is restrained until, the entire ascent being accomplished, we become wholly voiceless, inasmuch as we are absorbed in it that is totally ineffable.
    -St. Dionysius the Areopagite.

    It's not merely about speaking in code or "esoteric labels", as you put it. It's more about brevity so to speak, there's no reason to withhold ideas from each other. Scientific language is not unwelcome, so why is metaphysics to be limited? (I know why) Metaphysics is severely limited in the West due to its turn into hard rationalism (around the 16th and 17th centuries). This is why you have so many Westerners looking to the East in order to get their metaphysics whether it be Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, etc. The Reformation blew the metaphysical foundations out of the West, so now we have MILFs in yoga pants at the mall.

    Otherwise, if you have the words, use them. If not, learn them.

  8. #138
    Phase-shifted beam Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    27,212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Isk Stark View Post
    @Coriolis,


    -St. Dionysius the Areopagite.

    It's not really about speaking in code or "esoteric labels", as you put it. It's more about brevity so to speak, there's no reason to withhold ideas from each other. If on-lookers are interested, they can google a word they don't understand. If not, they were never really interested in the first place.
    I'm all for being concise, but not at the expense of being understood. Unexplained specialized terminology is just jargon. Sure - people can look it up, if they have time, but as with any statement, the burden is first on the one presenting it to make him/herself understood, and that includes explaining specialized terms likely to be unfamiliar to "the layman". Of course that requires that the presenter understand them him/herself. If you are going to assume people who don't look these terms up aren't really interested, I can just as easily assume that someone who uses them without explanation is not really trying to be understood.
    Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth. ~ Buddha

  9. #139
    Senior Member Justin of Flavia Neapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    871

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I'm all for being concise, but not at the expense of being understood. Unexplained specialized terminology is just jargon. Sure - people can look it up, if they have time, but as with any statement, the burden is first on the one presenting it to make him/herself understood, and that includes explaining specialized terms likely to be unfamiliar to "the layman". Of course that requires that the presenter understand them him/herself. If you are going to assume people who don't look these terms up aren't really interested, I can just as easily assume that someone who uses them without explanation is not really trying to be understood.
    Probably not. Those specific terms are a little bit advanced. It's not "layman" language by any means, but the laymen know these Truths by feel. "Blessed are the poor in spirit". The laymen don't need to intellectualize what they feel. It's me who posts on this dumb forum who needs to intellectualize what the layman already experiences.

    I'm the one using the language as a crutch. I'm the one who needs God's grace. The layman doesn't need to understand my words. They'd just as well be surprised that there exists a word that describes what they already know and feel. They're already there, man. I envy them. Lord have mercy.

    Which reminds me of this short 9 minute podcast about the intellectual theist vs the layman:

    Ask Me About Jesus - Steve the Builder | Ancient Faith Ministries

  10. #140
    Armchair Explorer Doctor Anaximander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    MBTI
    TiSi
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    19,133

    Default

    What are anyone's thoughts on Edward Feser? I don't find his arguments particularly convincing, and a lot of them seem to made from circular reasoning and feeling. Like, yadda yadda Aquinas said this yadda yadda Thomas bloody Aquinas.

Similar Threads

  1. The random philosophy thought thread
    By Evee in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 150
    Last Post: 01-10-2020, 03:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO