|
Immortal said: I doubt our views are that different at all, given that I'm an Indian being raised in a Hindu household whose only real inputs are his (very religious) mother's lectures and his mind. Well, online forums and school, too, but these places are really just where I go when I want to argue. :P I guess I should've seen it coming that you're not against the "enlightened human" idea in and of itself and just don't agree that modern "scientists" are the right people. I still think that you're being far too harsh on far too many people by doing this, though. I'm sure if you looked hard enough (well, I'm grasping at straws here since you probably have), you'd find as much meaning in the Old Testament and even modern TV shows as you do in Indian philosophy. Don't see why you're specifically against TV and the internet then, though. Your statement implied that post-internet society is worse than pre-internet society. That makes your overall historical worldview irrelevant since only this recent period of time matters. Anyway, for your first point, you're right, I don't have much experience in self control at all. Of course, I have the excuse that I'm a teenager and at the point in life at which people are generally most driven by impulse so I'm sure I'll be wise enough to manage it in the future. Basically, I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. :P To be honest, this part is what's really annoying about my philosophy. It's perfectly alright to indulge without feeling guilty and yet meditation and forsaking all things real are important for attaining higher self? ...I guess it has to be coherent. Somehow. Nevertheless, I think my point about self control not being affected by modern indulgences isn't diminished by this at all. The fact that I can't manage it myself doesn't detract from my ability to recognize it in others, surely? I make that point with regard to the fact that I know very many people who enjoy the things that you claim and are still capable of meditation and profound thought. Take yourself, even. Aren't you here, discussing something on a video game forum? I can take this your mere registration here mean that you care/cared quite a bit about video games. Unless video games are on a completely different plane from and more intellectual than TV shows, this should impede upon your ability to meditate quite a bit. And has it? And it's true that the argument I used could be applied pretty much everywhere. That's hardly a sufficient rebuttal, though. Tell me why it doesn't apply in your case. Also, while I'd love to join you in looking down upon Western philosophy, you're not being dispassionate at all. I know it's probably not the point right now, but still. You sound as spiteful as I do when talking about modern atheists (which ultimately ends up criticizing the West anyway). It's fine that you're not really answering what I said. What's more annoying is that you're phrasing everything in a manner that is either very eloquent or outright bizarre. I had to read most of those paragraphs like three times before I got what you were saying. And I'm in one of my more mentally active parts of the day. Forgive me I've completely missed what you were saying and just responded to something else. |
" I still think that you're being far too harsh on far too many people by doing this, though"
Well why don't we just all hold hands and get along? Seriously, just because I've somehow made my point clearly it is taken as offense(?). Consider that.
"Im sure if you looked hard enough (well, I'm grasping at straws here since you probably have), you'd find as much meaning in the Old Testament and even modern TV shows as you do in Indian philosophy."
Firstly, there's no such thing as "Indian" philosophy. To be totally straightforward again, there's no such thing as "Hindu". This term simply communicates an inherent ignorance about the culture and philosphy of Bharata.
Secondly, nomenclature aside, when the actual philosophy is brought up, I have to ask what philosophy that is. For me it's perfectly clear. There is the single author of the Veda, Srila Vyasadeva, who compiled the 4 Vedas from the 1 Veda at the advent of this age of Kali. This was done to facilitate the decreasing intelligence in human beings during this age. He also compiled many branches and subranches of the Veda.
There is the Sruti and Smriti. The Sruti is accepted by all classes of transcendentalists as Absolute truth. This includes the Upanishads which focus on Brahman. The Smriti isn't accepted by followers of Shankaracarya, but the position of Shankaracarya himself needs proper explanation and careful consideration to understand. Unfortunately, there was a lack of proper understanding by the first person to communicate the message of the Veda to the Western World. Swami Vivekenanda's views are rejected by Vyasadeva himself. Indeed, in the very conversation between Vyasadeva and his Guru, Narada Muni (1st Canto of Bhagavat Purana), his philosophical persuasion is asserted as clearly as can be. This first impression has certainly lasted, and the Western world knows nearly nothing of the "Hinduism" it has apparantly been introduced to by one of Her so-called knowers.
Unfortunately for them, the followers of Shankaracarya do not accept Smriti. Smriti is that which is remembered. So you obviously know Ramayana and Mahabharata. These fall in that category and are called Itihastas. The Purana literature (general histories of this universe) are also not accepted. This, in spite of the fact that the same author compiled them.
Vedanta Sutra. Literally, "The Final Limb of the Veda". Very important literature. Famously starts of with:
athato brahma jijnasa
"Now is the time to enquire into brahman" - commentary: Now that you have reached the human form of life, your duty is to know spirit.
The Vedanta Sutra is very short and compressed. It requires an incredibly sophisticated knowledge of Sanskrit that practically no-one posesses any more. The compiler (once again the Maha-Muni Vyasadeva), desided to make things easier by writing a commentary on the Vedanta Sutra.
So that Commentary is called Bhagavat Purana, or Srimad Bhagavatam.
And in the Srimad Bhagavatam is everything - EVERYTHING that encapsulates the "Philosophy of India" or "Hinduism". But how many Indians who 'know their philsophy' have read the Srimad Bhagavatam? How many even know these few paragraphs I've typed out here? Nothing here is from some obscure branch of Hinduism or from speculation, it is all exactly as in the tradition itself. The followers of Madhvacarya, Ramanujacarya and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu know it, but somehow no-one else does.
So, NO, there is nothing in the Old Testament that even comes close to the sheer depth and clarity found in the Veda. If you think that I'm being unreasonable agian, then please consider: My dad is a minister and I went to Church every Sunday (twice!) until I was 16. Thereafter a little less. I actually read the entire Bible(!). If you actually compare the Bible with - say - the Bhagavad Gita then we can speak again (this holds for anyone who feels offended by this statement). Though there is some value to be found in the Bible.
And TV shows - are you serious? COME ON.
"you in looking down upon Western philosophy"
I'm not looking down on Western philosophy. There were some incredible Western Philosophers. Plato and Socrates especially. Actually, I'm looking up at Vedic philosophy.
"Take yourself, even. Aren't you here, discussing something on a video game forum? I can take this your mere registration here mean that you care/cared quite a bit about video games. Unless video games are on a completely different plane from and more intellectual than TV shows, this should impede upon your ability to meditate quite a bit. And has it?"
I never claimed to be the VGC Jesus that I was accused of. I've smoked more pot in my life than everyone on this thread combined (most probably), and I've had personal issues in this life - definitely. But now, just because I'm being very assertive in my speech and the points I make, you have to go and attack my character? Do you want to know how long I lived in a monastary or how long I was celibate and didn't take stimulants? Or maybe how many hours a day I meditate What are you doing here?
Actually, you're inherently stating that there isn't scope for real progressive discussion about anything higher than the mundane sphere of videogames. Bravo- you're probably right. So should I just leave VGC again because it looks like I'm trying to be a Messiah on here or what?
Just leave these UTTERLY NONSENICLE POINTS THAT ARE REGURGITATED OVER AND OVER AGAIN to infiltrate the minds of poor innocent people that never hear the other side of the story?
Where is your freedom? Where is your liberty? Truth is, this world has none. If you actually read your own scriptures you would know that.
"It's perfectly alright to indulge without feeling guilty and yet meditation and forsaking all things real are important for attaining higher self?"
I don't want to be to heavy here, but that's not your philosophy. In Bhagavad Gita the systems of Karma-Yoga, Dhyana, Jnana and Bhakti are described for the different leves of practitioners. In none of those can you just follow the demands of your senses like an animal. INHERENT in your philosophy is that there are 8.4million species of life to take birth in, and behaving like an animal grants you a suitable body in your next life.
EDIT:
“In the morning I bathe my intellect in the stupendous and cosmogonal philosophy of the Bhagavad-Gita, in comparison with which our modern world and its literature seems puny and trivial.”
“I owed a magnificent day to the Bhagavad Gita. It was the first of books; it was as if an empire spoke to us, nothing small or unworthy, but large, serene, consistent, the voice of an old intelligence which in another age and climate had pondered and thus disposed of the same questions which exercise us.”
