-snipping a ton of stuff here, but still want to leave the links intact-
[1]Sorry for the VERY late reply. finally someone brings some of the eastern wisdom into here! [2] i have read the bhagavad gita few times over the years and while its quite a straight forward text, i can't even pretend i truly understand half of it. the birthless, deathless, unchanging characteristics of the soul in the bhagavad gita does not support your belief. [3] a birthless, deathless, unchanging nature of the soul means it can not learn, since new knowledge, or new experiences are "qualities" of the ever changing mind and are its constructs. what changes the mind is the knowledge, the "soul" stays the same. [4] it also says in the bhagavad gita that the Mokasha is when one fully realize his soul is one and the same as the Absolute one that is in everything which kinda negates the notion of individual knowledge that is passed through the soul between bodies. [5] i am aware that the text also point to some sort of transmigration between bodies, but i have not understood what is it that transmigrates.
[6] If you take the "selfless" view of the east, then each thought/concept that floats before "your" consciousness is temporary and less you than a drop of water is a river and in the same sense, its just as you as the drop of water is the river. so the thought, concept or cloud of concepts that passes to others (A-la Dawkins Memes) is something of you that got reborn in another person.
[7] Speaking of Moksha / spiritual experiences / enlightenment and psychadelic drugs, U.G kirsnamurty, who described his own Moksha not as enlightenment but as a calamity (That is if you believe him that he has been enlightened, which is very understandable if you don't since he generally just fools around and nowhere near what you would expect from a spiritual man), because he said it destroyed "Him" completely and that its the last thing "anyone" would want, said that all the spiritual exercises are useless since you can just take a shroom and achieve exactly the same thing without all the hassle and time wasting. he maintains that if we ever invent machines that make us reach those experiences then there is no reason not to use those since the "way" to the experiences is utterly meaningless and that those experiences has nothing to do with the enlightenment.
[8] "Any religion that insists that you hold faith in its teachings is not worth learning, true knowledge requires you to ask the hard questions even if they dont have answers"
[1] It's nice to be able to talk about it, since it's hard with being pretty much the only one here that has views that way. (At least as far as I can tell)
[2] Personally, my favorite part of the Bhagavad-Gita is where Arjuna just flat out tells Krishna to speak clearly, and stop talking in circles.
[3] That is correct. This is why I do not base my beliefs on the Bhagavad-Gita. I simply site parts from it where my beliefs are similar.
[4] Another part where I disagree with the book. I've yet to conclude any sort of "end" to reincarnation. There is simply no end to what can be learned. (I've entertained the idea that it's actually impossible to learn everything, because one of the things you'd have to learn to be knowing of everything, would be to know what it's like to be God. And even if the "final life" is to be God, then you're stuck being immortal, and hence, there is no end. I don't believe this, though, I just think it'd be a cool idea for a book or something.)
[5] I have no answer for this.
If you figure this out, let me know.
[6] Yeah... I don't really believe in the idea they have that all souls are basically the same. I think souls are
far more individual, and unique, and you wouldn't be able to just splash them together in some soul river.
[7] I've never heard of this, but I like this guy's thinking. More logical than a lot of the things I've read.
[8] This so much. I didn't start believing in reincarnation after reading a book, or hearing someone's story, or anything like that. I came to that conclusion on my own, and I still disagree with many ideas behind reincarnation that other people believe (such as many large parts of the Bhagavad-Gita, for an example.)
Also, as an aside, I have come to the conclusion that Lord Krishna is actually Cthulhu.
In the Bhagavad-Gita, Krishna reveals to Arjuna his "True Form", which is an infinitely large being, comprised of an infinite number of twisting arms, each covered with, not just regular mouths, but
flaming mouths, that feast on the souls of entire
dimensions, along with a numberless amount of eyes, each one the size of a star.
The very sight of this monstrosity causes Arjuna to temporarily
lose his fucking mind, and he begs Krishna to turn back into his human form, after which Krishna explains that had
anyone else in the world seen that, they would have been annihilated.
Hence, Lord Krishna is actually Cthulhu.
Poll
71 (27.7%)
Author
Topic: Railgun and Spirituality Discussion (Read 687409 times)