My comments in between. --- In [email protected], t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: t3rinity:Oh, that's really immaterial what I believe. But in order to judge and respect somebody following a religion or spiritual path, you have to respect their understanding of the scripture they follow.
Irmeli:I think it is very important to see the distinction: You can respect the person, but don't need to agree with or respect all aspects of his understanding. > > It was written by MEN, and in this case, > > by the VERY men who are saying that it's a sin to > > question them or their motives or speak ill of them > > of do anything other than what they tell you to do. t3rinity:Gosh, you are doing mindreading from that far away. If anything, that is a mystic tradition. There is a whole tradition behind this not just one man or woman. You may just trash the whole tradition and assume that they were just exploiting innocent people, and disrespect the experience that has gone into such a tradition. This looks like you take a modernist sociological approach, like a marxists approach, God was just invented to control people. But this ignores the experiences and values of any mystic tradition. Irmeli: You make far too wide generalisations. Uncle never claimed that all religion and God was invented to control people. He said that holy scriptures are a mixture of deep wisdom and the limited understanding of the culture, where the sages who wrote the texts lived. > > You seem to be of the opinion that these MEN who wrote > > these things were doing so for only pure motives. t3rinity:I assume that they actually experienced what they were talking about, and which can be still experienced by anybody today. This whole approach rests on a transfer of spiritual knowledge from teacher to student, which is so essential in Tantra - for which the Atharva Veda is the direct ancester btw. > > I > > make no such assumption. They were establishing a set > > of guidelines so that no one would ever think for them- > > selves and judge spiritual teachers as *people*, for > > fear that to do so would be a sin. t3rinity:You don't have to believe in this kind of approach, but you should respect the feelings of those who do so. Irmeli: Are you saying that people who understand things in a different way than you should not express that understanding, because people like you get hurt? Do you think that it is a correct procedure not to criticise the fundamentalist muslim terrorists' interpretation of their religion, because their feelings could get so hurt that they might kill you? > Just to temper this somewhat, and explain a little > bit more what might be easily misconstrued, I have > *no problem* with those who believe scripture is > the revealed word of God. I'm just making the point > that some people seem to feel that because *they* > believe this, that others should, too. t3rinity:Dead wrong Uncl. But you should understand and respect the people who follow this approach - the Vedic Tradition that is, when you talk to them. Irmeli: If one does not believe a scripture to be the revealed word of God and gives expression to that understanding, why does it hurt your feelings so badly? Have you some doubts yourself? > > I don't. First, I don't believe in a sentient God, > one who has thoughts that could be written down. > Second, although I easily accept the possibility of > lesser "gods" or devas, I give them no more credence > and pay no more attention to them than I would a > fellow human being. t3rinity:That maybe so for you, but its different for others. You basically have the same problem like all western intellectuals of the 68 generation have. It's a cult about ego and I, and the worst thing for those people is to give control of the I away. Therefore the rejection of the Guru system. > They are interesting, but not > much of relevance to my life. t3rinity:But they are to other lives. What about respecting peoples feelings. Irmeli: How much do you show respect for Uncle's understanding. Although I think your disrespect doesn't hurt his feelings. Why are you reading FFL if you get so badly hurt? You surely can find elsewhere better groups of people, who share your worldview. And it's not just the > Hindu or Western scriptures; I feel exactly the same > way about the canon of Buddhism. > > I tend to regard scripture as literature. t3rinity:You can do so. You are being very selective in this, as you have adopted, consciously or unconsciously many items of these systems in you personal beliefsystem. You may not be aware that thsese quotes of teachers or scriptures you respect have outgrown these very traditions you reject. Irmeli: I have adopted deep wisdom from the holy scriptures, but also rejected a lot of stuff from those sources. It is an automatic process for me. When I give a dog something to eat, part of which it don't like, it very skilfully selects out the part that tastes it and swallows it, and spits out the dubious part. What's the problem here? > I fully > believe that some scripture is *inspired* literature, > and that some of it was inspired in men who were fully > enlightened and writing their visions down for the > general betterment of humanity, as an act of service. t3rinity:Yeah, but just a minute ago you said they did it to control other people. Irmeli: Again you make false generalisations. > At the same time, I believe that some of it very much > reflected the prejudices and the assumptions of the > time in which it was written, and the prejudices and > the assumptions and the particular path of the enlight- > ened person who wrote it down. T3rinity:That maybe. I am also against the caste system which is propounded by the Gita and the Vedas, but this is a social structure, which has nothing to do with spirituality. Yet with things that are essentially relating to the process of acquiring spiritual knowldege it's really a different matter, and we shouldn't adopt materialistic measures to judge them. In reality you are trashing Bhakti and Guruvada which form essential ingredients of any Indian tantric path, as if they were a sign of spiritual adolescencse. Thats clear from your answer to Lawson I am not saying you should adopt it, I am just saying you should stop trashing it. And I am simply sharing what I know about it - for you to consider as a background. I am not saying you should swap flags. Irmeli: I hear you saying that expressing a different understanding of the issues you consider to be holy is identical with trashing. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
