Skip to search.

Breaking News Visit Yahoo! News for the latest.

×Close this window

existlist · All Things Existential
  • Members Only
  • Post
  • Files
  • Photos
  • Links
  • Database
  • Polls
  • Calendar
  • Promote

The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

Check it out!

Group Information

  • Members: 593
  • Category: Existentialism
  • Founded: Apr 16, 1999
  • Language: English
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Hear how Yahoo! Groups has changed the lives of others. Take me there.

Messages
Message #
Search:
Advanced
 Messages Help
Messages
Topics
Hot Topics
Messages 59387 - 59416 of 59785   Oldest  |  < Older  |  Newer >  |  Newest
Messages: Show Message Summaries Sort by Date ^  
#59387 From: devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 5:25 am
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Re: [Wisdom-l] Re: [TheBecoming] Fw: The soul,re;latest missive. / Concept of Physical Life 		dgulhati
Send Email Send Email
  
* Several different theories may offer equally plausible accounts of the same
situation
	 * Scientific theories are "undetermined" by experience
	 * There are infinite interpretations of a discourse depending on the context
	 *

	 * Words have a meaning only relative to the other words they are connected to
in the sentences that we assume to be true
	 * The meaning of a sentence depends on the interpretation of the entire
language. Its meaning can even change in time.
	 * The meaning of language is not in the mind of the speaker
 
Gulati


________________________________
  From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>;
"greenlogic@yahoogroups.com" <greenlogic@...>;
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>;
"TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com" <TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com>;
Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com; "GnosticThought@yahoogroups.com"
<GnosticThought@yahoogroups.com>; "existlist@yahoogroups.com"
<existlist@yahoogroups.com>; "esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com"
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 11 February 2013 11:29 PM
Subject: [greenlogic] Re: [Wisdom-l] Re: [TheBecoming] Fw: The soul,re;latest
missive. / Concept of Physical Life


 
Devinder!
 
Concept of Physical Life
 
Indefinite terms can never lead us to
definitive clues about creation and life. Think of the nuisance-value of these
indeterminate phrases viz. physical life, the vital, mental reality, the origin
and so forth.
 
However, these indeterminate terms can be
turned into determinate ones through appropriate interpretation based on
discreet
and accurate fundamental definitions.
 
Your narrations may at best be seen as
*literary*, not *philosophical* straight away. For, these are instances of
running non-philosophically amok, with few fundamental definitions in purview.
 
Take the case of *physical life* as an
example. This notion would constitute of a number of pre-conceived inferences
which would collectively project life as an integral property of physicality.
The constituent inferences would incorporate these necessary premises.
 
1)    1) Life
is inherent in physicality.
2)    2) Physicality
of existence is primarily the source of life.
3)    3) Life
may be experienced *subjectively* or noticed *objectively*.
4)    4) The
subjective experiencing of life and life*s objective indication are inherently
and completely commensurable (with point-to-point correspondence, as that
between an object and its mirror-image).
5)   
5) *Life*
is the integral property of the integrated physique and is composed of
constituent properties ascribable uniquely to entity*s respective physical
constituencies.
6)   
6) Constituents
of entity*s integral subjective experience are inherently consistent and this
intra-subjectivity
consistency would connote and vindicate consistency among constituencies of
life*s objectivity.
7)    7) Similarly,
constituents of life*s integral objective portrayal are inherently consistent
and this intra-objectivity consistency connotes and vindicates consistency
among constituencies of entity*s subjectivity.
8)    8) Both
intra-subjectivity and intra-objectivity consistencies along with reciprocal
consistency between subjectivity and objectivity would connote and vindicate
inherent intra-physique (intra-body, intra-existence) consistency among entity*s
physical constituencies and physique-subjectivity, physique-objectivity
reciprocal consistencies.
9)    9) Though
to the ordinary eye, these six fundamental consistencies - viz. intra-physique,
intra-subjectivity and intra-objectivity consistencies and
physique-subjectivity, physique-objectivity and subjectivity-objectivity
reciprocal consistencies - may seem equally inherent and mutually disparate,
there is a lineage of causality among them. This lineage emanates from
*configured
existence*.
10  10) Thus *configuration*
is the most fundamental inherence and the most fundamental cause. And the most
fundamental cause is ever *existential* in nature. That is to say,
configuration is the maiden and eternal *mechanism of existence*.
11)11) Body/ physique is to
be defined on the basis of its configuration.
12)12) Corporeity and
corporeality merge at *configuration*.
13)13) Configuration is
characterized with growing polarity in order to develop intra-body,
intra-physique, intra-existence organs and to cause positive differentiation
(evolution) of existence, subjectivity and objectivity.
14)14) The maiden polarity
is that endows existence/ entity with the maiden organ - the epistemic organ -
that enables it to know itself (through internal subjectivity) and its
neighborhood (through external objectivity). This process conforms with the
obvious doctrine of *primordial right*. According to this doctrine, an
existence/ entity must know itself and its neighborhood to materialize the
*objective
of existence*.
15)15) The epistemic organ
ought to emerge at the very (moment of) beginning of existence. That is to say,
the epistemic organ isn*t only the maiden organ, it is the very maiden
existence.
16)16) The epistemic organ
has been latent for a long time by way of being buried in its won dazzle in the
form of subjectivity (subjective feeling, epistemic experiencing) - as the
filament of a milky electric bulb is buried inside own light, as the eye-organ
is buried inside own sight-feeling.
17)17) It has been the *primordial
ignorance* which has grown into the greatest intellectual fallacy that proposes
primacy of feeling (epistemic experience, subjectivity) over its existential
seat (source of emanation) when the opposite is true.
18)18) Growing polarity of
existential configuration turns the latter into an unwieldy pyramidal hierarchy
where the epistemic organ situated at its apex acquires great sophistication to
be termed mind, intellect, soul-organ etc and to cause the great epistemic
phenomena viz. emotion, subjectivity, soul-feeling etc.
 
This should be an
outline of the concept of *physical life*.



(Bhanu Padmo)
http://www.bhanupadmo.com
You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well
or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.

--- On Sun, 2/3/13, devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...> wrote:


>From: devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...>
>Subject: [Wisdom-l] Re: [TheBecoming] Fw: The soul,re;latest missive.
>To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@yahoogroups.com" <greenlogic@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>,
"TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com" <TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com>,
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>,
"GnosticThought@yahoogroups.com" <GnosticThought@yahoogroups.com>,
"existlist@yahoogroups.com" <existlist@yahoogroups.com>,
"esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com"
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>
>Date: Sunday, February 3, 2013, 5:05 AM
>
>
> 
>All physical life has the vital as its origin. The vital has the mental reality
as its origin. The mental itself has another origin. And so on.
>Nothing can be manifested upon earth physically unless it has at its origin a
higher truth. Otherwise the world would not exist. If it were something flat,
having its origin in itself, it would very soon cease to exist. It is because
there is a force, an energy that drives, behind the manifestation that life
continues to exist. Otherwise it would soon exhaust itself.
>There is only one Origin. This Origin is the Truth at its perfection, for it is
the only thing that truly exists. It has exteriorised itself, projected itself,
scattered itself, and by so doing has produced what we see, a mass of very fine,
very brilliant brains in search of that which they have not yet found and which
they find at last; for what they are in search of is within them. 
>There is what we call the Truth, the foundation of all things, because if that
was not there nothing would be. There is nothing which does not carry within it
an eternal Truth, otherwise it would not be. The universe would not exist for
one thousandth part of a second if it did not contain in itself a Truth. 
>You represent a little mass of agglomerate substance that forms your self.
Enter into that and find the key. You cannot say: "That is beyond me, that is
too great for me." Go within the little person and you will find the key that
opens all the doors.
> [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAuro\
bindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-4/-047\
_The%20Origin.htm]
>
>
>> JACOB: These higher souls are,of course,dependent on higher forms of
matter-basedentities.
>The highest truth of curse is not matter based.
>
>Gulati
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
>To: greenlogic@yahoogroups.com; seerseeker@yahoogroups.com;
TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com; Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com;
TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Friday, 25 January 2013 11:48 AM
>Subject: [TheBecoming] Fw: The soul,re;latest missive.
>
>
> 
>
>
>--- On Thu, 1/24/13, jacob@... <jacob@...> wrote:
>
>
>>From: jacob@... <jacob@...>
>>Subject: The soul,re;latest missive.
>>To: "bhanu padmo" <greenbhanu@...>
>>Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 5:53 AM
>>
>>
>>Yes Bhanu,
>>
>>Thank you for your email.
>>
>>I have not the time and space(account Mbytes getting
  critical)to answer in
>>detail.
>>Immortality from humanity's perspective cannot,philosophically
>>speaking,amount to eternity,even if we are speaking about soul in the
>>universal context,unless we believe that the Universe is without
>>beginning/end,i.e.,eternal.
>>
>>We are part of the whole.Our souls are part of the whole.Our
  consciousness
>>is part of the whole.Our journey is to fall into our role as human being
>>to become aware of who we are,what we are and where we are at.As our
>>identification with the larger whole deepens and widens,our personal soul
>>does likewise,one would think.Since there are any number of archetypes
>>serving humanity,and in turn being served by humanity,it stands to reason
>>that evolving souls identify and merge with higher,not necessarily
>>physically embodied,souls.
>>These higher souls are,of course,dependent on higher forms of matter-based
>>entities.Ultimately,the proposition with regard to human bodies and their
>>souls applies to larger,less dense entities just the same.The Universe as
>>a whole is also a body/entity.If humans are able to think and feel,and
>>surmise that they have a soul,they are only able to do so because the
>>reality in principle is there,and was there from the beginning-If there
>>was a beginning.If
  there was no beginning,there will be no end,but that is
>>no proof that we will,as human beings,have a personal immortal soul.
>>
>>All is flux.Unless we become enlightened to the extent that we are able to
>>escape this universe and become/start a new one(unlikely,but who
>>knows,maybe nothing is impossible)we become individuated individuals on
>>the way to merge with higher and higher entities until such time as we
>>disappear as separate and become one with the One,the universe as a Whole.
>>
>>We may surmise that some living examples of human being are evolved to
>>such an extent that they in fact constitute a very high soul at a level
>>which will allow the so embodied human to join with the universal Whole
>>directly upon the demise of the physical human body in question-Thereby
>>by-passing all the other archetypes which,from a human perspective,are
>>already,currently,from our perspective,dis-embodied.
>>
>>You are welcome to
  forward my little snippet of wisdom.I'll also check out
>>the blog.
>>
>>Cheers.  Jacob.
>>
>>
>>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59388 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:29 am
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul -hilarious - 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
--- On Tue, 2/12/13, Raghu Anthanarayanan <raghu@...>
wrote:

From: Raghu Anthanarayanan <raghu@...>
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@..." <greenlogic@...>,
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>, "Alan Kuzlev"
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>, "existlist@yahoogroups.com"
<existlist@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 12, 2013, 7:29 AM
















 









       Dear Bhanu,
Aapta means to attain to, as well as trustworthy. In Sankhya where aapta vachana
is used in a specific context, the meaning explicated by Yogacharya
Krishnamacharya is 'the words of a trustworthy person'.
Raghu

Equanimity just looks on and observes, while calmly settled in composed
neutrality. It is manifested as the quieting of both resentment and approval.
Gautham Buddha

On Feb 12, 2013, at 1:19, Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...> wrote:
















 










Dear Raghu1


(Legacy of Wisdom)


Aapta
Vachana means literary legacy (aapta = acquired, received / vachana =
narration).
This meaning is nowhere close to *authentic narration*. Please note that such
inaccuracy of literary expression has been the anathema against the legacy of
philosophical wisdom.

 

Matam
means opinion. You are right. If teachings of seers are taken as body of
mutable opinions, the notion of aapta vachana wouldn*t ever invoke the bigotry
of indiscriminate following.

 

Again,
we agree with you over the need for yama (ascertaining the scope) and niyama
(discipline) during inter-personal dialectics and personal reflections, provided
evolution of idea is emphasized as intellectual objective throughout verbal and
literary interactions.

 



(Bhanu Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.



--- On Wed, 2/6/13, Raghu Anthanarayanan <raghu@...>
wrote:

From: Raghu Anthanarayanan <raghu@...>
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@..." <greenlogic@...>,
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>, "Alan Kuzlev"
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>, "existlist@yahoogroups.com"
<existlist@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, February 6, 2013, 2:32 AM
















 






       Dharma also means nourishing that which is standing, restring that which
is falling and regenerating that which has fallen. There is no equivalent to
religion. The word Matham meaning opinion is used to refer to the teachings of
seers. For example Bauddha Matham,  there is also the idea of an Aapta Vachana,
an authentic source. One has the responsibility to make a choice. The demand
from the person is to observe the Yama and Niyama, the boundaries and discipline
that govern interpersonal and intrapersonal behaviour.
Getting caught with the idea of Religion as it is in the Abhrahamic traditions
is a political process!
Regards,
Raghu

Equanimity just looks on and observes, while calmly settled in composed
neutrality. It is manifested as the quieting of both resentment and approval.
Gautham Buddha

On Feb 5, 2013, at 12:25, S kumar <kumar_8134@...> wrote:
















 






       Dharma in Sanskrit means-established order, usage, institution, custom,
prescription, rule, duty, virtue, moral merit, good works, right, justice, law..
Ref.Pg.130 of Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Arthur A.Macdonnel, MA,PhD, Corpus
Christ College, University of Oxford- Published by Longmans Green and Co. in
1893.Nowhere it is mentioned Dharma refers to Religion Similarly, Samskruthi in
Sanskrit means Preparation, formation, consecration, page 320. If you desire to
have a detailed meaning, Refer Amarakosam in Sanskrit or other languages for
these terms.        From: devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...>
  To: "greenlogic@..." <greenlogic@...>;
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>;
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>;
"TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>; Alan Kuzlev
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>; "existlist@yahoogroups.com"
<existlist@yahoogroups.com>
  Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 9:12 AM
  Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -















 






       "When the word was spoken to me the image would appear
vividly"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4kcsXiwNbo > BHANU: What else could be
the translation of the English term *religion* in Sanskrit or that of the
Sanskrit term *dharma* in English? What could be the translation of the English
term *culture* in Sanskrit or that of the Sanskrit term
  *samskriti* in English? Isn*t the matter straight forward?
No indeed:http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/4173
Gulati
         From: Bhanu Padmo
  <greenbhanu@...>
  To: greenlogic@...
  Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2013 12:29 AM
  Subject: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -















 








--- On Mon, 2/4/13, ankh <ankhaton@...> wrote:

From: ankh <ankhaton@...>
Subject: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul
-hilarious -
To: Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, February 4, 2013, 2:23 PM
















 






       Instead of scripture  words

the word 'LOVE' covers it all

God constantly searching each cubic nanometre of his xillions² spheres
to collect the LOVE wherever he sees it

All else is hilarious

ankhaton

--- On Mon, 2/4/13, Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...> wrote:

From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Subject: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <thebecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@yahoogroups.com" <greenlogic@yahoogroups.com>,
"TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com" <therampapath@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com"
  <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>, "Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com"
  <wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>, TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, February 4, 2013, 5:11 AM
















 











Dear
Tilak,

 

Wishfulness,
Wistfulness and Lazy Gossips about Dharma. 
I understand your sentiments about religiosity. That is not very
difficult to understand or achieve at our level. What is being pointed at is
*terminology and semantics*. It is what it is. It may not be what it ought to
be. We should refrain from imposing our wistfulness and have patience in
implementing our wishfulness. Wistfulness is to be passed by because of its
non-reasonability. And the reason of wish needn*t be implementable right away,
without general preparedness.

 

What
else could be the translation of the English term *religion* in Sanskrit or
that of the Sanskrit term *dharma* in English? What could be the translation of
the English term *culture* in Sanskrit or that of the Sanskrit term *samskriti*
in English? Isn*t the matter straight forward?

 

What
you have been trying to point at is the difference between religion (dharma)
and culture (samskriti), as we are all wary of mistaking one for the other. A
culture is a particular case of the generic/ theoretical religion
(paaribhaashika
dharma) and may be deemed to be a practical/ localized dharma (praakruta
dharma).

 

This
much matter isn*t so intricate that all of us (all wise people) would get
entangled
here inextricably! Just say *no* to lazy gossips.

 

Green Pyramid Analogy
of Dharma.  Take this analogy (Green Pyramid Analogy)
about religion (dharma) to understand first the *seed/ genes of religion*
(dharmabeeja)
and then its *logical/ deductive amplification* and its *temporal/ shapely
magnification*
thereafter.

 

A
small green mango grows into a bigger one keeping the shape intact. This we
shall refer here as temporal/ shapely magnification. Had the small green mango
been
a small green living pyramid, we would have witnessed temporal/ shapely
magnification of the pyramid.

 

Assuming
that the pyramid is contemporaneously a dynamic one in so far as its causal
apex as the *seed of the pyramidal body* (deha-beeja) would progressively
precipitate commensurably and progressively the lower layers resulting in what
we have termed logical/ deductive amplification, the maiden small pyramid would
also continually grow adding respective effect to original temporal/ shapely
magnification as well.

 

These
twin phenomena portrayed in this analogy are applicable to dharma (religion)
which arrives amidst a community in the form of a code. The code is indeed a
pyramid of laws that is initiated by its causal apex in the form of a
philosophical/
metaphysical and jurisprudential prelude. This philosophical/ metaphysical and
jurisprudential signature isn*t really the integral philosophy/ metaphysics
(darshana) and jurisprudence (nyaya-vijnaana) proper that would embody
community*s respective *unified theory of creation and life*.

 

The
apex of the code depicts the seed of religion (dharma-beeja) that would propel
religion*s
logical/ deductive amplification across contemporaneous themes and that would
propel religion*s temporal/ shapely magnification across evolving/ insinuated
themes down the ages.

 

This
much matter isn*t so intricate that all of us (all wise people) would get
entangled
here inextricably! Just say *no* to lazy gossips.

  

Thanks. (Bhanu Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com/


You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well
or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.



--- On Fri, 1/25/13, Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...> wrote:

From: Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...>
Subject: RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul [1 Attachment]
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <thebecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@yahoogroups.com" <greenlogic@yahoogroups.com>,
"TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com" <therampapath@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>,
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Friday, January 25, 2013, 5:37 PM
















 









Dear Bhanu Jee Namaste No, 'Dharma' is not 'Religion.' They are apples and
oranges. Matter of fact, we must make the distinction even more pronounced to
make any dialogue clear. Religions are about social control, to make individuals
into soldiers. There theme is: "Only my religion is true and direction to
heaven. All others are wrong and hell bound. We are brothers, others are enemies
to be converted. You believe and obey whatever your religion dishes out to you
without any question." Dharma is about inner nature and improvement on it
through seeking truth 'Satya' and discipline 'Yoga.' An individual may practice
any or go to any temple. There is always overlaps of people's ideas and
practices. To group people into a legal boxes like Christian, Hindu, Buddhist,
Muslim etc. is good only in the census. Otherwise, it has absolutely no merit in
real spiritual studies. Do Hindus go to Buddhist temple and pray or not?
  Matter
  of
  fact, Hinduism is not Dharma, but collection of Dharmas evolved in Indian
sub-continent like - Vaishnav, Shaiva, Baudha, Jain, Tantra etc. Do you see any
Muslims praying in Church or Temple? No, you will not see any. On the contrary,
they destroyed Bamiyan Buddha. Let us be very clear about it. Sincerely, Tilak
Shrestha, Ph.D.To: TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com; greenlogic@yahoogroups.com;
TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com; seerseeker@yahoogroups.com;
Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com From: greenbhanu@... Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013
04:59:58 -0800 Subject: Re: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul














 











BHANU :

 

Understanding
Dharma and Materialistic Anarchy :

Proposing *Political Religion*

 

            Shouldn*t
we make the matter of understanding dharma simpler by shedding exaggerated
mystique about the word *dharma* by way of taking the term *religion* as its
trans-language synonym? The current usage of the term *dharma* in its place of
origin (India) is almost identical with the usage of the term *religion* in its
place of origin (the West).

 

            According
to the current usage, religion may be defined as a set of moral and social
rules that sprout a commensurate culture composed of characteristic public
behaviors and events that include moralizing ritualism.

 

            Philosophy
is a body of fundamental postulates that explains the nature of religion.
Though it is likely that the three terms - religion, culture and philosophy -
would get mixed up quite often in lay conversations, the formal line of
demarcation between the three ought to be invoked when necessary. The Sanskrit
translations for the trio *philosophy-religion-culture* is
*darshana-dharma-samskriti*.

 

            With
this prelude, I would like to check your (Devinder Singh Gulati*s) given
narration
line by line and issue my opinions. This juxtaposition will be a good beginning
for mutual understanding, I suppose. The manner of this interaction ought to be
candid and we shouldn*t leave between us much room for shallow fusses. Let the
discussion henceforth be put down in conversation format.

(Devinder
– Bhanu Dialog)

 

DEVINDER : In evolving standards of conduct and
shaping values, we have to take into consideration the variety and complexity
of human life and nature.

 

BHANU : Yes, human life and human nature is
very complex and variegated. Yes, evolving standards of conduct and shaping
values need extreme precaution and care. But who are the people you have in
mind who would be undertaking such a gigantic project. This project is
tantamount to invention of a religion (dharma).

 

            Let*s
assume that you are the person who have set sail in that direction. That is
fine. You would be the founder guru (adi-guru) who would collect information as
much as possible and combine them into a hierarchy of inferences till you have a
world view and an integrated philosophy of life (darshana).

 

            That
you do at a very personal level according to your intellectual capacity. In
other words, all the constituent inferences that would make the world view and
integrated philosophy of life would be your *personal truths*. Even the world
view and integrated philosophy you would arrive at are only *peak* personal
truths, characteristic of your own intellect.

 

            Let*s
get rid of the baffle that we experience across such utterances as *truth*,
*reality*, *actuality* etc. You perceive actuality as the immediate cause and
conceive the underlying deeper causes as realities and connect the sequence of
realities
into a truth. It is useful to remind ourselves of this *actuality-reality-truth
axis* quite often lest we are not lost in the dazzle of such words.

 

            If
all inferences you accede to are mere *personal truths*, what about the
*absolute
truth*? No, you don*t accede to the absolute truth ever. Practically or
effectively, an acknowledged and relatively higher understanding in the form of
a higher inference may sometimes be addressed to as absolute truth. But that
isn*t an accurate approach, though practical and effective to a great extent.

 

            Absolute
truth may lie in the direction of the median (locus) that runs through and
connects
the sequence of personal truths. Thus the absolute truth can only be an
intellectual
direction, never a particular inference.

 

            Degree
of sustainability of a guru thus is his/ her ability to be more resolute and
less
lax intellectually, so that lesser and lesser number of resolute personal
inferences portend the *absolute direction of truth*. This inverse proportion
makes appraisal of guru, philosophy and religion quite paradoxical and critical,
often precarious.

 

            The
pyramid of truth accruing out of the founder guru and a sequence of follower
gurus foreshadows a social code, a body of practical rules that need to be
pronounced, propagated and implemented. This code also ought to include a lean
moralizing
ritualism that would optimally remind the crowd of the cardinal inferences and
principles that reinforce the pyramid of truth.

            This
psycho-intellectual process is religion (dharma). The ensuing metamorphosed
public behavior and elevated events would constitute the commensurate culture
(sanskriti).

 

DEVINDER : The Dharma, at once religious law of
action and deepest law of our nature, is not, as in the Western idea, a creed,
cult or ideal inspiring an ethical and social rule; it is the right law of
functioning of our life in all its parts.

 

BHANU : We were talking about the generic
guru and the commensurate religion, philosophy or  culture. A particular guru
would give rise to
a particular commensurate religion, philosophy or culture. The sequence of the
founder gurus of generic religion would endeavor to traverse forward along the
*absolute
direction of truth* to discover higher and higher particular religions,
philosophies and cultures.

 

            We
mustn*t mistake *generic religion* for *absolute religion*. As we have already
noted, there is no absolute religion, no absolute philosophy, no absolute
culture, no absolute guru, no absolute truth. We have only a series of
practicable religions of differing potentialities and capacities for public
welfare.

 

            So
no particular religion can be deemed to have harbored the deepest law of human
nature or the law of deepest human nature. However, a particular religion can
promote the *absolute direction of truth* by teaching the commensurable public
methodology
and mechanism. At any point of time or space, the generic religion can emerge
as only a creed, developing into a cult (a particular religion), with an ideal.

 

            What
about a particular religion which has discovered, enunciated and begun to
implement the public methodology and mechanism of following the *absolute
direction of truth*? This would be a magnanimous religion, a pragmatic
religion, a progressive religion and yet it wouldn*t be the absolute religion.

 

            We
have to get rid of the specter of overemphasizing own insufficient religiosity
in the name of absoluteness. This has been a tragic philosophical error in the
realm of theology.

           

DEVINDER : The tendency of man to seek after a
just and perfect law of his living finds its truth and its justification in the
Dharma. Everything indeed has its dharma, its law of life imposed on it by its
nature; but for man the dharma is the conscious imposition of a rule of ideal
living on all his members.

 

BHANU : Dharma is always *the enunciated one*.
We can say that a group of people ought to have a dharma if they do not have one
at the moment. We can*t say that they have a dharma just because they wish to
have one, although they haven*t yet been able to enunciate it even crudely.

 

            Saying
that everything has a dharma would replace *enunciated inference* and
*promulgated
commensurate law* by *property* (guna) in the aforesaid definition of dharma.
This would further baffle understanding of dharma and thwart its emergence.

 

            You
are right when you say that dharma is conscious and consented and collective
self-imposition
of a integral body of enunciated social and moral rules to promote the highest
realized
ideal.

 

DEVINDER : Dharma is fixed in its essence, but
still it develops in our consciousness and evolves and has its stages; there
are gradations of spiritual and ethical ascension in the search for the highest
law of our nature.

 

BHANU : Dharma remains still a search even as
it gets implemented, true, but it never has a fixed intellectual essence in
metaphysical,
moral, social or spiritual terms. The elusive absolute truth hasn*t been in the
grip of the current dharma ever.

 

            As
we say this, we are aware of the importance of the public methodology and
mechanism of achieving the *absolute direction of truth*.

 

            You
are right when you say that inferences about nature form a pyramidal hierarchy
whose
understanding facilitates spiritual and ethical ascension.

 

DEVINDER : All men cannot follow in all things
one common and invariable rule. Life is too complex to admit of the arbitrary
ideal simplicity which the moralizing theorist loves. Natures differ; the
position, the work we have to do has its own claims and standards; the aim and
bent, the call of life, the call of the spirit within is not the same for
everyone: the degree and turn of development and the capacity, adhikara, are
not equal. Man lives in society and by society, and every society has its own
general dharma, and the individual life must be fitted into this wider law of
movement. But there too the individual’s part in society and his nature and
the
needs of his capacity and temperament vary and have many kinds and degrees: the
social law must make some room for this variety and would lose by being rigidly
one for all.

 

BHANU : You are right when you say that the
body of moral and social laws constitutes of situation-specific adapted
constituents.
Codification has been a herculean task. It is easier to talk about ethereal
matters
than to translate them into earthen affairs. Here comes the fallacy of
exaggerations about absoluteness as a fatal hindrance.

 

DEVINDER : A lawless impulsion of desire and
interest and propensity cannot be allowed to lead human conduct; even in the
frankest following of desire and interest and propensity there must be a
governing and restraining and directing line, a guidance. There must be an
ethic or a science, a restraint as well as a scope arising from the truth of
the thing sought, a standard of perfection, an order.

 

BHANU : Take the other perspective.
Law-making ought to be a democratic process so that its implementation is
acknowledged integrally by the society. Impulsive lawlessness is ruled out
through disciplinary enforcement. That is not a problem. The real problem is
with the process of law-making.

 

            Take
two societies of differing intellectual achievements. The two respective
pyramids
of inferences vary in height and sprawl. Naturally, the respective qualities of
laws will vary, one being guided by a higher ideal (higher peak inference) than
the other.

 

            And
accordingly, the former will be rewarded with larger progress than the latter.
This will create consternation in the latter society. If the explanation for
the civilization lag is denied too long, this society would revolt against
itself quite implicitly, the wealth in the neighborhood being the source of
distraction.

 

            The
ultimate cause for this *purported* materialistic anarchy is not being able to
cope
intellectually with the neighboring society. *Intellectually* refers here to
*civil
intellectualism*, not to a stunted academicism. Please note that public desire
in
any form, however contrary it may seem, need not be always seen as *lawless*.

 

            You
have raised the most pertinent issue of *public guidance*. Who could guide a
sovereign
society? If *inferring* is the prime process by which it achieves intellectual
height and material progress, what is that public methodology and mechanism
that could achieve this (public process of widespread inferring)? This
methodology and mechanism also would also discover and implement the *absolute
direction of truth* as well.

 

            The
generic name for this methodology and mechanism is *polity*. So, we are looking
forward to that particular type of polity that would accomplish the twin
objective of finding the absolute direction of truth and effecting intellectual
coping.

 

            As
the story unfolds further, we are drawn to the consideration of the *political
religion* (raja-dharma) that would surpass existing cultural religions in
import and worth.

 

            What
is that model? However, that is another phase altogether.  

 

DEVINDER : The universal embracing dharma in the
Indian idea is a law of ideal perfection for the developing mind and soul of
man; it compels him to grow in the power and force of certain high or large
universal qualities which in their harmony build a highest type of manhood.

 

BHANU : The phrases *universe-embracing
dharma* and *Indian idea* don*t go together - me and your are sure. Perfection
that connotes absoluteness too is, in a way, ruled out. What you could be
looking forward to is the aforesaid public methodology and mechanism that could
unravel and implement absolute direction of truth and that could bring about
fastest psycho-cultural coping among societies.

 

DEVINDER : Dharma has two aspects: universal,
which is common to all humanity and the individual or specific, which is unique
to the nature of the individual or the community.

 

BHANU : You are right when you differentiate
generic religion (dharma) from its particular cases in the form of a cultures
(samskritis)......................

(Bhanu Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com/


You may reply this thread
upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.

 



From: devindersingh gulati
<dgulhati@...>

To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com"
<TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Wednesday, 19 December 2012, 7:49

Subject: Re: [TheBecoming] Fw: Tears of Reason for Connecticut's Slain
Children

 

 

In evolving standards
of conduct and shaping values, we have to take into consideration the variety
and complexity of human life and nature.

The Dharma, at once
religious law of action and deepest law of our nature, is not, as in the
Western idea, a creed, cult or ideal inspiring an ethical and social rule; it
is the right law of functioning of our life in all its parts.

The tendency of man
to seek after a just and perfect law of his living finds its truth and its
justification in the Dharma. Everything indeed has its dharma, its law of life
imposed on it by its nature; but for man the dharma is the conscious imposition
of a rule of ideal living on all his members.

Dharma is fixed in
its essence, but still it develops in our consciousness and evolves and has its
stages; there are gradations of spiritual and ethical ascension in the search
for the highest law of our nature.

All men cannot follow
in all things one common and invariable rule. Life is too complex to admit of
the arbitrary ideal simplicity which the moralizing theorist loves. Natures
differ; the position, the work we have to do has its own claims and standards;
the aim and bent, the call of life, the call of the spirit within is not the
same for everyone: the degree and turn of development and the capacity,
adhikara, are not equal. Man lives in society and by society, and every society
has its own general dharma, and the individual life must be fitted into this
wider law of movement. But there too the individual’s part in society and his
nature and the needs of his capacity and temperament vary and have many kinds
and degrees: the social law must make some room for this variety and would lose
by being rigidly one for all.

A lawless impulsion
of desire and interest and propensity cannot be allowed to lead human conduct;
even in the frankest following of desire and interest and propensity there must
be a governing and restraining and directing line, a guidance. There must be an
ethic or a science, a restraint as well as a scope arising from the truth of
the thing sought, a standard of perfection, an order.

The universal
embracing dharma in the Indian idea is a law of ideal perfection for the
developing mind and soul of man; it compels him to grow in the power and force
of certain high or large universal qualities which in their harmony build a
highest type of manhood.

Dharma has two
aspects: universal, which is common to all humanity and the individual or
specific, which is unique to the nature of the individual or the community.
[More...]

http://fdi.sasociety.in/cms/index.php/fdi/article/360_The_Way_of_Dharma

 

Gulati



































































































































































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (6)
#59389 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:31 am
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul -hilarious - 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
Raghu!

 

I noted this
postscript in your e-mail :

**Equanimity
just looks on and observes, while calmly settled in composed neutrality. It is
manifested as the quieting of both resentment and approval. (Gautama Buddha)**

I have
something to say over this statement.

 

(Understanding Buddha*s Equanimity : Theory of
Opposites and Fallacy of Composed Neutrality)



When somebody quotes or transcribes Buddha*s ideas, directly or indirectly, in
this manner, we can*t do without undergoing a spell of reflection over the
*theory of opposites*.

Take the
cases of sensation of light and darkness. Darkness is absence of light. Not
vice versa. That is to say, light isn*t absence of darkness. Why?

It is because
light is the actual, the real, the existent entity. The existent can afford to
be absent. This consideration precipitates the sister analogy i.e. the
matter-space analogy.

Space is
absence of matter. Not vice versa. That is to say, matter isn*t absence of
space. Because, matter is the actual, the real, the existent entity. The
existent
can afford to be absent.

The
perception that imparts us the notion of *the opposite* is that of *absence of
existence*. That is how the light-darkness opposites are perceived. That is how
the matter-space opposites are perceived.

Surreptitious
incursion by an inscrutable mystery makes the idea of opposites a dangerous
bottomless pit. To understand this new development, we may take the help of
this koan.

As one walks
back along number-line (in opposite direction) from a finite number, say 10,
he/ she reaches the zero-point which could be described in a way as absence of
number and could be comported to absence of existence. Of course, here the
presumption is that number comports with existence (of value).

The theory of
opposites propounds that existence and absence of existence are the two unique
opposites. According to this theory of opposites, a number (say, 10) and zero
could qualify to be the opposites. Let it be so.

If so, what
would further happen as you continue to 
traverse backward from the waypoint (+10) along the number line (in
opposite direction) beyond zero-point? Then, you enter the mysterious domain.

How would you
explain then the status of (-10) with respect to zero firstly and with respect
to
(+10) secondly?

Many tend to
believe that +10 is the legitimate opposite of -10. However, this belief
doesn*t comport with the exposition of *theory of opposites* that states that
+10 and zero are the unique opposites. Thus the mystery deepens about the
relationship between (+10) and (-10). Call it the *mystery of opposites*.

Mirror-symmetry
of number line about the pivotal *zero* provides a clue to understand the
mystery of opposites. Set a mirror at *zero* facing +10. Now look at the mirror
while standing on the number line beyond +10. The virtual image of the positive
side of number line seen upon the mirror would coincide with the negative side
of the number model (number line). So the mirror-image of number (+10) may be
deemed to be virtually coincident with number (-10). The latter lies across the
mirror-face.  And the mirror-face harbors
the zero-point. How does this narration help in solving the mystery of
opposites?

Let* think
over this new proposition. If zero is the opposite of +10 by the theory of
opposites (that states that *absence of existence* is uniquely the opposite of
*existence*),  -10 is then the *doubled/ deepened opposite*
of +10 insofar as absence of value is further deepened in the former.

The notion of
*doubled/ deepened opposite* may be described rather as *absence of magnitude*
(when magnitude refers to magnitude of value), not simply as *absence of value*.
Ten (10) is not only a value, this value has a magnitude measuring ten (10). If
zero is the opposite of value (of any magnitude), -10 may be deemed to be the
deepened/ doubled opposite of value of magnitude +10.

Virtuality of
mirror-image (image upon a plane mirror) may be ascribed to the doubled/
deepened opposite (perception of *absence of magnitude*) from rather a queer
viewpoint. Think of darkness as the absence of light (of any magnitude). Now
darkness is sensed as blackness, the opposite of sensation of light. How would
this blackness be deepened or doubled practically, if it was to be the absence
of magnitude (say, absence of light of magnitude +10 i.e. absence of a light
ten time brighter)?

Darkness as
complete absence of light is perfectly black. Are there differing shades of
perfect blackness? Similarly, in the matters of absence of matter, are there
differing shades of space? No.

The doubled/
deepened opposite is perceptibly virtual (indiscernible) when the simple
opposite is perceptibly actual (discernible). In other words, perception of the
simple opposite (of the absence of existence) is simple and ordinary
(non-intellectual,
non-psychic), when experiencing of the deepened opposite is hyper-active and
extraordinary (psycho-intellectual).

Coming back
to the given quotation from Buddha, contrary to what is said, equanimity isn*t
composed neutrality. It is a fallacy. Because such neutrality rather connotes
psycho-intellectual inertness. According to our arguments, equanimity ought to
be a composed hyper-active experience, the equable experiencing of own
superlative
psycho-intellectual state.

Equanimity
isn*t any form of quieting, neither of approval nor of resentment. Further, any
attempt to combine approval and resentment into a continuum would be
metaphysically anomalous as there are as many as two U-turns in between
resentment and approval, the former being the doubled/ deepened opposite of the
latter. The first U-turn brings into sight *the opposite* out of absence of any
existence and the second U-turn brings into sight *the doubled opposite* out of
absence of magnitude of existence.


(Bhanu Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.
--- On Tue, 2/12/13, Raghu Anthanarayanan <raghu@...>
wrote:

From: Raghu Anthanarayanan <raghu@...>
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@..." <greenlogic@...>,
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>, "Alan Kuzlev"
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>, "existlist@yahoogroups.com"
<existlist@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 12, 2013, 7:29 AM
















 









       Dear Bhanu,
Aapta means to attain to, as well as trustworthy. In Sankhya where aapta vachana
is used in a specific context, the meaning explicated by Yogacharya
Krishnamacharya is 'the words of a trustworthy person'.
Raghu

Equanimity just looks on and observes, while calmly settled in composed
neutrality. It is manifested as the quieting of both resentment and approval.
Gautham Buddha

On Feb 12, 2013, at 1:19, Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...> wrote:
















 










Dear Raghu1


(Legacy of Wisdom)


Aapta
Vachana means literary legacy (aapta = acquired, received / vachana =
narration).
This meaning is nowhere close to *authentic narration*. Please note that such
inaccuracy of literary expression has been the anathema against the legacy of
philosophical wisdom.

 

Matam
means opinion. You are right. If teachings of seers are taken as body of
mutable opinions, the notion of aapta vachana wouldn*t ever invoke the bigotry
of indiscriminate following.

 

Again,
we agree with you over the need for yama (ascertaining the scope) and niyama
(discipline) during inter-personal dialectics and personal reflections, provided
evolution of idea is emphasized as intellectual objective throughout verbal and
literary interactions.

 



(Bhanu Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.



--- On Wed, 2/6/13, Raghu Anthanarayanan <raghu@...>
wrote:

From: Raghu Anthanarayanan <raghu@...>
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@..." <greenlogic@...>,
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>, "Alan Kuzlev"
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>, "existlist@yahoogroups.com"
<existlist@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, February 6, 2013, 2:32 AM
















 






       Dharma also means nourishing that which is standing, restring that which
is falling and regenerating that which has fallen. There is no equivalent to
religion. The word Matham meaning opinion is used to refer to the teachings of
seers. For example Bauddha Matham,  there is also the idea of an Aapta Vachana,
an authentic source. One has the responsibility to make a choice. The demand
from the person is to observe the Yama and Niyama, the boundaries and discipline
that govern interpersonal and intrapersonal behaviour.
Getting caught with the idea of Religion as it is in the Abhrahamic traditions
is a political process!
Regards,
Raghu

Equanimity just looks on and observes, while calmly settled in composed
neutrality. It is manifested as the quieting of both resentment and approval.
Gautham Buddha

On Feb 5, 2013, at 12:25, S kumar <kumar_8134@...> wrote:
















 






       Dharma in Sanskrit means-established order, usage, institution, custom,
prescription, rule, duty, virtue, moral merit, good works, right, justice, law..
Ref.Pg.130 of Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Arthur A.Macdonnel, MA,PhD, Corpus
Christ College, University of Oxford- Published by Longmans Green and Co. in
1893.Nowhere it is mentioned Dharma refers to Religion Similarly, Samskruthi in
Sanskrit means Preparation, formation, consecration, page 320. If you desire to
have a detailed meaning, Refer Amarakosam in Sanskrit or other languages for
these terms.        From: devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...>
  To: "greenlogic@..." <greenlogic@...>;
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>;
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>;
"TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>; Alan Kuzlev
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>; "existlist@yahoogroups.com"
<existlist@yahoogroups.com>
  Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 9:12 AM
  Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -















 






       "When the word was spoken to me the image would appear
vividly"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4kcsXiwNbo > BHANU: What else could be
the translation of the English term *religion* in Sanskrit or that of the
Sanskrit term *dharma* in English? What could be the translation of the English
term *culture* in Sanskrit or that of the Sanskrit term
  *samskriti* in English? Isn*t the matter straight forward?
No indeed:http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/4173
Gulati
         From: Bhanu Padmo
  <greenbhanu@...>
  To: greenlogic@...
  Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2013 12:29 AM
  Subject: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -















 








--- On Mon, 2/4/13, ankh <ankhaton@...> wrote:

From: ankh <ankhaton@...>
Subject: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul
-hilarious -
To: Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, February 4, 2013, 2:23 PM
















 






       Instead of scripture  words

the word 'LOVE' covers it all

God constantly searching each cubic nanometre of his xillions² spheres
to collect the LOVE wherever he sees it

All else is hilarious

ankhaton

--- On Mon, 2/4/13, Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...> wrote:

From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Subject: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <thebecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@yahoogroups.com" <greenlogic@yahoogroups.com>,
"TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com" <therampapath@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com"
  <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>, "Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com"
  <wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>, TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, February 4, 2013, 5:11 AM
















 











Dear
Tilak,

 

Wishfulness,
Wistfulness and Lazy Gossips about Dharma. 
I understand your sentiments about religiosity. That is not very
difficult to understand or achieve at our level. What is being pointed at is
*terminology and semantics*. It is what it is. It may not be what it ought to
be. We should refrain from imposing our wistfulness and have patience in
implementing our wishfulness. Wistfulness is to be passed by because of its
non-reasonability. And the reason of wish needn*t be implementable right away,
without general preparedness.

 

What
else could be the translation of the English term *religion* in Sanskrit or
that of the Sanskrit term *dharma* in English? What could be the translation of
the English term *culture* in Sanskrit or that of the Sanskrit term *samskriti*
in English? Isn*t the matter straight forward?

 

What
you have been trying to point at is the difference between religion (dharma)
and culture (samskriti), as we are all wary of mistaking one for the other. A
culture is a particular case of the generic/ theoretical religion
(paaribhaashika
dharma) and may be deemed to be a practical/ localized dharma (praakruta
dharma).

 

This
much matter isn*t so intricate that all of us (all wise people) would get
entangled
here inextricably! Just say *no* to lazy gossips.

 

Green Pyramid Analogy
of Dharma.  Take this analogy (Green Pyramid Analogy)
about religion (dharma) to understand first the *seed/ genes of religion*
(dharmabeeja)
and then its *logical/ deductive amplification* and its *temporal/ shapely
magnification*
thereafter.

 

A
small green mango grows into a bigger one keeping the shape intact. This we
shall refer here as temporal/ shapely magnification. Had the small green mango
been
a small green living pyramid, we would have witnessed temporal/ shapely
magnification of the pyramid.

 

Assuming
that the pyramid is contemporaneously a dynamic one in so far as its causal
apex as the *seed of the pyramidal body* (deha-beeja) would progressively
precipitate commensurably and progressively the lower layers resulting in what
we have termed logical/ deductive amplification, the maiden small pyramid would
also continually grow adding respective effect to original temporal/ shapely
magnification as well.

 

These
twin phenomena portrayed in this analogy are applicable to dharma (religion)
which arrives amidst a community in the form of a code. The code is indeed a
pyramid of laws that is initiated by its causal apex in the form of a
philosophical/
metaphysical and jurisprudential prelude. This philosophical/ metaphysical and
jurisprudential signature isn*t really the integral philosophy/ metaphysics
(darshana) and jurisprudence (nyaya-vijnaana) proper that would embody
community*s respective *unified theory of creation and life*.

 

The
apex of the code depicts the seed of religion (dharma-beeja) that would propel
religion*s
logical/ deductive amplification across contemporaneous themes and that would
propel religion*s temporal/ shapely magnification across evolving/ insinuated
themes down the ages.

 

This
much matter isn*t so intricate that all of us (all wise people) would get
entangled
here inextricably! Just say *no* to lazy gossips.

  

Thanks. (Bhanu Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com/


You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well
or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.



--- On Fri, 1/25/13, Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...> wrote:

From: Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...>
Subject: RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul [1 Attachment]
To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <thebecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"greenlogic@yahoogroups.com" <greenlogic@yahoogroups.com>,
"TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com" <therampapath@yahoogroups.com>,
"seerseeker@yahoogroups.com" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>,
"Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com" <wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Friday, January 25, 2013, 5:37 PM
















 









Dear Bhanu Jee Namaste No, 'Dharma' is not 'Religion.' They are apples and
oranges. Matter of fact, we must make the distinction even more pronounced to
make any dialogue clear. Religions are about social control, to make individuals
into soldiers. There theme is: "Only my religion is true and direction to
heaven. All others are wrong and hell bound. We are brothers, others are enemies
to be converted. You believe and obey whatever your religion dishes out to you
without any question." Dharma is about inner nature and improvement on it
through seeking truth 'Satya' and discipline 'Yoga.' An individual may practice
any or go to any temple. There is always overlaps of people's ideas and
practices. To group people into a legal boxes like Christian, Hindu, Buddhist,
Muslim etc. is good only in the census. Otherwise, it has absolutely no merit in
real spiritual studies. Do Hindus go to Buddhist temple and pray or not?
  Matter
  of
  fact, Hinduism is not Dharma, but collection of Dharmas evolved in Indian
sub-continent like - Vaishnav, Shaiva, Baudha, Jain, Tantra etc. Do you see any
Muslims praying in Church or Temple? No, you will not see any. On the contrary,
they destroyed Bamiyan Buddha. Let us be very clear about it. Sincerely, Tilak
Shrestha, Ph.D.To: TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com; greenlogic@yahoogroups.com;
TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com; seerseeker@yahoogroups.com;
Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com From: greenbhanu@... Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013
04:59:58 -0800 Subject: Re: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul














 











BHANU :

 

Understanding
Dharma and Materialistic Anarchy :

Proposing *Political Religion*

 

            Shouldn*t
we make the matter of understanding dharma simpler by shedding exaggerated
mystique about the word *dharma* by way of taking the term *religion* as its
trans-language synonym? The current usage of the term *dharma* in its place of
origin (India) is almost identical with the usage of the term *religion* in its
place of origin (the West).

 

            According
to the current usage, religion may be defined as a set of moral and social
rules that sprout a commensurate culture composed of characteristic public
behaviors and events that include moralizing ritualism.

 

            Philosophy
is a body of fundamental postulates that explains the nature of religion.
Though it is likely that the three terms - religion, culture and philosophy -
would get mixed up quite often in lay conversations, the formal line of
demarcation between the three ought to be invoked when necessary. The Sanskrit
translations for the trio *philosophy-religion-culture* is
*darshana-dharma-samskriti*.

 

            With
this prelude, I would like to check your (Devinder Singh Gulati*s) given
narration
line by line and issue my opinions. This juxtaposition will be a good beginning
for mutual understanding, I suppose. The manner of this interaction ought to be
candid and we shouldn*t leave between us much room for shallow fusses. Let the
discussion henceforth be put down in conversation format.

(Devinder
– Bhanu Dialog)

 

DEVINDER : In evolving standards of conduct and
shaping values, we have to take into consideration the variety and complexity
of human life and nature.

 

BHANU : Yes, human life and human nature is
very complex and variegated. Yes, evolving standards of conduct and shaping
values need extreme precaution and care. But who are the people you have in
mind who would be undertaking such a gigantic project. This project is
tantamount to invention of a religion (dharma).

 

            Let*s
assume that you are the person who have set sail in that direction. That is
fine. You would be the founder guru (adi-guru) who would collect information as
much as possible and combine them into a hierarchy of inferences till you have a
world view and an integrated philosophy of life (darshana).

 

            That
you do at a very personal level according to your intellectual capacity. In
other words, all the constituent inferences that would make the world view and
integrated philosophy of life would be your *personal truths*. Even the world
view and integrated philosophy you would arrive at are only *peak* personal
truths, characteristic of your own intellect.

 

            Let*s
get rid of the baffle that we experience across such utterances as *truth*,
*reality*, *actuality* etc. You perceive actuality as the immediate cause and
conceive the underlying deeper causes as realities and connect the sequence of
realities
into a truth. It is useful to remind ourselves of this *actuality-reality-truth
axis* quite often lest we are not lost in the dazzle of such words.

 

            If
all inferences you accede to are mere *personal truths*, what about the
*absolute
truth*? No, you don*t accede to the absolute truth ever. Practically or
effectively, an acknowledged and relatively higher understanding in the form of
a higher inference may sometimes be addressed to as absolute truth. But that
isn*t an accurate approach, though practical and effective to a great extent.

 

            Absolute
truth may lie in the direction of the median (locus) that runs through and
connects
the sequence of personal truths. Thus the absolute truth can only be an
intellectual
direction, never a particular inference.

 

            Degree
of sustainability of a guru thus is his/ her ability to be more resolute and
less
lax intellectually, so that lesser and lesser number of resolute personal
inferences portend the *absolute direction of truth*. This inverse proportion
makes appraisal of guru, philosophy and religion quite paradoxical and critical,
often precarious.

 

            The
pyramid of truth accruing out of the founder guru and a sequence of follower
gurus foreshadows a social code, a body of practical rules that need to be
pronounced, propagated and implemented. This code also ought to include a lean
moralizing
ritualism that would optimally remind the crowd of the cardinal inferences and
principles that reinforce the pyramid of truth.

            This
psycho-intellectual process is religion (dharma). The ensuing metamorphosed
public behavior and elevated events would constitute the commensurate culture
(sanskriti).

 

DEVINDER : The Dharma, at once religious law of
action and deepest law of our nature, is not, as in the Western idea, a creed,
cult or ideal inspiring an ethical and social rule; it is the right law of
functioning of our life in all its parts.

 

BHANU : We were talking about the generic
guru and the commensurate religion, philosophy or  culture. A particular guru
would give rise to
a particular commensurate religion, philosophy or culture. The sequence of the
founder gurus of generic religion would endeavor to traverse forward along the
*absolute
direction of truth* to discover higher and higher particular religions,
philosophies and cultures.

 

            We
mustn*t mistake *generic religion* for *absolute religion*. As we have already
noted, there is no absolute religion, no absolute philosophy, no absolute
culture, no absolute guru, no absolute truth. We have only a series of
practicable religions of differing potentialities and capacities for public
welfare.

 

            So
no particular religion can be deemed to have harbored the deepest law of human
nature or the law of deepest human nature. However, a particular religion can
promote the *absolute direction of truth* by teaching the commensurable public
methodology
and mechanism. At any point of time or space, the generic religion can emerge
as only a creed, developing into a cult (a particular religion), with an ideal.

 

            What
about a particular religion which has discovered, enunciated and begun to
implement the public methodology and mechanism of following the *absolute
direction of truth*? This would be a magnanimous religion, a pragmatic
religion, a progressive religion and yet it wouldn*t be the absolute religion.

 

            We
have to get rid of the specter of overemphasizing own insufficient religiosity
in the name of absoluteness. This has been a tragic philosophical error in the
realm of theology.

           

DEVINDER : The tendency of man to seek after a
just and perfect law of his living finds its truth and its justification in the
Dharma. Everything indeed has its dharma, its law of life imposed on it by its
nature; but for man the dharma is the conscious imposition of a rule of ideal
living on all his members.

 

BHANU : Dharma is always *the enunciated one*.
We can say that a group of people ought to have a dharma if they do not have one
at the moment. We can*t say that they have a dharma just because they wish to
have one, although they haven*t yet been able to enunciate it even crudely.

 

            Saying
that everything has a dharma would replace *enunciated inference* and
*promulgated
commensurate law* by *property* (guna) in the aforesaid definition of dharma.
This would further baffle understanding of dharma and thwart its emergence.

 

            You
are right when you say that dharma is conscious and consented and collective
self-imposition
of a integral body of enunciated social and moral rules to promote the highest
realized
ideal.

 

DEVINDER : Dharma is fixed in its essence, but
still it develops in our consciousness and evolves and has its stages; there
are gradations of spiritual and ethical ascension in the search for the highest
law of our nature.

 

BHANU : Dharma remains still a search even as
it gets implemented, true, but it never has a fixed intellectual essence in
metaphysical,
moral, social or spiritual terms. The elusive absolute truth hasn*t been in the
grip of the current dharma ever.

 

            As
we say this, we are aware of the importance of the public methodology and
mechanism of achieving the *absolute direction of truth*.

 

            You
are right when you say that inferences about nature form a pyramidal hierarchy
whose
understanding facilitates spiritual and ethical ascension.

 

DEVINDER : All men cannot follow in all things
one common and invariable rule. Life is too complex to admit of the arbitrary
ideal simplicity which the moralizing theorist loves. Natures differ; the
position, the work we have to do has its own claims and standards; the aim and
bent, the call of life, the call of the spirit within is not the same for
everyone: the degree and turn of development and the capacity, adhikara, are
not equal. Man lives in society and by society, and every society has its own
general dharma, and the individual life must be fitted into this wider law of
movement. But there too the individual’s part in society and his nature and
the
needs of his capacity and temperament vary and have many kinds and degrees: the
social law must make some room for this variety and would lose by being rigidly
one for all.

 

BHANU : You are right when you say that the
body of moral and social laws constitutes of situation-specific adapted
constituents.
Codification has been a herculean task. It is easier to talk about ethereal
matters
than to translate them into earthen affairs. Here comes the fallacy of
exaggerations about absoluteness as a fatal hindrance.

 

DEVINDER : A lawless impulsion of desire and
interest and propensity cannot be allowed to lead human conduct; even in the
frankest following of desire and interest and propensity there must be a
governing and restraining and directing line, a guidance. There must be an
ethic or a science, a restraint as well as a scope arising from the truth of
the thing sought, a standard of perfection, an order.

 

BHANU : Take the other perspective.
Law-making ought to be a democratic process so that its implementation is
acknowledged integrally by the society. Impulsive lawlessness is ruled out
through disciplinary enforcement. That is not a problem. The real problem is
with the process of law-making.

 

            Take
two societies of differing intellectual achievements. The two respective
pyramids
of inferences vary in height and sprawl. Naturally, the respective qualities of
laws will vary, one being guided by a higher ideal (higher peak inference) than
the other.

 

            And
accordingly, the former will be rewarded with larger progress than the latter.
This will create consternation in the latter society. If the explanation for
the civilization lag is denied too long, this society would revolt against
itself quite implicitly, the wealth in the neighborhood being the source of
distraction.

 

            The
ultimate cause for this *purported* materialistic anarchy is not being able to
cope
intellectually with the neighboring society. *Intellectually* refers here to
*civil
intellectualism*, not to a stunted academicism. Please note that public desire
in
any form, however contrary it may seem, need not be always seen as *lawless*.

 

            You
have raised the most pertinent issue of *public guidance*. Who could guide a
sovereign
society? If *inferring* is the prime process by which it achieves intellectual
height and material progress, what is that public methodology and mechanism
that could achieve this (public process of widespread inferring)? This
methodology and mechanism also would also discover and implement the *absolute
direction of truth* as well.

 

            The
generic name for this methodology and mechanism is *polity*. So, we are looking
forward to that particular type of polity that would accomplish the twin
objective of finding the absolute direction of truth and effecting intellectual
coping.

 

            As
the story unfolds further, we are drawn to the consideration of the *political
religion* (raja-dharma) that would surpass existing cultural religions in
import and worth.

 

            What
is that model? However, that is another phase altogether.  

 

DEVINDER : The universal embracing dharma in the
Indian idea is a law of ideal perfection for the developing mind and soul of
man; it compels him to grow in the power and force of certain high or large
universal qualities which in their harmony build a highest type of manhood.

 

BHANU : The phrases *universe-embracing
dharma* and *Indian idea* don*t go together - me and your are sure. Perfection
that connotes absoluteness too is, in a way, ruled out. What you could be
looking forward to is the aforesaid public methodology and mechanism that could
unravel and implement absolute direction of truth and that could bring about
fastest psycho-cultural coping among societies.

 

DEVINDER : Dharma has two aspects: universal,
which is common to all humanity and the individual or specific, which is unique
to the nature of the individual or the community.

 

BHANU : You are right when you differentiate
generic religion (dharma) from its particular cases in the form of a cultures
(samskritis)......................

(Bhanu Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com/


You may reply this thread
upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.

 



From: devindersingh gulati
<dgulhati@...>

To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com"
<TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Wednesday, 19 December 2012, 7:49

Subject: Re: [TheBecoming] Fw: Tears of Reason for Connecticut's Slain
Children

 

 

In evolving standards
of conduct and shaping values, we have to take into consideration the variety
and complexity of human life and nature.

The Dharma, at once
religious law of action and deepest law of our nature, is not, as in the
Western idea, a creed, cult or ideal inspiring an ethical and social rule; it
is the right law of functioning of our life in all its parts.

The tendency of man
to seek after a just and perfect law of his living finds its truth and its
justification in the Dharma. Everything indeed has its dharma, its law of life
imposed on it by its nature; but for man the dharma is the conscious imposition
of a rule of ideal living on all his members.

Dharma is fixed in
its essence, but still it develops in our consciousness and evolves and has its
stages; there are gradations of spiritual and ethical ascension in the search
for the highest law of our nature.

All men cannot follow
in all things one common and invariable rule. Life is too complex to admit of
the arbitrary ideal simplicity which the moralizing theorist loves. Natures
differ; the position, the work we have to do has its own claims and standards;
the aim and bent, the call of life, the call of the spirit within is not the
same for everyone: the degree and turn of development and the capacity,
adhikara, are not equal. Man lives in society and by society, and every society
has its own general dharma, and the individual life must be fitted into this
wider law of movement. But there too the individual’s part in society and his
nature and the needs of his capacity and temperament vary and have many kinds
and degrees: the social law must make some room for this variety and would lose
by being rigidly one for all.

A lawless impulsion
of desire and interest and propensity cannot be allowed to lead human conduct;
even in the frankest following of desire and interest and propensity there must
be a governing and restraining and directing line, a guidance. There must be an
ethic or a science, a restraint as well as a scope arising from the truth of
the thing sought, a standard of perfection, an order.

The universal
embracing dharma in the Indian idea is a law of ideal perfection for the
developing mind and soul of man; it compels him to grow in the power and force
of certain high or large universal qualities which in their harmony build a
highest type of manhood.

Dharma has two
aspects: universal, which is common to all humanity and the individual or
specific, which is unique to the nature of the individual or the community.
[More...]

http://fdi.sasociety.in/cms/index.php/fdi/article/360_The_Way_of_Dharma

 

Gulati



































































































































































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (6)
#59390 From: "Mary" <josephson45r@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:51 pm
Subject: Jumping ship 		josephson45r
Send Email Send Email
  
I'll try Bill's group for awhile. If I'm not mistaken, there are no mystics
allowed.

Mary

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59391 From: "William" <vize9938@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:41 pm
Subject: Not Hinduism 		bhvwd
Send Email Send Email
  
Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for you. I
will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no moderation so fire away
and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of science and
existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on new
membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and perhaps
discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our ideas about
the modern world. Bill

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59392 From: "Dick." <somerset_2@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:16 pm
Subject: Third Video on uTube 		somerset_2
Send Email Send Email
  
Third Video on uTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDBSJ5OOs4Q
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDBSJ5OOs4Q>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1nbS9pZphQ
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1nbS9pZphQ>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np7FySSMuCU
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np7FySSMuCU>

Dick Richardson







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59393 From: eduardathome <yeoman@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:55 pm
Subject: Re: Not Hinduism 		yeoman4
Send Email Send Email
  
Sounds good.  Send the link to moi at ...

yeoman@...

eduardathome

-----Original Message-----
From: William
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:41 PM
To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [existlist] Not Hinduism

Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for
you. I will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no moderation so
fire away and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of science
and existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on new
membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and perhaps
discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our ideas
about the modern world. Bill



------------------------------------

Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59394 From: "William" <vize9938@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:27 pm
Subject: Re: Not Hinduism 		bhvwd
Send Email Send Email
  
--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome <yeoman@...> wrote:
>
> Sounds good.  Send the link to moi at ...
>
> yeoman@...
>
> eduardathome
>Eduard, the group is  at Neoex.Yahoo groups. I do not know how to send a link
but know you can find the group at Yahoo groups. Sorry I am such a computer
luddite. Im self taught and pretty  primative. I`ll wait for your request to
join. We are discussing the meteor trikes and misses. Also what you said about
drones disrupting piloted aircraft is being researched in several centers.Bill
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:41 PM
> To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [existlist] Not Hinduism
>
> Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for
> you. I will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no moderation so
> fire away and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of science
> and existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on new
> membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and perhaps
> discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our ideas
> about the modern world. Bill
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
>
> Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59395 From: "Mary" <josephson45r@...>
Date: Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:32 pm
Subject: Re: Not Hinduism 		josephson45r
Send Email Send Email
  
eduard, here's the URL for the group page.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/neoex/

Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome <yeoman@> wrote:
> >
> > Sounds good.  Send the link to moi at ...
> >
> > yeoman@
> >
> > eduardathome
> >Eduard, the group is  at Neoex.Yahoo groups. I do not know how to send a link
but know you can find the group at Yahoo groups. Sorry I am such a computer
luddite. Im self taught and pretty  primative. I`ll wait for your request to
join. We are discussing the meteor trikes and misses. Also what you said about
drones disrupting piloted aircraft is being researched in several centers.Bill
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: William
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:41 PM
> > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [existlist] Not Hinduism
> >
> > Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for
> > you. I will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no moderation so
> > fire away and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of science
> > and existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on new
> > membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and perhaps
> > discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our ideas
> > about the modern world. Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
> >
> > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
> >
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59396 From: eduardathome <yeoman@...>
Date: Sat Feb 16, 2013 12:57 am
Subject: Re: Re: Not Hinduism 		yeoman4
Send Email Send Email
  
done

-----Original Message-----
From: William
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 6:27 PM
To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism



--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome <yeoman@...> wrote:
>
> Sounds good.  Send the link to moi at ...
>
> yeoman@...
>
> eduardathome
>Eduard, the group is  at Neoex.Yahoo groups. I do not know how to send a
>link but know you can find the group at Yahoo groups. Sorry I am such a
>computer luddite. Im self taught and pretty  primative. I`ll wait for your
>request to join. We are discussing the meteor trikes and misses. Also what
>you said about drones disrupting piloted aircraft is being researched in
>several centers.Bill
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:41 PM
> To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [existlist] Not Hinduism
>
> Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for
> you. I will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no moderation
> so
> fire away and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of
> science
> and existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on
> new
> membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and
> perhaps
> discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our ideas
> about the modern world. Bill
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
>
> Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
>




------------------------------------

Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59397 From: devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...>
Date: Sat Feb 16, 2013 12:32 pm
Subject: Re: [TheBecoming] Re: The Fractal View 		dgulhati
Send Email Send Email
  
Previous: One may very well imagine that the universe is only an entity
in something which is still vaster, as the individual is only an entity in  a
much vaster totality. Now, each unit has its consciousness and its own spirit
which contains all the others, as a group consciousness is made up of all the
individual consciousnesses which constitute it and as a national consciousness
is made up of all the individual consciousnesses which constitute it, and
something more.  Just like you: you have lots of cells in your body; each
cell has its own consciousness and you have a consciousness which is the
consciousness of your total individuality, though made up of all these small
cellulary consciousnesses.
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/293

Roger Lass: My suggestion is that if something is transmitted from one
conscious being to another, the medium is only a medium and possesses no
features that belong to the conscious beings.

RKS: But what if my words are relayed by you to someone else? At what point
does my response to a particular question that you or someone else asks become a
non-conscious representation of my
consciousness? http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MindBrain/message/45829

Human beings function as invisible conduits for the exchange of anger, sex and
depression, as Sri Aurobindo and the Mother repeatedly pointed out, and it is
only when our inner being opens up that we discover the rich and voluminous
nature of this commerce.  This exchange occurs through the higher vital
(pranamaya kosha) and mental sheaths (manomaya kosha) in the human
consciousness. It is not only talk that creates a turmoil – disturbing forces
can come in by contact also. There may be restlessness or confusion of
consciousness in the person who talks with you to which he does not give
expression or is not even aware that he is like that, or he may bring forces
from others. Again it may be that you met or contacted in your sleep the vital
of others or some vital forces in the atmosphere. Turmoil may come in many
ways.  Whenever one mixes with others, things are passing from one to the
other. If I talk with a number of people, I bring away
  with me in my atmosphere many forces that were around them; they may affect me
or not, but they remain for a time at least. If in that time I speak with
another man, he may receive them from me. It is like a man carrying germs with
him from a person he has visited; he may not fall ill himself (or he may), but,
even if he does not, he can pass them on to another man he visits afterwards –
who falls ill. It is the same thing here in the supraphysical parts. 

Nagin: Why does even a slight casual talk create a disturbance in my work?
Sri Aurobindo: It is because by talking one passes into another consciousness.
That is so long as the inner being has not attained a constant and even calm
poise.  It is no use giving up talking altogether – the proper course is to
speak usefully to people but not to talk for the sake of talking.
So next time you find yourself getting depressed or angry for no legitimate
reason, ask yourself whether
	 1. it is because you were recently chatting with a person who was a conduit for
these aberrant movements.
	 2. OR it is a cyclical rhythm which is triggered within your consciousness
every once in a while, as explained in an earlier post.
http://auromere.wordpress.com/2013/02/15/the-exchange-of-vital-forces-during-soc\
ial-interactions/#more-9285
Gulati


________________________________

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)
#59398 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:09 pm
Subject: Reply to Kolki Poem / Poem *Eugenics* 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
 

Poem : Eugenics

 

Until it
did hit as inertia of conceit,

Poetry it
was to me.

The inertia
of rest.

 

Spewing
deceptive peace;

Yearning
for price in return;

Price to
comport possessive whim,

Unconditional
and unlimited;

Congealing
into conceit indomitable;

Inertia of
rest it was.

Poetry to me
then;

Until it
did hit as inertia of conceit.

 

A eugenic
purge it soon called for.

This
conceit indomitable.

 

To be the
recessive allele,

It was
bound to dip.

Still in
the garb of bravado though.

This
conceit indomitable.

 

But it was
bound to dip;

Letting the
initiative arrive elsewhere

In allele
dominant.

The uncanny
instrument of natural purge.

 

*Cause in
conceit, no initiative could dwell.

 

Nature
gained, Hitlers lost out.

Oblivion
they were bound for,

Quite
naturally.

They, the
images of conceit.

 

Natural
selection by dream,

They had
contradicted.

Survival of
the wisest,

They had failed
to appreciate.

Still aware
they weren*t

Of Mendel*s
magic.

 

Dominance
of truth so obvious,

They had failed
to perceive;

Even when it
pervaded blood and genes.

 

Still aware
they weren*t

Of Mendel*s
magic.

The magic that
could repaint flowers

And recast
faces.

Even
corporeal inheritance wouldn*t deign

Thenceforth
to be immutable.

 

In egotism
dwelt eugenics vindicated –

Hitlers mused
wistfully;

Until
Buddha*s magnanimity bloomed

Surreptitiously
to thwart.

 

To thwart
this colorful gloom;

This
conceit indomitable.

 

And to turn
it down as the recessive allele.

 

Poetry it
was to me then,

Until it
did hit as inertia terminal.

The inertia
of rest.

 

A eugenic
purge it did ask for soon.




(Bhanu
Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended
discussions............................................................
On Tue, 2/5/13, Global Teacher <globallistener@...> wrote:

Fittest

(Dedicated to an Egalitarian Democratic
World – Deepak Sarkar, www.kolki.com)


<Related
poems:  Free     Best     In
Vain     Harmony     One
World    Universal
Notes     Universal
God     Global Solidarity>

 

Every time I saw a small bird nesting

Having babies without doctors,
nurses, and hospital bills

Surviving and enjoying life in
storms, snow and rain

Without additional clothes, heating
or cooling -

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Every time I saw/heard Canadian
Geese flying at night

Alone or as a team for a distant
flight

Navigating towards destination
without compass or light

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Every time I watched a small spider
creating web

Out of nothing except own sap and
legs

Then resting in the centre to catch
preys

Enjoying own creation at its best -

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Every time a seed germinated in the
soil or water

Grew as plant or trees withstanding
disasters

Shed leaves for the winter only to
be reborn in vigour

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Every time I looked at small
sparrows playing in the snow

When I was feeling cozy in heated
home among clothes

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Fittest are natural knower who
exercise self power

Without unlearning instincts to
technological slave work!

Endless dependency only makes humans
enslaved and weaker

As generations strive for expensive
and competitive future!

 

Birds travelling thousands of miles
without rest

Navigating at night over deserts and
oceans

Even a fruit fly does everything,
more than I crave

Eat, meet, multiply and even fly
without much rest!

 

After I leave -

Many animals and birds will outlive
me

Shrubs and trees I planted

Would be surviving and serving
merrily

Without disturbing and destroying
natural harmony -

Of course, if they are not victim of
modern industry!

 

Thus,
the slogan ‘Survival of the fittest’

Resonates very well with Eugenic1
quest

For aristocrative exploitation of
the masses

With population control whenever
needed -

Encouraging supremacist ideology at
the best!

 

Darwin’s theory is flawed with fundamental mistake

Yet remains unchallenged in royal
heritage  

Discovered while travelling on Royal
H.M.S Beagle

Collecting samples from American and
African Islands

Hypothesised in “Origin of Species”

“The Survival of The Fittest”

Without
realizing evolution doesn’t leave any trace!








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)
#59399 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:14 pm
Subject: Re: [seerseeker] re: are we naturally good or bad? 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
(The Post-Modern Fuss)

 

Hey, hey Mr
Holman! I mean Brother Kyva! Don*t run away so abruptly putting such a label on
my back so surreptitiously. I am sure you have mistaken the *generic* lower
subject for yourself.

 

Had we been
talking about our personal selves all these whiles, Kyva?

 

My
insistence on inequality of truth-content in multiple narrations over the same
context is about *nature of truth*, not about your *personal truthfulness*. I
think we have been juxtaposing each other with an initial phase difference.

 

We can
preen out this latent inconsistency in our restful hours.

 

Even in the
poorest opinion about me from your side, you seem to have overestimated me!
Contrary
to your observation that not many people like me, the truth is that no one
likes me - maybe.

 

But I shall
always find an alibi to justify myself. I would continue to think that no one
has the same (good!) attitude as mine - maybe.

 

Let*s
return to our normal business. I have something to say about the following
Kyva-speak :

 

**As
it should be patently evident by now, personal
experience is completely subjective, complex and multilayered, hence the
postmodern dilemma.  In my experience, the more investigation, the more
fluid and in flux apparent reality is.  It's an illusion, albeit a very
convincing one like Einstein said.  Thus a dynamic relationship to truth.** 


 

It is a
tautology that *personal experience* is *subjective*. But when you say that
*any* personal experience is *completely* subjective, you are pushing yourself
into a quicksand-like deep problem. When you acknowledge and appreciate
complexity and multi-layered nature of subjectivity, you automatically admit
the fact that a personal experience is tantamount to contingent/ partial/
limited permeating of *meaning* in the complex and multi-layered subjective
domain.

 

Modern?
Post-modern? What sort of chronology you apply to inertness? You are trying to
assign a clock to a piece of rock, Kyva! Did you find sufficient/ desired
clarity in any corner of the philosophical domain? Isn*t your detection of
patency a bit ridiculous therefore? And especially when we are considering
mutability of the purported fundamentality that supports the several purported
patents which are being thrown around by the questionable (suspectedly lesser)
subjects!

 

Coming back
to the matter of *contingent/ partial meaning* begotten of partially permeated
(with personal experience) complex and multi-layered subjectivity, aren*t we
convinced of the fact that two different statements in the same context could
have different meaning-content or truth-content? So what is this post-modern
big fuss about *subjective/ personal sovereignty* when we know that it is
*limited*?

 

Why should
deeper investigation make apparent reality more fluid or cause it to be in flux
or make it seem to be another illusion when more of the originally-complex
subjectivity is being drawn into the process of meaning-making
(truth-harvesting)?

 

It is true
that the winning line of a race would yet to be arrived at. But the gap between
the runner and the winning line would be reducing constantly. Isn*t it more
than enough?

 

It isn*t that
you, Kyva, don*t understand all these. You are intelligent. However, I have a
suspicion hanging over you. Could it be that you don*t want me to understand
what you have already understood?




(Bhanu
Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You may
reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/  as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended
discussions.



--- On Sat, 2/16/13, Kyva Holman <kyholm7@...> wrote:

From: Kyva Holman <kyholm7@...>
Subject: Re: [seerseeker] re: are we naturally good or bad?
To: seerseeker@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 16, 2013, 6:39 AM
















 










huh... I hear you.  But when a discourse (especially anonymous and online)
begins with "welcome to the world of positive critiquing" right away, it seems
the writer is assuming a great deal about the conversant which may not at all
be correct.  They may have spent many years, decades, in the world of
critiquing - positive and otherwise.  So it can be received like: "let
me straighten you out..."  I don't think many people like that.  And then if,
over the course of the discussion, one reads


 


    


 


>>> All these statements about where you live aren*t equally true. None of these
statements are perfectly/ completely true, though there is a degree of truth in
each statement. The degree of truth varies across these statements most
certainly. <<<


 


 


now it's like being told that you don't have ownership of your own experience
of reality... that your truth is inferior to someone else's because THEY
KNOW truth's "final authority."  As it should be patently evident by
now, personal experience is completely subjective, complex and multilayered,
hence the postmodern dilemma.  In my experience, the more investigation, the
more fluid and in flux apparent reality is.  It's an illusion, albeit a very
convincing one like Einstein said.  Thus a dynamic relationship to truth. 


 


 


So it's probably not a matter of bleaching white ideas as much as simply
responding - and in moments reacting - to what's coming up.


 


 


So you've made your convictions known, which doesn't require a response from
me. We can totally let it ride ~  



been interesting tho'




 


-----Original Message-----

From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>

To: seerseeker <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>; greenlogic
<greenlogic@yahoogroups.com>; TheRampaPath <TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com>;
Wisdom-l <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>; exitlist <exitlist@yahoogroups.com>;
TheBecoming <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Fri, Feb 15, 2013 9:33 pm

Subject: Re: [seerseeker] re: are we naturally good or bad?





 












Kyva !
Internet page is not a place to teach or learn immediately. It is a place we
only exchange our views. Though this is a place of contact, the actual
dialectics between the two sets of views would generally follow when we wouldn*t
be in contact.
Are we in a haste to have our ideas bleached white immediately?
If no, we can afford to be less emotional about any exchange of views. Of
course, next meeting can be indefinitely postponed at will.
(Lesser Subject*s Limited Epistemic Sovereignty/ Authority)  
To alleviate confusions I might have initiated inadvertently, I shall quickly
run over a sequence of personal convictions which I deem relevant to our
on-going dialog.
1)      Subjective experience is sovereign insofar as it is the
indispensable (necessary) material from which truth would be constructed.
However, it may not be and usually not sufficient to complete the construction.
Limit to subjective capacity and efficiency curtails subject*s truth-fetching
(epistemic) sovereignty.
2)      A larger truth is a hierarchy of smaller truths and no
truth-constituent thus may be taken as eternally independent and complete.
3)      Lesser subjective sensibility may lower the quality of personal
inferences to a point when the latter may no longer be deemed by the neighboring
sensible subject to be acceptable truths.
4)      There is no exclusive/ personal domain of knowing for any subject.
That domain can be intruded upon/ transcended by any empathetic subject through
latter*s faculty of empathy that is a very efficient contrivance for epistemic
extrapolation over matters of neighboring personal territories.
5)      This notion of *curtailed/ limited epistemic sovereignty/ authority
of the lesser (relatively insensible) subject* sows the seed for *cogent
autocracy of superior truth*.

(Bhanu Padmo)


http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/  as
well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.




--- On Fri, 2/15/13, Kyva Holman <kyholm7@...> wrote:




From: Kyva Holman <kyholm7@...>

Subject: [seerseeker] re: are we naturally good or bad?

To: seerseeker@yahoogroups.com

Date: Friday, February 15, 2013, 8:43 AM







 



 














Kyva!


 


Sorry for the delayed response to your prompt last reply. Local/ personal
exigencies thwart my internet operations.


 


(Cogent Autocracy)


 


>>> All these statements about where you live aren*t equally true. None of these
statements are perfectly/ completely true, though there is a degree of truth in
each statement. The degree of truth varies across these statements most
certainly. <<<


 


YES they ARE... minus context.  In and of themselves all the statements are
perfectly autonomous and true. How are they not?  Are you lecturing me
about about my personal experience?  Even if you were - and you're in a
deficient position to do that - what you're saying is actually confirming my
point, especially the last sentence.  It's only when context is injected
and the question of getting picked up arises that the equally relevant
truths become relative, ordered and value-based, with the possibility of
producing one that's absolute.        


 


>>> By whose standard do the degree of truth varies across these statements? <<<


 


Mine.  It's MY EXPERIENCE.


 


>>> These statements about your place of abode do portend an approach line that
points to the virtual (unsaid) absoluteness. This is akin to the ever-approached
*limit* of an indeterminate/ variable mathematical expression in calculus. <<<


 


I don't know what this means.  Calculus, while fascinating, is completely
irrelevant to my experience of what's true at the deepest levels.  Math is only
one language, albeit a compelling one. 


 


 


>>> The *virtual absolute answer* presages the *potential final semantic
authority*. The *contemporary semantic authority* is presaged by the answer that
currently contains highest truth in the form of the most accurate description of
reality (place of your abode). <<<


 


I can't follow any of it.  Again: I know what each of the words means in
isolation, but this passage - I'm sorry - is meaningless to me.


 


*Autocracy* smacks of absoluteness and underscores absolute supremacy. Isn*t
*autocracy* then most appropriately/ accurately ascribable to authoritativeness
of *contemporary highest truth* and its *virtual absoluteness*?


 


We haven't established the absoluteness of truth at all at this point.  So
truth's absolute supremacy is being assumed without logical precedent.  What
are your proofs?  How did you gather them?  Did you ask me how I experience
what's true?  No. You made a blanket statement based on YOUR experience of
truth and then superimposed it onto my reality.  I'm telling you that your
mental constructs don't map to what's true for me.  PERIOD.  (no dis) 


 


absoluteness + "virtual" (unreal) absoluteness = anomaly / contradiction.



 

 


>>> Ability is the natural byproduct of truth. Greater truth is endowed with
both greater semantic clarity and greater potential physical prowess. Thus
autocracy is the natural legacy in the world of truth. <<<


 


I somewhat agree ~ except that truth is a mental abstraction with no tangible
physical characteristics like potential prowess... which itself is not existent
if it's potentiality, but again... what's your POINT?  If you really follow
what happens in my example: there are a number of things that... before a
specific situation is introduced... are equally true - with none taking
precedence over the other


 


I live in an apartment


I live in Oakland


I live in the Bay Area


Northern california


in the present moment... etc.


 


as they are, which of these is autocratic?  It's only when the context of being
picked up is introduced that one particular truth (I live at so-and so
specific address) rises to the status of "autocratic."  Since every single
experience I have will not conform to this scenario, the specific address
"autocratic" in this instance hardly applies universally.  If I were asked
instead: 'do you wish you were 23 again?'  And I gave my address - the supposed
autocracy of that answer disappears in this new context and the response "I live
in the present moment" rises to so-called absoluteness.








































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59400 From: "Dick." <somerset_2@...>
Date: Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:03 pm
Subject: My Five uTube Videos 		somerset_2
Send Email Send Email
  
My Five uTube Video's

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOEOQSq7nuk&feature=youtu.be
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOEOQSq7nuk&feature=youtu.be>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDBSJ5OOs4Q
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDBSJ5OOs4Q>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1nbS9pZphQ
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1nbS9pZphQ>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np7FySSMuCU
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np7FySSMuCU>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjLcrCx8GAY
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjLcrCx8GAY>

rwr







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59401 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Sun Feb 17, 2013 2:26 am
Subject: Re: Re: Not Hinduism 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
William/
Bill,

 

Why did you
deny my entry into Neoex when you seem to have been interested in elitism?

 

Are you
sure I am an Eastern Mystic?

 

Just
rethink if you have purged the elite out. Because, I think I had a new
principle or two on elitism about every theme you could imagine of.

 

Let me in.

 

(Bhanu Padmo)



--- On Sat, 2/16/13, eduardathome <yeoman@...> wrote:

From: eduardathome <yeoman@...>
Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism
To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 16, 2013, 12:57 AM
















 









       done



-----Original Message-----

From: William

Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 6:27 PM

To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism



--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome  wrote:

>

> Sounds good.  Send the link to moi at ...

>

> yeoman@...

>

> eduardathome

>Eduard, the group is  at Neoex.Yahoo groups. I do not know how to send a

>link but know you can find the group at Yahoo groups. Sorry I am such a

>computer luddite. Im self taught and pretty  primative. I`ll wait for your

>request to join. We are discussing the meteor trikes and misses. Also what

>you said about drones disrupting piloted aircraft is being researched in

>several centers.Bill

> -----Original Message-----

> From: William

> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:41 PM

> To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [existlist] Not Hinduism

>

> Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for

> you. I will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no moderation

> so

> fire away and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of

> science

> and existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on

> new

> membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and

> perhaps

> discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our ideas

> about the modern world. Bill

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

>

> Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links

>



------------------------------------



Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!



Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links



























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59402 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Sun Feb 17, 2013 5:56 am
Subject: Fw: Re: [seerseeker] re: are we naturally good or bad? 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
--- On Sun, 2/17/13, Kyva Holman <kyholm7@...> wrote:

From: Kyva Holman <kyholm7@...>
Subject: Re: [seerseeker] re: are we naturally good or bad?
To: seerseeker@yahoogroups.com, caus@...
Date: Sunday, February 17, 2013, 2:56 AM
















 










oy oy oy.  Are we still doing this?  Ugh... fine.



 













(The Post-Modern Fuss)


 


Hey, hey Mr Holman! I mean Brother Kyva! Don*t run away so abruptly putting such
a label on my back so surreptitiously. I am sure you have mistaken the *generic*
lower subject for yourself.


 


what label did I put on your back?  Looks to me like you're making assumption
after assumption and I'm having a difficult time tracking how anything useful is
coming out of this.  I made statements regarding my reflections.  Also, I
don't run away.  I saunter casually, especially when things seem a lost cause,
an extended wank producing more heat than light.  The generic lower
subject...? 


 


Had we been talking about our personal selves all these whiles, Kyva?


 


I have.  Much as I'd love to think otherwise, I can only speak to what's true
for me.  If we're not talking about ourselves, who or what are we talking
about?  "Society"?  "Ultimate truth?"  "Science?"  "God?"   Put 23
people - matter of fact three - in the same room and they'll tell you, with
enough prompting, completely contradictory things about all of these
subjects.  Is there anything any of us can really talk about with
anything resembling "ultimate authority" other than our personal
experience?   


 


My insistence on inequality of truth-content in multiple narrations over the
same context is about *nature of truth*, not about your *personal truthfulness*.
I think we have been juxtaposing each other with an initial phase difference.


 


*sigh*  I wonder what Siddhartha would have said about the nature of truth.  I
keep thinking I heard something about not settling on dogma and other fixed,
immutable positions.  What IS the "nature of truth"?  Fixed?  Again, who
says?  You?  Has any philosopher, sage or seer, in any conceivable era, been
able to perceive the Direct, Absolute, Eternal Truth of All Time with no
subjective bias whatsoever?  Plus, naming a number of different layers of
reality pertaining to where I live is NOT my "personal truthfulness."  They
are what is objectively true, to whatever extent that's possible...  things as
they really are. Personal truthfulness is about honesty.  A list of different
qualities of where I live is making a list of facts.     





 


 


We can preen out this latent inconsistency in our restful hours.


 


Even in the poorest opinion about me from your side, you seem to have
overestimated me! Contrary to your observation that not many people like me, the
truth is that no one likes me - maybe.


 


My opinion about you is not poor, and I never SAID "nobody likes you..."  Jeez
Louise. I said people don't like being told things that feel like "let me
straighten you out..."  And that is not at all particular to Bro. Bhanu.  Lots
of people, if not everybody, would risk being disliked for presuming to
straighten others out. This is a perfect example of how you make assumptions
and attributions that don't map to reality.  By ending this section with "the
truth is that no one likes me - maybe", you demonstrate two things - 1) you've
formulated a position about yourself based on an opinion you erroneously
ascribed to me for whatever reason.  2) If you have to hedge your bets by
qualifying nobody liking you with "maybe"... you've basically proven the point
I've been trying to make all along.  TO WIT - truth is dynamic, fluid and
extremely hard to pin down.  Why wring your brain cells with phantoms of
absoluteness?


 


But I shall always find an alibi to justify myself. I would continue to think
that no one has the same (good!) attitude as mine - maybe.


 


Let*s return to our normal business. I have something to say about the following
Kyva-speak :


 


**As it should be patently evident by now, personal experience is
completely subjective, complex and multilayered, hence the postmodern dilemma.
 In my experience, the more investigation, the more fluid and in flux apparent
reality is.  It's an illusion, albeit a very convincing one like Einstein
said.  Thus a dynamic relationship to truth.** 


 


It is a tautology that *personal experience* is *subjective*. But when you say
that *any* personal experience is *completely* subjective, you are pushing
yourself into a quicksand-like deep problem. When you acknowledge and appreciate
complexity and multi-layered nature of subjectivity, you automatically admit the
fact that a personal experience is tantamount to contingent/ partial/ limited
permeating of *meaning* in the complex and multilayered subjective domain.


 


No - it's NOT a tautology.  There have been some people: philosophers,
atheistic Richard Dawkins-type scientists, political prognosticators etc., who
present as if their personal experience is in fact objective, indefatigable and
unassailable.  Ummm... what do you think YOU'RE doing when you "correct" my
wrong thinking about ultimate truth?  I mean... do you really get this? 
You're arguing that truth is absolute, I'm pushing into quicksand and the
like... as if you understand my experience better than I do.  Really? 
Really...      


 


Modern? Post-modern? What sort of chronology you apply to inertness? You are
trying to assign a clock to a piece of rock, Kyva! Did you find sufficient/
desired clarity in any corner of the philosophical domain? Isn*t your detection
of patency a bit ridiculous therefore? And especially when we are considering
mutability of the purported fundamentality that supports the several purported
patents which are being thrown around by the questionable (suspectedly lesser)
subjects!


 


What?  Huh?  How could anyone, much less me, apply a timeline to a quality of
immobility?  Why would I?  What are you saying?  I found patency in the
teachings of the Enlightened One, Buddha, WHO SAID:. 


 


"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in
anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many >>>like ultimate
truth<<<. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your
religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your
teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed
down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find
that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one
and all, then accept it and live up to it."


 


so are you saying that Buddha's open ended approach to truth is "a bit
ridiculous therefore"?  That's how you feel? 


 


Coming back to the matter of *contingent/ partial meaning* begotten of partially
permeated (with personal experience) complex and multi-layered subjectivity,
aren*t we convinced of the fact that two different statements in the same
context could have different meaning-content or truth-content? So what is this
post-modern big fuss about *subjective/ personal sovereignty* when we know that
it is *limited*?


 


I have no idea what this is asking


 


Why should deeper investigation make apparent reality more fluid or cause it to
be in flux or make it seem to be another illusion when more of the
originally-complex subjectivity is being drawn into the process of
meaning-making (truth-harvesting)?


 


ummm... because the more information you have, the more data points, the more
radiating, rhizomatic points of connection, the more one has to develop an
appreciation for the deep complexity of "apparent reality"!   


 


It is true that the winning line of a race would yet to be arrived at. But the
gap between the runner and the winning line would be reducing constantly. Isn*t
it more than enough?


 


Isn't WHAT more than enough? 


 


It isn*t that you, Kyva, don*t understand all these. You are intelligent.
However, I have a suspicion hanging over you. Could it be that you don*t want me
to understand what you have already understood?







You have a suspicion hanging over me?  Hahahaha!  What might that be?  I'M
trying to hide something from YOU because I don't want you to understand it? 
Have you not seen me laboring assiduously over this whole tortured thread to
explain very carefully exactly what it is I've come to understand?  I'm sorry
bruh but I gotta call bull now.  When people write with all these exaggerated
intellectual-sounding words that don't hang together coherently as an
addressable point... THAT feels to me like not wanting one to understand what
has allegedly been understood.  In short, a textbook case of projection.


 


I should be doing homework right now.  My committment to making myself clear in
whatever this is supposed to be has come at some cost.  What's worse is that
it feels increasingly pointless.  We're diddling our fiddles over here and the
planet is being pummeled with meteors.  And then some. There could be more
important things to get all lathered up about.   


 


"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in
large ones either."  Albert Einstein


 
















































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59403 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Sun Feb 17, 2013 6:04 am
Subject: Re: [seerseeker] Do we naturally form hierarchies? 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
(Fuss about Equality and Freedom :

Dynamic Pivot of Discretionary Hierarchy)

 

Does anybody desire straightaway
after equality really? Does anybody fancy freedom straightaway really? Or, the
fuss about equality and freedom is simply superficial! To realize this, we may
have to undertake the pain of thinking – thinking about the making of the
emotion
of equality and that of the emotion of freedom.

 

That isn*t very
difficult to achieve. Coziness that we are so fond of could easily surpass the
desire
for equality. In other words, the sense of compatibility and complementarity is
the emotion that primarily pervades our various considerations every moment.
Our respective individual cosinesses (desired conditions) aren*t equal at all.

 

What is freedom then?
Is it the psychological phenomenon of everybody*s capability and capacity for
wishing after the same thing? Or, is it that for wishing after respective
snuggeries (snug conditions)? To wit, freedom is conditioned by the sense of
compatibility and complementarity. So we have two forms of freedom viz.
indiscriminate/
implicit/ blind freedom and conditioned/ explicit/ discreet freedom.

 

What is the origin of
the sense of compatibility and complementarity, anyway? Is there any preceding
phenomenon that conditions this utilitarian sense? Yes. Roughly, it is
secularism
(worldliness, secular outlook) or rather, utilitarianism (utilitarian outlook).
But where does then the sense of utility emanate from?

 

It is the goal-sense
that creates the futuristic lineage of utilities which are opted out of the
actualities strewn or buried around us. Do we have any idea about the coming of
goal-sense? Yes. It is the essence of entity*s epistemic sense and its actual
mental
organization of information. Such enquiry is preceded by the causal and eternal
emotion of dream. This primal and primordial emotion is the desire to transcend
the current being (the present) by way of becoming greater-better-higher.

 

So where exactly is
the beginning of the emotion of compatibility and complementarity? If the
immediate use of this emotion is in finding the optimality (the optimal
utility), this *entity-universe (neighborhood) interface* has been under
construction in phases. The preceding phases of optimality (cosiness) or
utility have been goal, integrated-and-convergent wisdom and dream.

 

Thus the conditioning
phases for equality have been compatibility-complementarity (utility,
optimality), clarity of goal, discreetly preened wisdom and unrelenting dream.
This is also the sequence of conditioning phases for freedom.

 

Have we thought over
why it is so; why the entity*s purported sublime sense of equality and freedom
too need to be conditioned.

 

That is quite easy to
perceive. It is the uniqueness of entity that causes uniqueness of its
emotional and practical locus and uniqueness of its personal specializations.  

 

What does uniqueness
of every entity connote about the universe? Assuming that all entities are
interlocked into the singular universal system, it suggests that it is an
asymmetrical universe with polarization in its every constituency.

 

Again, the principle
of economy of organization suggests that the universe and its unique
constituents (entities) ought to be *hierarchical* by construction. Since
hierarchy is a form of asymmetry, both the descriptions about universe and
entity fit well. But there is a *discretionary* element that mars such a
prospect of static stability of the universe.

 

To understand the
inherent dynamics of the universal system, we shall take up a koan. It is the
see-saw koan. You have seen children playing at see-saw device. So you can
imagine a second see-saw placed upon the first see-saw to make the contingency
of load stability doubly difficult. Call it double dynamicism of a doubled
see-saw.

 

The difficulty of
managing the contingency of load stability would increase exponentially
across  tripled see-saw, quadrupled
see-saw calling for notions of tripled dynamicism, quadruped dynamicism etc. Now
we can, through this complex scenario, see the *pivotal discretionary act* of
stabilizing the rising dynamicism.

 

Whose discretion could
be ascribed to the *dynamic pivot*? Assuming that every load (child) of the
multiple see-saw has the potential participatory discretion, the dynamic pivot
would belong to multiple eligibles. Thus the *physical hierarchy* of a system is
reduced to its *essential hierarchy* viz. the hierarchy of dream and
discretion.

 

The notion of
hierarchy of dream and discretion does connote the superimposed hierarchy of
differential individual freedom.

 

All these are for
supreme systemic good. The egalitarian ought to understand this. It may be
noted that egalitarianism isn*t being ruled out in this argumentation. Not a
bit. Here equality is being defined as equality of opportunity of nurturing and
implementing own discretion (to protect the dynamic pivot of multiplied
dynamicism of the universe) while stationed in the integral hierarchy of
competing mutable individual discretions.

 

This is the story of
the *dynamic pivot of discretionary hierarchy*.




(Bhanu
Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You may
reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/  as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended
discussions.



--- On Fri, 2/8/13, Laurie <libramoon42@...> wrote:

From: Laurie <libramoon42@...>
Subject: [seerseeker] Do we naturally form hierarchies?
To: "seers and seekers" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Friday, February 8, 2013, 11:50 PM
















 













http://iwillknow.jesaurai.net/?p=1657
Do we naturally form
hierarchies?
This is an important
question for anyone that wishes to live in an egalitarian society. If we
naturally form hierarchies equality can only exist for a short time or by
suppressing our natural instincts. And to suppress our natural instincts goes
against one of the fundamentals of equality. Freedom!
 
While reading up on
this subject researchers and philosophers slot into two distinct interpretations
of humans past which are based more on preconceived ideologies rather than self
analysis. One, mainly anthropologists, see early primitive hunter gatherers as
non-hierarchical, as equal. There was no hereditary title or god given status,
hierarchies only developed once we formed agrarian civilisations and could
create a surplus of food. This surplus gave those that possessed the grain
houses power over those that did not. And soon after hereditary status temples
and kings developed.
 
Others, mainly
political analysts and sociologists, see even hunter gatherer societies as
hierarchical. They were patriarchies where the dominant male ruled over his
children and females and passed on this power to his favoured son. They were
violent gangs fighting with other tribes for territory and power, subjugating
women and weaker males. And they see this in our closest cousins the apes, and
even in flocks of birds and chickens, which is were the term pecking order comes
from. To them hierarchy is natural in any social creature and observation proves
it.
 
I shall try and bring
these two observations together for there is truth in both. I think the problem
is partly about the definition of equality and hierarchy and about how and why
we form groups. Not all groups that look to have an order have the detrimental
affects of hierarchy.
 
First we should look
at why we desire equality, then why we form groups and then how hierarchies can
occur, and lastly I’ll look at self organising systems – mobs, for to some
they
were order without hierarchy but unfortunately they display much of a
hierarchies worst attributes.
 
Why we desire
equality
 
First I should ask do
we desire equality? I know I do. I recall when travelling, leaving the order and
hierarchy of the most celebrated egalitarian country in the world Australia, I
felt a great levity having freedom. For even in my home built on equality and
the tall poppy syndrome there are many rules, expectations, and stratum to the
ladder of achievement and self worth. To go where I wished, to treat everyone I
met based upon how they treated me, and to be human is the greatest asset of
human beings. To love others for being same same but different. To be good and
find so much goodness in others. This is very equal and very lovely. I feel we
all desire this equality. We all feel more at peace and at home without a
hierarchy, we adore equality. If you feel different please leave a comment
below. I could be wrong. But I shall move on with the belief that we desire
equality because we loathe hierarchy, and there is good reason to loathe
it.
 
I have written
extensively on why hierarchies are bad on this site so I shall just summarise
in this piece. Those at the bottom of the hierarchy have increased levels of
stress (cortisol levels) this makes them angry then to compensate for their lack
of control they release endorphins which make them weak (they put on weight and
lose confidence), sick (heart disease, decreased immune defences), conservative
(unwilling to take chances or experiment) and stupid (decreased neurogenesis,
and connectivity in the brain). The leaders get a testosterone kick making them
over confident (hubris) lacking empathy (immoral) aggressive (violence and war),
and short sighted (not literally but they can’t plan for the distant future or
see the consequences of their actions). We end up with a group which is only
really capable of going to war and that’s what we end up doing. Or the
hierarchy
collapses catastrophically because it becomes rigid and uninventive, completely
incapable of adapting to a changing environment. It is the worst possible way to
organise a society which begs the question why would we evolve to form
hierarchies when they seem to be the worst way to sustain a group for any great
length of time.
 
Of course Rome lasted
for centuries and was very hierarchical, as did the British empire although for
a much shorter time, and the American empire may prove to be the shortest lived
global empire. These hierarchical societies only staved off collapse by invading
and absorbing other cultures and resources. Their new ideas came from the
fluidity of expansion. A lowly clerk from England could move to Africa or
Australia and get lands and move up the hierarchy, this devolution helped to
prolong these empires but not indefinitely. Eventually rigamortis sets in and
they were (are) easy pickings for the new kid on the block. And when you think
about it America’s reign has really only been 100 years, a mere blink in
civilised history.* China’s may be far shorter!
 
Why we form
groups
It is generally
accepted that we are social animals, we naturally from groups. I hate generally
accepted ideas because once we accept an idea it closes down any analysis or
conversation about whether the assumption is true or not. Some of us don’t
like
other people much, some like to be alone. People throughout the ages have chosen
to live on their own, ascetic monks, nomads on the steppes and agoraphobics. But
we do rely upon the world around us to survive, and we generally have a better
life when in groups. And there is much evidence to show that connectivity and
human touching makes us happy, healthy and calm. So it seems forming groups is
good for most of us. But why do we do it? Well we can achieve more in a group
than on our own, but most importantly we are born dependent and die dependent. A
child must be cared for to survive, and when we are sick or old we must rely on
others for food and care. Without others none of us would be here at all. So I
think we have a natural (I shall discuss my problems with this word in the next
section but for now I shall continue to use it) tendency to form groups and
defer decision making to others. The child has no choice and the adult can
achieve more security and success with others.
 
Equality does not
mean the same. We all have different aptitudes and physical abilities and
knowledge. We constantly defer to others who know more than us, we defer to a
doctor about our health, we defer to our parents on how to bring up our
children, we defer to the strongest to protect us, we defer to the bravest to
cross the ragging river first. We defer to meteorologist to predict the weather.
This deference gives the other power. We also like deferring responsibility,
sometimes we are not sure, we wander in a fog of options and cannot make up our
mind and feel making the wrong (this is often the socially wrong) decision will
harm us, so to defer the decision and the responsibility to another makes us
more assured. This of course can lead to a further lack of confidence and
inability to take responsibility for our own choices so we defer again and
again. We become a weak follower.
 
All people defer
power to others at some point often just through laziness or disinterest. You
don’t know what to order for dinner so you say to your girlfriend “order for
me”
and she does and your happy with it. Even if your not its her fault you got a
lousy meal not yours. However the next time you have to make a decision she may
feel you incapable again and make it for you. This will be the start of a
division of power. It has moved from one situation to another. She feels
empowered and you feel you are incapable so either follow again or fight. The
winner will extend their power. But as a couple you are stronger because while
she is making decisions for you you can relax and think about your finances or
you next trip or work all of which she will benefit form. Division of decision
making makes the group more capable. But if you defer all the time and feel
weak, unconfident, filled with stress from being dominated you cannot plan while
she makes decisions for you. You are only a heavy but compliant weight behind
her choices.
 
However I would not
call deference a hierarchy, if anything it is a soft fluid hierarchy which is
bottom up. We can choose to follow advice of those we defer to or not, we can
choose not to defer power but to make decisions ourselves, we can choose. You
can choose to order a different meal. And groups that work on this bottom up
deferral system avoid the bad effects of hierarchy. The people deferring power
don’t feel powerless rather they feel more capable because their friends,
acquaintances and connections have made them able to do things they would not
normally have been capable of. And those that are deferred to know that this
position of power is fleeting because it is situation and mood based, as
situations and moods change so does the decision maker. So the decision maker
only gets a minor testosterone boost, enough to make them feel good but not so
much as to make them overconfident. And often the responsibility can outweigh
the power and the decision maker can actually become more humble, and thus
encourage strength and confidence in the other. They wish to share. Both power
and responsibility.
 
Of course the more we
defer to others, the more we defer to an absolute power. When we defer
responsibility we see the decision as absolute, authority comes from the
absolute and therefore is truth. Authority right or wrong proclaims truth and
having the power over others makes us more absolute in our answers. We desire
respect. As we defer to others we rely less upon our intuition, our own
experience. We become less confident about the world we see because we no longer
test it against our own experience. We loose confidence, we loose self will. To
learn we must make decisions for ourselves but with reference and sometimes
deference too others. A wise man learns from the mistakes of others, a smart man
learns from his own mistakes, and a fool never learns… he follows the
leader.
 
But these pluralistic
(many groupings for different situations and purposes) and fluid (ever devolving
and interacting) groups can easily form a hierarchy which is rigid and
dangerous, but first I shall talk a bit about words and definitions because the
word natural gives me shivers.
The problem with
words
 
Words are abstract
and rigid. The definitions of words are very personal, influenced by experience
and perception. Dictionaries like to nail words to the floor, but even their
definitions change over time. In this sense the way we communicate is much like
all we create, a rigid form with fluidity all around it. We want the absolute
truth from an inexact world.
 
The word natural is used to imply inevitability, and
absolute which cannot be questioned because it is ingrained into our genetic
code. It is who we are. So anything natural must be accepted as the expression
that will occur with freedom. Firstly our genetic code is not fixed. Evolution
is the changing of genetic code over generations in response to sexual selection
and environmental suitability. Even within an individual epigenetics is showing
the expression of our genetic code, what instructions are turned off or on, is
influenced by our environment. So even “natural” inclinations do change in
response to the environment and maybe even our own will.
 
So if we say we were
naturally hierarchical that doesn’t mean we still are naturally hierarchical
or
that will will remain naturally hierarchical. Or vice versa. We change, the
world changes, things are fluid. This of course makes it very difficult to find
security from truth. What we end up with is a string of belief based upon a web
of evidence and self examination. We find the best truth possible for now but
leave the door open to new information, and are willing to change our mind. I
might say one of the worst aspects of rigid hierarchies is the inability to do
that simple task. To change their mind.
 
It seems to me people
have a very poor understanding of equality. It does not mean all
the same, nor does it mean we all have the same wealth, abilities or aptitudes.
It was thought to mean that you couldn’t follow, or lead. I think now we use
equality to mean we are not ruled. To rule is to have the right over another
life, to be able to chose how another lives, behaves even thinks. And not to be
questioned by those below. This is what exists in a class or caste system, most
corporations and even democratic societies. Others make the rules on where you
can live, how you are to build your house, what is considered smart, what will
be rewarded with wealth, and even what you wear. This is
ahierarchy.
 
How hierarchies form
from groups
So how does a fluid
group that has individuals deferring to many others and has others defer to them
form a rigid hierarchical group in which one or a few get to make decisions
without their asking?
 
Lets start with the
most natural deferral attachment. Parents and children. Parents get to make
pretty much all the decisions for the baby, although the baby does have some
quite effective mechanisms to get what they need, from crying, too those big
baby eyes that make even the harshest man love them. Even this grouping it not
absolute! As the child grows up the parent allows the child to make more and
more of their own decisions until they rebel usually around puberty and decide
to devolve into new groups, usually friends. If the parent moves the early power
they have over their child into a complete dominance this can make a very weak
adult who can’t rebel. The parent can withhold affection, they can punish
strictly they can manipulate to maintain power and this extends what was a group
into a hierarchy.
 
Then this replicates.
The child will either rebel and try and form their own rigid hierarchy with them
at the top, or they will remain weak deferring all decisions to a new leader.
Once the parent is dead, in some cultures this hierarchy is maintained through
ancestor worship. By deferring to a new authority figure they will create a
dominate person who will then try to enslave more followers through physical
strength – they have compliant followers to bash individuals into submission.
Wealth or emotional manipulation are now more often used.
 
Just being aware of a
hierarchy and your position in it can be enough to well hubris or weakness in us
all. See someone driving a Astin Martin and you long to be them, hate them and
respect them all at once. Meet them and you feel small. And the driver feels the
world and all its inhabitants are mere puppets at the end of his
tentacles.
 
As I described before
once the deference of power has been moved into areas outside a persons
speciality or is demanded (or just expected) by the one in power testosterone
and cortisol kick-in to fix the hierarchy. It becomes more rigid and more
stratified. This tightly bonded hierarchical group makes a formidable foe for
more fluid groups and they can and do invade and conquer other groups thus
expanding and replicating the hierarchy. The only way to repel such a force it
to form your own group. Fear increases, cortisol makes people less inventive and
more likely to follow a hubristic leader. The most psychopathic amongst us move
to the top because they do not feel the fear. War is the
result.
 
Luck could also play a part. Imagine that
one person in a fluid group wins the lottery, or finds a wild
orchard full of free fruit, or kills a buffalo with a lucky spear throw. We
can’t explain why they have been blessed and not us so we think they have a
power that we don’t. Nature adorns them with more gifts. At first we beg for
some of the money, fruit or meat and then we start to follow what ever they do
because if we act like them and do what they say maybe we to will be blessed. Or
we just come to a conclusion they are better than we and to do well we should
follow the lucky – god blessed, one. The hierarchy forms and then it narrows
and
elongates because of the physical and emotional drivers. Then it replicates for
to gain freedom against a blessed “lucky” leader all we can do is form
another
hierarchy, or mob.
 
I also think some
people, probably a very few have a tendency to weakness – to defer all
decisions
to others, and others also very few to dominance. Some are just inclined to
follow, and others to a self-confidence that feeds off belittling others. I’m
sure you can see that these two types of people will find each other and form a
connection, a very strong bind which will make them stronger than any one
individual and from here they can expand the hierarchical group by force if
necessary. Like a tiny cancerous cell finding the perfect host, it invades again
and again ignoring the future for the immediate rush of power, the invaded cell
feeds the cancer as a follower feeds a tyrant.
 
So we form groups
that defer power but maintain independence and the ability to devolve, but the
rigid hierarchical group can easily form from these flexible connections and
once it does it can proliferate like a cancer devouring all around. And look at
the world around you now pretty much everywhere you look is a hierarchy. The
cancer has subsumed the body.
 
Mob
rule
In a mob, be it a
mosh pit, protest march, lads on a night out or TV audience (as used by French
doco makers in a version of the Milgrim experiments and Derren Brown in his
“Experiments”) we can feel we are not being told what to do, we are not
deferring power but non-the-less still act as one. We become part of a
superorganism. We actually feel more powerful, we get an adrenaline and
testosterone boost like the leader of a hierarchy, we get power from the
security within the group but as a few go one way we all follow. We don’t even
know who is leading. This has been described by some lovers of Ayn Rand as a
self organising system and they have used it as an argument against hierarchy
and for individualism which I find odd. My mother called it peer-group
pressure.
 
The classic question
against group stupidity is to ask the teenager. “If everyone else jumped off a
cliff would you?” Of course you say no. I wouldn’t be so stupid as to follow
the
mob to death. But of course we know many do. The mosh pit keeps pushing until
some suffocate. The protesters attack the police and get shot, the TV audience
tortures a man to death.
 
So The mob looks all
the world like a hierarchy without a leader, where all the people get the
testosterone boost but at the same time feel they cannot leave like a cortisol
filled follower. And again they are dangerous, they think short term, don’t
worry about consequences, are aggressive to outsiders, and are often
immoral.
 
The greatest empires
have used this mob mentality combined with hierarchy. An army is the classic
mob. Each soldier relies on his comrades and becomes bigger and more powerful
from them. It counters the affects of hierarchy on the subservient foot soldier,
they gain power from the group.
 
But why do mobs form?
Well they mostly form when a person feels under threat, and feels individually
powerless. As teenagers go through the rebellious stage against their parental
leader they form mobs of teenagers, these mobs can form hierarchical gangs and
then hierarchy replicates again. To my mind mobs form in response to hierarchy
or as a tool of hierarchy.
 
There’s a classic
experiment from the time of early silicon valley which encouraged the idea of
self organising systems – mobs. They put a bunch of students and IT boffins in
a
cinema and on the screen they played a game of pong. The first video game where
two opposing lines move up and down the side of the screen and a dot acting as
the ball pings between them. They gave everyone in the cinema a controller and
the paddle would only move if the majority agreed. Very quickly the whole cinema
was playing as one, like two individuals thinking for themselves hundreds had
self organised to act together to play the game.
 
So what drove them to
consensus. A single agreed goal. Hit the pong back. This didn’t require a
meeting, or a vote, just a reaction to shared information, the movement on the
shared screen. So who is the real leader here? The screen, the shared goal. This
requires a narrowing of perceptions enhanced by testosterone, as they got better
they focused more, as they focused more they acted more together, and this
replicated. The mob acted like the hubristic leader of the
hierarchy.
 
So why do hierarchies
and even mobs form?
They form in response
to external restrictions. Sanctions and manipulations of the outside world and
our societies. We form ordered corridors on a busy street when hemmed in by
buildings, roads and goals that carry a penalty. If we are late for work we may
lose our job. So we self organise into all walking together on the left or on
the right and get pissed off when others don’t follow the
rules.
 
We form mobs and
hierarchies to gain security from a changing world that does not guarantee food
or shelter. We tighten the group when threatened by another group. And our
biology encourages power in the leader, submission in the follower and bonding
in the mob.
 
We cannot create a
world without some sanction or manipulation. We are born weak and dependant. We
age and become weak and dependant once more. We are born in certain locations,
some which offer much food and a pleasant climate others that are harsh and
threatening. We are born with certain aptitudes and abilities which are better
or worse than others.
 
We can change though,
and we can modify our environment decreasing the environmental and natural
sanctions. And we have done this very well. But ruefully we have replaced them
with human made hierarchies which replicate our fear of the natural
world.
 
We have made order to
gain freedom, but instead of embracing freedom we have replicated sanctions and
manipulations to maintain the hierarchy and the mob. We created these tools
(hierarchy and mobs) to give ourselves freedom from fear, freedom from reliance,
freedom from the unpredictability of the world that created life. But now we
prolong these tools rather than embrace freedom. Those at the top wish to
maintain their status so tell us if we relax for just a second the hierarchy
will collapse and all around us the natural world will invade and you will
perish from fear alone. The mob keeps us focused on the short term goals of
fashion and common goals to get us the energy to fight through our cortisol
stress from powerlessness.
 
Was it so terrifying
being a nomad? Being with nature. Was it so bad we had to create a hierarchy
which destroys the majority to avoid it. And most importantly could a fluid
group be more secure than a hierarchy or mob? I think so. It will definitely be
less stressful and more humane.
 
Going with the
flow
There is something to
be said for going with the flow. It basically means we don’t worry about the
unexpected but rather embrace the new. To do this we need no fear, and it
replicates no fear. A full belly helps but many ascetics and loners I mentioned
at the beginning,those monks in the cave got by with very little food, and very
poor shelter, if any. What they had was a lack of fear. This allowed them to
imagine a very distant future, a very distant world, a foreign place without
hierarchy or mobs, without fear or plenty. They found peace.
 
When we are at peace
we don’t need hierarchy, nor the mob, but can join and leave at a whim. We can
play dream and achieve. We can even lead, by example. And defer when we meet
greatness.
 
 
So are hierarchies
natural
 
Well sort of. They
seem to be a beneficial short term tool to fight external threats. As is the
mob. But really like many things that have short term gains but cause long term
damage such as drugs, alcohol, fighting and most wonderfully hedonistic things
they are a really crap base to build a society upon. If we have any intellect at
all we will find a way to allow us to devolve from hierarchies once they become
to rigid and this should allow a more fluid pluralistic system which allows us
to defer power without losing esteem.
 
David J
Campbell
 
* If you think the
USA is not on the decline look to its followers. France (don’t forget it was
France who supported the American revolution, and was its intellectual base) and
the UK now act independently in African and middle eastern conflicts. And the EU
is fracturing and solidifying with different power brokers, many from the Nordic
and eastern states. Australia the compliant follower of great powers, first
Britain then USA is now looking to China and Asia. When the followers leave the
power is lost.
 
http://iwillknow.jesaurai.net/?page_id=12
 
JeSaurai accepts
submissions from anyone, on almost anything, refer to the catagories on the site
for a guide but we are not limited to these subjects.
We accept written
pieces, essays, poetry, images only (although a description of the subject and
the artist should be supplied) and
video.
























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59404 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Sun Feb 17, 2013 9:20 am
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul -hilarious - 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
Dear Krishna Kumar,

 

1       
Sophisticated Idea and Simple Terminology.

 

Don*t you see a problem there when you suggest use of
simplistic wording to represent sophisticated ideas? Isn*t there a proportional
relationship between the two?

 

You are possibly talking about simplicity of later sequential
interpretations. What about the maiden/ basic definitive expression that would
by and by emanate the later sequential interpretations in bits and pieces.

 

If it is a case of sparse/ sporadic writing, your suggestion
is immensely considerable. But if the writing project is about protracted
building-up of a *unified theory* / *theory of everything* or its like, the
maiden expressions ought to be etymologically sophisticated.

 

The first line of targeted people need not be ordinary
public, by the way. The target line is that of extra-ordinary readers from whom
the unusual idea would percolate to lay populace drop by drop. It is a long
process.

 

I think I have successfully nurtured in me the requisite
patience for such a protracted project. It is towards the end of the third
decade of the project that I have met you.

 

2       
Uniqueness of Sanatana Dharma.

 

Would you be interested in eternal uniqueness? Have you
imagined the consequences of eternal uniqueness? Its perils? *Silent apocalypse*
is the other name for what you prescribe in the name of *eternal uniqueness*.

 

Being *uniquely evolutionary* is the supreme attribute we
should be looking for. But it brings along with it perplexing consequences.
Understanding of post-evolution vivacity and perplexity is the objective of
study,
analysis and ensuing wisdom.

 

Transition of current religious identity strikes one as the
greatest contingency and is mistaken for fatal peril. You have to come out of
that selfish horror and be prepared for religious/ spiritual metamorphosis and
actual cultural mutation.

 

What you identify as complex and unique Sanatani thought
process may not be that complex really. Anyway, it needs to be augmented/
complemented. We have to develop the *evolutionary uniqueness* of Sanatana
Dharma.

 

To say that Sanatana Dharma is endowed with inherent
evolutionary uniqueness doesn*t befit a speaker who doesn*t even accept the
*cardinal/
empirical index of religiosity/ spirituality* for own religion.

 

The supreme index of religiosity and culture and morality is
the current crime/ immorality status of its people. Set amidst the worst
criminal scenario, there is every reason for castigating ourselves for being
superfluously proud of the ineligible. We should deem ourselves as potential
criminals, at least figuratively, until we cause the scenario to change.

 

Relative religious eligibility of Sanatana Dharma lies in
our hermeneutic power (power of interpretation) that could synthesize interface
anomalies seamlessly. Harping on some internal pronouncements of altruistic and
inert tenor doesn*t suffice the Herculean task of propagating this great
religion.  

 

3       
Linguistic Power of Sanskrit.

 

As I say this, I do appreciate the linguistic value of
Sanskrit language (including semantic value of its terminology). Let me compare
this mother language with its daughter languages (in spite of comparing it to
English) to indicate its shortfalls (viz, its relative lack of accuracy or
vitality)
as a prelude to my attempts to pull you out of the obsession of considering the
daughter as evolutionarily inferior.

 

You are surely aware of the biological fact that the
offspring is genetically superior to the parent and so the former is potentially
a contender for higher morality. Applying this analogy to Sanskrit language, it
may be proposed that its linguistic heir apparent ought to be by far a superior
language.

 

Many would tend to think skeptically about the existence
(reality) of an heir apparent of this classical language, implicitly taking it
for granted that the heir apparent could have perished in some historical
linguistic epidemic. They are wrong.

 

Out of the three eligible contenders for direct linguistic
inheritance of *Sanskrit linguistic age* (viz. Odia, Bengali and Assamese),
take the case of Odia (the language of Odisha) which is believed to be the
eldest of these three sisters. This daughter*s inherent Sanskrit etymology and
an evolved grammar would make the level of its apparent similarity with its
mother rise to the metaphorical 101%.

 

An elite Odia poem or an elite passage in prose would almost
be indiscernible from a Sanskrit sloka except for the narrow grammatical
crevices strewn sparsely over the body of the narration.  If we further reckon
the expressive prowess
of this daughter language with respect to the mother, the former would score
much higher than its apparent parental similarity.

 

There is a reason why this language (Odia or rather, Odriyaa
– the language of Odra Desha) could be a contender to such dignity and glory.
As history unfolds in unprejudiced new anthropology (after shedding off western
anthropology about Indian History), genesis of erstwhile original and tiny India
(original
and tiny AaryaaVarta) becomes ascribable to internal affair of erstwhile
Odisha. That is another subject altogether.

 

The
present concern is the need for casting away linguistic necrophilia about
Sanskit in order to develop greater linguistic dimensions to be commensurable
with evolutionary aspect of Sanatani philosophy and to rescue the drowning
present.




(Bhanu
Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You may
reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/  as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended
discussions.



--- On Tue, 2/12/13, Krishna Kumar Pillalamarri <pkrishnak@...> wrote:

From: Krishna Kumar Pillalamarri <pkrishnak@...>
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -
To: TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com
Cc: greenlogic@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, February 12, 2013, 6:37 AM
















 









       Dear Mr. Bhanu Padmo,
Luckily I saw this just as I was going to bed. The point I was making is not to
avoid sophistication of thought, but your statements are highly complex
sentences that defeat the purpose of conveying the thought itself to a wide
readership. With increase in written word sophistication, the analysis required
to ensure we understand what your saying, and the number of interpretations this
gives rise to defeats your very purpose. This serves no purpose at all, with the
purpose being conveyance of a singular thought unsullied by misinterpretations.
You may perhaps use Rajiv Malhotra's definitions in his book, 'Being Different'
for the purpose.

On the other hand, I will submit that a better way is to use Sanskrit words to
convey the meaning properly. English as a language is highly inadequate in
conveying complex thought processes that are unique to Sanatana Dharma. While
the medium forces us to use English as a common language, it is perhaps best to
use English only as a link language to the correct Sanskrit terminology. Else,
your memos are in danger of looking almost like pontification.(Again, a term
which perhaps eulogizes the Christian hierarchy, but I am searching for terms
here!)

Regards,
Krishna

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...> wrote:
















 











Dear
Krishna Kumar,

 

(Verbose Complexity
and Verbal Ingenuity)

 

We
are not looking for what has been said down the ages to inadequately explain
dharma, but trying to complement the inadequacies; looking forward to a *you-me
binary dialectic* in that context, therefore.

 

Critical
thinking is greatly advanced in such binary dialectics, not in multi-lateral
information-seeking. I would certainly abide by your suggestion to not resort
to complex verbiage, if this complexity connotes verbose complication. You may
kindly note the other connotation of complexity viz. verbal sophistication.

 

If
a straight and simple wire was to serve as the filament of a bulb (an electric
circuit) or was to sing a song (when set in a radio-circuitry), we wouldn*t opt
for complex wire-work.

 

Sophistication
(sophisticated configuration) yields result. Bare simplicity seldom gives
desired result. *Simple sophistication* is another thing altogether. It is
ingenuity or creativity proper.

 

If
your call for avoidance of verbal/ verbose complexity means obviating verbal
sophistication or verbal ingenuity, I will request you to kindly rethink.




(Bhanu Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended discussions.



--- On Tue, 2/5/13, Krishna Kumar Pillalamarri <pkrishnak@...> wrote:


From: Krishna Kumar Pillalamarri <pkrishnak@...>
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -

To: TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2013, 6:58 PM
















 






       Hi Bhano,
Religion and Dharma are not the same. For complete explanation of what these
words mean, and how correct usage changes our perspective and that of the
Western thinkers, read Rajiv Malhotra's 'Being Different' and 'Breaking
India'. 


I would also request you to not use complex verbage to discuss any of the points
you are trying to make. It clouds the message you are trying to give. It
probably shows that you are hiding behind language complexity instead of writing
with thought complexity. A simple and straight forward messaging will give
enough room for others to participate and challenge you; that is unless you are
trying to avoid exactly that.


Regards,
Krishna Kumar Pillalamarri

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:42 PM, devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...> wrote:

















 









       "When the word was spoken to me the image would appear vividly"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4kcsXiwNbo 

> BHANU: What else could be the translation of the English term *religion* in
Sanskrit or that of the Sanskrit term *dharma* in English? What could be the
translation of the English term *culture* in Sanskrit or that of the Sanskrit
term
  *samskriti* in English? Isn*t the matter straight forward?


No indeed:http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/4173


Gulati


      From: Bhanu Padmo
  <greenbhanu@...>
  To: greenlogic@...


  Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2013 12:29 AM
  Subject: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy:
Restoring the Soul -hilarious -


















 








- web post



               Reply to sender



               Reply to group


             Start a New Topic


                             Messages in this topic
                 (7)












       Recent Activity:



       New Members
       72




     Visit Your Group







   Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send
us Feedback



















   .























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (6)
#59405 From: "devindersingh" <dgulhati@...>
Date: Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:46 am
Subject: Re: Not Hinduism 		dgulhati
Send Email Send Email
  
The elitism here is the old deranged idea called 'White Supremacy'.
Don't you see the spite William oozes?

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...> wrote:

> William/
> Bill,

> Why did you
> deny my entry into Neoex when you seem to have been interested in elitism?

> Are you
> sure I am an Eastern Mystic?

> Just
> rethink if you have purged the elite out. Because, I think I had a new
> principle or two on elitism about every theme you could imagine of.

> Let me in.

> (Bhanu Padmo)

> --- On Sat, 2/16/13, eduardathome <yeoman@...> wrote:
>
> From: eduardathome <yeoman@...>
> Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism
> To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, February 16, 2013, 12:57 AM

>       done

> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: William
>
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 6:27 PM
>
> To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
>
> Subject: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism

> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome  wrote:

> > Sounds good.  Send the link to moi at ...

> > yeoman@

> > eduardathome
>
> >Eduard, the group is  at Neoex.Yahoo groups. I do not know how to send a
>
> >link but know you can find the group at Yahoo groups. Sorry I am such a
>
> >computer luddite. Im self taught and pretty  primative. I`ll wait for your
>
> >request to join. We are discussing the meteor trikes and misses. Also what
>
> >you said about drones disrupting piloted aircraft is being researched in
>
> >several centers.Bill
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: William
>
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:41 PM
>
> > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
>
> > Subject: [existlist] Not Hinduism

> > Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for
>
> > you. I will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no moderation
>
> > so
>
> > fire away and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of
>
> > science
>
> > and existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on
>
> > new
>
> > membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and
>
> > perhaps
>
> > discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our ideas
>
> > about the modern world. Bill

> > ------------------------------------

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59406 From: "William" <vize9938@...>
Date: Sun Feb 17, 2013 6:14 pm
Subject: Re: Not Hinduism 		bhvwd
Send Email Send Email
  
--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "devindersingh" <dgulhati@...> wrote:
>
> The elitism here is the old deranged idea called 'White Supremacy'.
> Don't you see the spite William oozes?
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@> wrote:
>
> > William/
> > Bill,
>
> > Why did you
> > deny my entry into Neoex when you seem to have been interested in elitism?
>
> > Are you
> > sure I am an Eastern Mystic?
>
> > Just
> > rethink if you have purged the elite out. Because, I think I had a new
> > principle or two on elitism about every theme you could imagine of.
>
> > Let me in.
>
> > (Bhanu Padmo)
>Sorry,champ,I have seen the chop job you have done here. Try to sell your junk
here. Nobody but  your buds  will be listening. Bill
> > --- On Sat, 2/16/13, eduardathome <yeoman@> wrote:
> >
> > From: eduardathome <yeoman@>
> > Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism
> > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Saturday, February 16, 2013, 12:57 AM
>
> >       done
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: William
> >
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 6:27 PM
> >
> > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Subject: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism
>
> > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome  wrote:
>
> > > Sounds good.  Send the link to moi at ...
>
> > > yeoman@
>
> > > eduardathome
> >
> > >Eduard, the group is  at Neoex.Yahoo groups. I do not know how to send a
> >
> > >link but know you can find the group at Yahoo groups. Sorry I am such a
> >
> > >computer luddite. Im self taught and pretty  primative. I`ll wait for your
> >
> > >request to join. We are discussing the meteor trikes and misses. Also what
> >
> > >you said about drones disrupting piloted aircraft is being researched in
> >
> > >several centers.Bill
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > > From: William
> >
> > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:41 PM
> >
> > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > > Subject: [existlist] Not Hinduism
>
> > > Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for
> >
> > > you. I will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no moderation
> >
> > > so
> >
> > > fire away and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of
> >
> > > science
> >
> > > and existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on
> >
> > > new
> >
> > > membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and
> >
> > > perhaps
> >
> > > discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our ideas
> >
> > > about the modern world. Bill
>
> > > ------------------------------------
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59407 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:09 am
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Fw: Re: [Wisdom-l] RE: [TheBecoming] Philosophy: Restoring the Soul -hilarious - 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
Dear Gulati,

(1) No two
theories about the same context will be equally correct and equally plausible.



(2) Academic and Philosophical
Blackmail. The
so-called scientific theories are about *objectivity* only. Their themes do not
include any form of *subjectivity-objectivity connectivity*. How could anybody
be able to or expect to experience *subjectively-objectivity relationship* in
the course of a so-called scientific experiment?



The implicit
complaint which your statement connotes is about the definition of *science*.
Science
ought to deal with the *unified theory* which can not exclude epistemic/
subjective aspect of this cosmos/ creation. Moreover, the subjective aspect of
knowing needs to be *prioritized* over objective aspect, though the latter is
*absolutely
indispensable* as well.



The *truncated
science* of academy fails to integrate the two aspects as it decisively
amputates the subjective aspect off and yet it continues to boast of its
endeavors after offering us a unified theory which can never take off as such.



The problem is
over when we differentiate *objectivity-dwelling non-science* from
*objectivity-intensive
science* and *integral science*. The latter two would undertake the task of
complementing the unified theory by way of taking both subjective and objective
aspects into consideration while ascribing primacy to the subjective aspect and
acknowledging absolute indispensability of the objective aspect.



It may be noted
that the classical subjectivists had been committing the grave error of denying
or ignoring *absolute indispensability* of objectivism when they were to
explicitly acknowledge it. Thus they propagated *exclusive subjectivism* often
in the name of religion and spirituality. The latter act is tantamount to
philosophical blackmail.



They were as
erroneous as the modern objectivists who propagate *exclusive objectivism* in
the name of science. This is academic blackmail.





(3) There can
be many interpretations of a passage/ discourse/ theory that can be seen as
phases of the hermeneutic (meaning-mutating, meaning-updating) process. The
objective
of the sequence of interpretations is evolution of meaning. With this objective
out of view, interpretations would go awry and be infinite in number.



(4) Yes. That
is why we have to start with given or acknowledged or average meaning of words.
If any doubt crops up in the course of a discussion, the contending parties
would seek clarification.



(5) Academic Sapience. You are going too far in
generalizing the matter. The contenders are not blind people. They should have
basic qualification which is confirmed by the fact that they have agreed to
commence the conversation.



Their verbal
juxtaposition couldn*t bring out unlimited linguistic or semantic variation,
unless one or both of them suddenly decides/ decide to enter respective narrow
capillary-like academic tunnel/ tunnels.



Sapience of
academic specialization (that has lost sight of unified knowledge) is the
greatest danger against philosophical advancement. That is why it is essential
that the contenders assent to *civility* (of civil research) qualifiably even
if they are academicians.



Let*s broaden
the meaning of the term *academician*. For our purposes, it should not mean
only *tax-supported/ salaried professor who has not been able to cast off the
slavish hangover and who has not been able to transcend the salary-thick
information-barrier*.



The causal
essence of such a status is *protracted unconditional/ unlimited/
disproportionate social-financial security*.



If you apply
this causal essence to other fields, the curtain is raised to disclose the
identity of other type of culture-supported academicians who erroneously enjoy
implicit sapience over learned philosophy conditioned by direct/ indirect
materialistic concerns.



(6) Which speaker do you have in mind? Me?
You? If any of us prove to be sapient and adamant and so cracked, the content
will slip through our fingers. Right!!





(Bhanu
Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You may
reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@... for extended
discussions.



......................


TheRampaPath] Re: [greenlogic] Re: [Wisdom-l] Re:
[TheBecoming] Fw: The soul,re;latest missive. / Concept of Physical Life

Friday,
February 15, 2013 5:25 AM

From:

"devindersingh gulati" <dgulhati@...>

Add sender to Contacts

To:

"greenlogic@..."
<greenlogic@...>, "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com"
<TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>, "seerseeker@yahoogroups.com"
<seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>... more

Several
      different theories may offer equally plausible accounts of the same
      situationScientific
      theories are "undetermined" by experience

There
      are infinite interpretations of a discourse depending on the contextWords
      have a meaning only relative to the other words they are connected to in
      the sentences that we assume to be trueThe
      meaning of a sentence depends on the interpretation of the entire
      language. Its meaning can even change in time.The
      meaning of language is not in the mind of the speaker



Gulati


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (6)
#59408 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:11 am
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Reply to Kolki Poem / Poem *Eugenics* 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
Abbey! 

 

(Theory of Life, Theory of Happiness and Pain )

 

To
settle the difficult issue (of incidence and alleviation of pain) you have
raised, we may have to develop a firstly a *theory of life* and then, if
possible,
a *theory of happiness and pain*. For that, we shall have to identify the
sources, causes and consequences of life and pain and amalgamate this
information into premises that would constitute the theories.

 

The
painful plight of animals and human beings could thereafter be possibly
explained
to some extent. The theories could also give us some idea about the magnitude
of your services to destitute animals (raccoons).

 

The
objective of life (living) is exercise of personal intelligence. It constitutes
of making of personal truths and their theme-specific implementation. Personal
intelligence or personal truth has an evolutionary value on an absolute/
universal scale. This absolute value is the degree of its compliance with
universal direction of evolution.

 

Personal
intelligence is exercised through wielding of wealth, the truth-implementing
contrivances.
It is enhanced through intellectual atonement (that includes moral, spiritual,
cultural atonements). Volume of intellectual exercise (of extant intellect) by
far exceeds the rate of intellectual atonement.

 

Intellectual
exercise is experienced subjectively as emotion. Acquired/ cumulative
intellect, if persistent, solidifies into instinctual genetics and has the body
transformed commensurately. This is *corporal precipitation* in which personal
truth/ intelligence is geneticized first and materialized/ formalized/
incorporated next.

 

Evolution
is the process in which atonement of personal truth/ intelligence is translated
into augmentation/ enhancement of genetics and body texture/ form. So, there is
a relationship (commensurability, proportionality) between truth-content of
intellect and existential status of genetics/ integral body.

 

Evolution
is a slow and rare phenomenon. Because, intellectual atonement (atonement of
personal truth) is a rare act. Accordingly, we may theoretically differentiate
*static life* from *dynamic life* in the following manner.

 

*Static
life* may be ascribed to a definite/ finite but unchanging intellectual value
and its non-evolving genetics/ body when *dynamic life* may be ascribed to a
changing intellectual value and its evolving genetics/ body.

 

Thus
emerge the two cardinal features of life viz. *consummation of intellect* and
*atonement
of intellect* with these two divisions of consequences viz. *corporal
precipitation* and *corporal evolution*.

 

Consummation
of intellect is primarily exercise of extant intellect that would precipitate
*projected
life* reinforced by socio-cultural, psycho-moral planning. The projected life
is pre-determined by the current intellectual magnitude.

 

Atonement
of intellect is the extra-terrestrial/ other-worldly act of extending existing
intellectual frontier and conducting the ensuing socio-cultural, psycho-moral
metamorphosis and corporal mutation (evolution).

 

There
are in-built subjective indicators (confirmatory feelings) to identify and
assess prospect, progression, digression or recession of life in these two
modes viz. static mode and dynamic mode.

 

In
the static mode, the prospect and progression and digression and recession of
exercise
of existing intellect is sensed respectively as optimism-pessimism
(apprehension), happiness, anxiety and sorrow. In the dynamic mode, prospect
and progression and digression and recession of existential/ corporal status is
sensed respectively as divinity-morbidity (fear), euphoria, wait and grief.

 

When
intellectual exercise falls sort of availing oneself with physical needs
(causing corporal curtailment) viz. physical protection, metabolic needs etc,
sorrow deepens into pain. When it falls short of maintaining native existential
status, grief deepens into a shade of suicidal attitude.

 

Also,
it may be noted that life is transferable. To wit, you may empathetically or
vicariously live your own life by way of acting upon another life.

 

That
is where your animal service (raccoon service) comes into picture. Now, you can
assess the initial (pre-service) and final (post-service) predicament of
raccoon in the light of above discussion and appreciate how much *life* you
collected for yourself in terms of (raccoon*s sensing of) optimism, divinity,
happiness, euphoria etc.




(Bhanu
Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You may
reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/  as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended
discussions.



--- On Sat, 2/16/13, Michelle <outincyberspace@...> wrote:

From: Michelle <outincyberspace@...>
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Reply to Kolki Poem / Poem *Eugenics*
To: "greenlogic@..." <greenlogic@...>
Date: Saturday, February 16, 2013, 6:57 PM
















 









       Hi Bhanuji!

Once I found out what Eugenics, allele, and Mendels magic meant, this poem was
really cool!  I like the Buddhas contradiction of Hitlers eugenics.

Just a couple of points - in the poem below yours, the talk about animals in
nature, enjoying wind and rain and snow - well, nature is a cruel mistress,
there is often immense hardships for the animal kingdom, in nature.

I believe that in a sane world, which we are hopefully becoming; that humans
will create a world where everyone lives in ease - that is, no desperation.
Wealth and atonement to dharma, will cause this. Then, it is visionary, but,
humans could assist the animals in nature to obtain the same ease and
happiness.  I know it is not much, but my aiding and abetting the plight of the
lives of raccoons
  that live wild among humans, is a step in this direction.

There is a window on this, in how some horses, dogs and cats, enjoy a much finer
life than what is found in nature - in spite of the immense suffering that does
occur to animals under the mercy of human hands. Om Shanti Om!
         From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
  To: globallistener@...; greenlogic@...;
TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com; seerseeker@yahoogroups.com;
Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com; TheBecoming@...; existlist@yahoogroups.com;
dancewithwordstwo@yahoogroups.com
  Sent:
  Saturday, February 16, 2013 8:09:29 AM
  Subject: [greenlogic] Reply to Kolki Poem / Poem *Eugenics*
















 












 

Poem : Eugenics

 

Until it
did hit as inertia of conceit,

Poetry it
was to me.

The inertia
of rest.

 

Spewing
deceptive peace;

Yearning
for price in return;

Price to
comport possessive whim,

Unconditional
and unlimited;

Congealing
into conceit indomitable;

Inertia of
rest it was.

Poetry to me
then;

Until it
did hit as inertia of conceit.

 

A eugenic
purge it soon called for.

This
conceit indomitable.

 

To be the
recessive allele,

It was
bound to dip.

Still in
the garb of bravado though.

This
conceit indomitable.

 

But it was
bound to dip;

Letting the
initiative arrive elsewhere

In allele
dominant.

The uncanny
instrument of natural purge.

 

*Cause in
conceit, no initiative could dwell.

 

Nature
gained, Hitlers lost out.

Oblivion
they were bound for,

Quite
naturally.

They, the
images of conceit.

 

Natural
selection by dream,

They had
contradicted.

Survival of
the wisest,

They had failed
to appreciate.

Still aware
they weren*t

Of Mendel*s
magic.

 

Dominance
of truth so obvious,

They had failed
to perceive;

Even when it
pervaded blood and genes.

 

Still aware
they weren*t

Of Mendel*s
magic.

The magic that
could repaint flowers

And recast
faces.

Even
corporeal inheritance wouldn*t deign

Thenceforth
to be immutable.

 

In egotism
dwelt eugenics vindicated –

Hitlers mused
wistfully;

Until
Buddha*s magnanimity bloomed

Surreptitiously
to thwart.

 

To thwart
this colorful gloom;

This
conceit indomitable.

 

And to turn
it down as the recessive allele.

 

Poetry it
was to me then,

Until it
did hit as inertia terminal.

The inertia
of rest.

 

A eugenic
purge it did ask for soon.




(Bhanu
Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended
discussions............................................................
On Tue, 2/5/13, Global Teacher <globallistener@...> wrote:

Fittest

(Dedicated to an Egalitarian Democratic
World – Deepak Sarkar, www.kolki.com)


<Related
poems:  Free     Best     In
Vain     Harmony     One
World    Universal
Notes     Universal
God     Global Solidarity>

 

Every time I saw a small bird nesting

Having babies without doctors,
nurses, and hospital bills

Surviving and enjoying life in
storms, snow and rain

Without additional clothes, heating
or cooling -

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Every time I saw/heard Canadian
Geese flying at night

Alone or as a team for a distant
flight

Navigating towards destination
without compass or light

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Every time I watched a small spider
creating web

Out of nothing except own sap and
legs

Then resting in the centre to catch
preys

Enjoying own creation at its best -

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Every time a seed germinated in the
soil or water

Grew as plant or trees withstanding
disasters

Shed leaves for the winter only to
be reborn in vigour

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Every time I looked at small
sparrows playing in the snow

When I was feeling cozy in heated
home among clothes

I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!

 

Fittest are natural knower who
exercise self power

Without unlearning instincts to
technological slave work!

Endless dependency only makes humans
enslaved and weaker

As generations strive for expensive
and competitive future!

 

Birds travelling thousands of miles
without rest

Navigating at night over deserts and
oceans

Even a fruit fly does everything,
more than I crave

Eat, meet, multiply and even fly
without much rest!

 

After I leave -

Many animals and birds will outlive
me

Shrubs and trees I planted

Would be surviving and serving
merrily

Without disturbing and destroying
natural harmony -

Of course, if they are not victim of
modern industry!

 

Thus,
the slogan ‘Survival of the fittest’

Resonates very well with Eugenic1
quest

For aristocrative exploitation of
the masses

With population control whenever
needed -

Encouraging supremacist ideology at
the best!

 

Darwin’s theory is flawed with fundamental mistake

Yet remains unchallenged in royal
heritage  

Discovered while travelling on Royal
H.M.S Beagle

Collecting samples from American and
African Islands

Hypothesised in “Origin of Species”

“The Survival of The Fittest”

Without
realizing evolution doesn’t leave any trace!









































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59409 From: "devindersingh" <dgulhati@...>
Date: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:27 am
Subject: Re: Not Hinduism 		dgulhati
Send Email Send Email
  
The racists can't stand public scrutiny. They scurry for cover.
They could do with a reading of Jung.

According to Jung the persona is a "segment of the collective psyche" and can
often be mistaken for something individual. Although there may be something
individual in it, it is, rather, he insisted, "a mask that feigns
individuality", while one is acting a collective role through which the voice of
the collective speaks its seductive "truths". Individuation, however, involves,
in part, "divesting oneself from the false wrappings of the persona" and the
realization of a privatized Self liberated from social obligations. Here then
Jung alluded to the persona as being ultimately connected to falsehood, even if
it does have practical value at one level of being. In identifying with the
persona, then, one is forging an unconscious relationship to the Asura of
Falsehood.

When people come in contact with the collective unconscious and there is an
expansion of consciousness, the inevitable outcome, at least initially, is
inflation. Jung is particularly biting in his remarks about people who identify
with any aspect of the collective psyche, which, he argued amounts to full
"acceptance of inflation but now exalted into a system". In mythological imagery
this means being devoured by the dragon, and a loss of individual autonomy.
Genuine self-criticism, he observed, is thrown to the wind and there is the
appearance of a reward in that one seems to participate in a superior world, one
"pregnant with meaning."
http://archives.mirroroftomorrow.org/blog/_archives/2010/2/4/4441753.html

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@...> wrote:

> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "devindersingh" <dgulhati@> wrote:
> >
> > The elitism here is the old deranged idea called 'White Supremacy'.
> > Don't you see the spite William oozes?
> >
> > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@> wrote:
> >
> > > William/
> > > Bill,
> >
> > > Why did you
> > > deny my entry into Neoex when you seem to have been interested in elitism?
> >
> > > Are you
> > > sure I am an Eastern Mystic?
> >
> > > Just
> > > rethink if you have purged the elite out. Because, I think I had a new
> > > principle or two on elitism about every theme you could imagine of.
> >
> > > Let me in.
> >
> > > (Bhanu Padmo)
> >Sorry,champ,I have seen the chop job you have done here. Try to sell your
junk here. Nobody but  your buds  will be listening. Bill
> > > --- On Sat, 2/16/13, eduardathome <yeoman@> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: eduardathome <yeoman@>
> > > Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism
> > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> > > Date: Saturday, February 16, 2013, 12:57 AM
> >
> > >       done
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > > From: William
> > >
> > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 6:27 PM
> > >
> > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Not Hinduism
> >
> > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome  wrote:
> >
> > > > Sounds good.  Send the link to moi at ...
> >
> > > > yeoman@
> >
> > > > eduardathome
> > >
> > > >Eduard, the group is  at Neoex.Yahoo groups. I do not know how to send a
> > >
> > > >link but know you can find the group at Yahoo groups. Sorry I am such a
> > >
> > > >computer luddite. Im self taught and pretty  primative. I`ll wait for
your
> > >
> > > >request to join. We are discussing the meteor trikes and misses. Also
what
> > >
> > > >you said about drones disrupting piloted aircraft is being researched in
> > >
> > > >several centers.Bill
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > > > From: William
> > >
> > > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 4:41 PM
> > >
> > > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > > > Subject: [existlist] Not Hinduism
> >
> > > > Eduard, I have accepted Mary at Neoex and will hopefully do the same for
> > >
> > > > you. I will not let the eastern mystics in . I do little or no
moderation
> > >
> > > > so
> > >
> > > > fire away and say what you like. The preamble tells of a  merging of
> > >
> > > > science
> > >
> > > > and existentialism. As the only three members I will give you a veto on
> > >
> > > > new
> > >
> > > > membersThe three of us  shouls  be able to keep the mystics out  and
> > >
> > > > perhaps
> > >
> > > > discuss what we are interested in. We will be small but elite in our
ideas
> > >
> > > > about the modern world. Bill
> >
> > > > ------------------------------------

Reply | Messages in this Topic (9)
#59410 From: "Dick." <somerset_2@...>
Date: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:14 pm
Subject: New Video link 		somerset_2
Send Email Send Email
  
New Video Link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9AMyh0pdU4
rwr




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59411 From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
Date: Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:12 pm
Subject: Re: Easy Methodology To End Constitutional Monarchies Peacefully in the West To Save And Maintain Democracies Around The World! Deepak Sarkar, www.kolki.com 		greenbhanu
Send Email Send Email
  
Deepak!

 

(Theory of Absolute Polity, Theory
of Constitution, Real and Virtual Constitutional Monarchies and Civil
Democracy)

 

The phrase
*constitutional monarchy* is fraught with a much different connotation that
could offer a much greater meaning. This great meaning can be arrived at if we
tread an analytical path ascribed with a characteristic unconventional and
radical reasoning.

 

Since the
phrase *constitutional monarchy* includes the term *constitution*, a waypoint
on that unconventional political logic will be the *theory of constitution*.

 

Terms like
monarchy, democracy etc refer to sovereignty of nation. Hence, the theme of the
discussion that would harbor the new political reasoning should be national
sovereignty.

 

To
understand national sovereignty, we shall start with individual sovereignty.
Unmitigable
personal dream and personal intelligence may be seen as personal/ individual
sovereignty. The description *unmitigable* here means *not coerced to mitigate
while being positively vulnerable to healthier influence*.

 

National
sovereignty would be sum total of individual sovereignties taken over all
citizens of the nation. However, the individual sovereignties aren*t alike.
They fall into two categories viz. ordinary and extraordinary. To say that
citizens are inherently divisible into two such natural classes may seem to
have oligarchic undertone, unless we learn this latent and intriguing nature of
human society through an appropriate analogy viz. Net-Knot Analogy.

 

A
fisherman*s round spread-net constitutes of knots and threads. Society
resembles such a net insofar as evenly distributed rarer citizens form
intermittent psycho-social polarities through their naturally-occurring higher/
unusual dream, intelligence and creativity. Call them *natural grassroots civil
leaders.*

 

Ordinary
citizens look forward to local natural grassroots leaders for psycho-social
leadership. Thus practically, the national sovereignty would be the sum total
of effects and influences of these evenly distributed intermittently occurring
sovereign citizens. This is the *greatest political truth*.

 

Here comes
into sight the *theory of constitution*. State*s written constitution ought to
incorporate the *greatest political truth* into its preamble and commence its
implementation from the very first letter of the main body of constitution.

 

The leading
light of the constitution is thus the fact that the plenary body of omnipresent
elected grassroots sovereign citizens would exclusively form the *state polity*
and hence, would need to be eternally protected and universally empowered.

 

Constitution*s
acknowledgement and implementation of this *civil principle* would make the
state governance a *true democracy*. Call it *civil democracy*.

 

Any
deviation would usher in *constitutional monarchy*, real or virtual and of
different degrees and forms. A deviated constitution*s implicitly-altruistic
rhetoric would hide the worst political pretense. The apparent altruism would be
furtively nullified sooner or later frustrating popular hope and consummating
the cruel anti-national and selfish intention of the political hijackers.  

 

Crucial is
the process of electing the grassroots sovereign citizens who have been ignored
from time immemorial precisely because of their pro-people dream and anti-evil
intelligence. The election would call for an ingenious procedure. The present
*vote-based
gross election* would have to be replaced by *value-based perfect election*.
Let*s check out this proposed perfect electoral procedure.

 

If a
1000-member village has to elect its 10-member village-level *civil body*
comprising of 10 sovereign citizens, let each villager reckon, discreetly and
secretly, own 10 favorites in decreasing order of deserved veneration. This
submitted ballot paper would be assessed to assign 10 points to the top name
and rest names would be reckoned in a decreasing order until the last person
scores 1. Considerations of all ballot papers (with the objective of finding
sum total of individual marks) would bring out the best 10, the *unmistakable*
10 sovereign citizens.

 

Let*s have
a look at the hierarchy of such sovereign citizens in a *civil polity*. Let*s
assume for the sake of ease of explanation that, in India, 10 villages make 1
panchayat and 10 panchayats make 1 block and 10 blocks make 1 district and 10
districts make 1 province and 10 provinces make the Country of India. All the
members of all 10-member village-level civil bodies would appoint, through
perfect election, a 10-member panchayat-level civil body and this process would
go on in turns at rising levels until the formation of province-level civil
bodies.

 

India*s *civil parliament* would then
comprise of all members of all 10-member province-level civil bodies. This will
be the sovereign political body that will elect from within itself India*s
President. Civil parliament would be the legislative, judicial and
administrative apex. The member of civil parliament will be the real
legislator-judge-administrator when the appointed civil servants would only be
subordinate-assistant judge, subordinate-assistant administrator etc.

 

The present
Parliament would have to be demoted to be called *managerial parliament*
harboring the ministry (body of state managers) and being thoroughly
subordinated to the civil parliament.

 

This will
be an outline of the final consequence of the introduction of *civil
constitution* and the consequential end of present form of *virtual*
constitutional monarchy of India.
The other countries embracing civil polity will follow respective paths of
reform.

 

Civil
Polity/ Civil Democracy that will replace all degrees/ forms of virtual and
real constitutional monarchies is the product of this Theory of Absolute
Polity.




(Bhanu
Padmo)

http://www.bhanupadmo.com


You may
reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well

or consign a copy to greenlogic@...  
for extended discussions.




--- On Sat, 2/16/13, Global Teacher <globallistener@...> wrote:

From: Global Teacher <globallistener@...>
Subject: Easy Methodology To End Constitutional Monarchies Peacefully in the
West To Save And Maintain Democracies Around The World! Deepak Sarkar,
www.kolki.com
To: ""TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com"" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>,
"sbicitizen@yahoogroups.com" <sbicitizen@yahoogroups.com>,
"issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com"
<issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com>, ""Viswa: Gmail""
<viswa.ghosh@...>, ""'vasant sardesai'"" <vasant_sardesai@...>,
"“kirit mehta”" <kiritsir@...>, "“Surya Rao Maturu”"
<suryaraom@...>, "kiritsir@..." <kiritsir@...>, ""vijendran
rao"" <vijendran.rao@...>, ""Benoit Couture"" <benoitctr@...>,
""devindersingh gulati"" <dgulhati@...>, "Major(Retd).R.Rudra Narasimham"
<rebbapragada@...>, "Bhavanajagat." <donotreply@...>, ""Koti
Sreekrishna"" <tatachar@...>, ""dr_ssdhillon""
<drdln@...>, ""Future Gujarat"" <futuregujarat@...>,
""Swarnim Gujarat"" <swarnim.gujarat2010@...>, ""info@...""
<info@...>, ""danchan budhoo"" <dbudhoo2000@...>, ""Dilip
  Kumar Roy"" <diliproy@...>, ""Swarnim Gujarat""
<swarnim.gujarat2010@...>, "P.K. Siddharth" <siddharthpk@...>,
"greenbhanu@..." <greenbhanu@...>, "baig.murad@..."
<baig.murad@...>, "CMVikram@..." <CMVikram@...>,
"ramangod@..." <ramangod@...>, "Leena Mehendale"
<leena.mehendale@...>, "vavamenon@..." <vavamenon@...>,
"vavamenon@..." <vavamenon@...>, "Prem Kumar Sabhlok"
<pksabhlok@...>, ""Ayush"" <arisebharat@...>,
"gdigest@..." <gdigest@...>,
"devinder.thakur@..." <devinder.thakur@...>,
"venkat.hpu@..." <venkat.hpu@...>, "Ramarao"
<rbodapati@...>, "Rajaram Bojji" <rajaram.bojji@...>, "Rudra
Narasimham Rebbapragada" <rebbapragada@...>, "Ramesam Vemuri"
<vemuri.ramesam@...>, "Keshav Sundaresan" <sundaresan08619@...>,
"Serve Veda" <vedakavi@...>,
  "Krishna Kumar Pillalamarri" <pkrishnak@...>, "pakay46@..."
<pakay46@...>, "director@..." <director@...>,
"writeatlas@..." <writeatlas@...>, "barbara.paolucci@..."
<barbara.paolucci@...>, "singhvj@..." <singhvj@...>,
"sarkar28@..." <sarkar28@...>, "MOHAN DADLANI"
<mohandadlani@...>, "Yahoo!" <royaldecor99@...>, "Satish Oberoi"
<oberoi50@...>, "smajhi@..." <smajhi@...>
Cc: "Raghu Anthanarayanan" <raghu@...>,
""greenlogic@..."" <greenlogic@...>,
""Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com"" <Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com>,
""seerseeker@yahoogroups.com"" <seerseeker@yahoogroups.com>, "Alan Kuzlev"
<esotericismspirituality@yahoogroups.com>, ""existlist@yahoogroups.com""
<existlist@yahoogroups.com>, "ankh" <ankhaton@...>, "singhvj@..."
<singhvj@...>, "sarkar28@..." <sarkar28@...>,
"media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com" <media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com>,
"hitaya123@..." <hitaya123@...>,
"stop-corruption-worldwide@googlegroups.com"
<stop-corruption-worldwide@googlegroups.com>,
"dandimarch-ii-global@googlegroups.com" <dandimarch-ii-global@googlegroups.com>,
"hindiUSA@yahoogroups.com" <hindiUSA@yahoogroups.com>, "pakay46@..."
<pakay46@...>, "director@..." <director@...>,
"writeatlas@..." <writeatlas@...>,
  "barbara.paolucci@..." <barbara.paolucci@...>
Date: Saturday, February 16, 2013, 10:35 AM

[Link to article: http://www.kolki.com/peace/Ending-Constitutional-Monarchy.htm]





[From the Author of “Poems by Kolki – Absolutely Humane”, “Real Path To
9/11” & “Sayings of Kolki”]
[Poem: A Day of Non-Violence]
<Planet Earth       Day of Consciousness       Patriot   
  Universal Super Power      Spiritualism      Universal Notes>
 
Easy Methodology To End Constitutional Monarchies Peacefully in the West To Save
And Maintain Democracies Around The World! Deepak Sarkar, http://www.kolki.com/
 
Throughout history of the Constitutional Monarchs Parliament has been closed or
prorogued, elected Prime Minister assassinated or had to step down for being not
so loyal to Monarchy and/or NATO alliance; even for evangelical reason like the
elected Members unacceptance of the agenda and code of conducts of the Church of
England headed by the Queen. Currently Belgium has no active Government for more
than a year but NATO HQ is operating from there in full gear of aggressive war
mode blessed by the Royals as Commander-in-Chiefs. Similar example of democratic
rights violations can be found throughout Monarchial Alliance including Sweden
and Australia. Both World Wars were fought to empower the Monarchial Alliance
and now they are fighting War on Terror defying Rule of Law and Proof of
Conviction, avoiding open
  public investigation of 9/11 type massive attacks blaming alleged virtual
patsies, which can trigger real WW III any time aided by their Covert
Intelligence and high-tech propaganda machineries like Echelon. So, it is time
To End Constitutional Monarchies Peacefully in the West To Save And Maintain
Democracies Around The World!  It is really time for most Western people to
enjoy life as free democratic
  proud citizens without being labeled as “Subjects” of non-productive
hereditary King/Queen bound by loyalty!      
 
<9/11 Truth Smoking Guns       Remote Military Hijacking       Why
Media Is Silent?      What is Al-Qaeda?>
 
Easy Methodology for Peaceful Conversion: (general with Canadian Example)
1st Step: Rename Governor General as President and all Lt. Governor Generals as
Governors
2nd Step: Install pictures of President and Prime Minister in Public places
3rd Step: Rename “Throne Speech” as “Presidential Speech”
4th Step: Call elections for all Senators as convenient to eliminate partisan
loyalty
5th Step: Call for Presidential and Gubernatorial election after one year
6th Step: Start printing money with faces of Good Canadians who served for the
nation
7th Step: Change Royal Canadian Mount Police (RCMP) to Canadian Mount Police
(CMP)
8th Step: Review why Canada has debts, to whom, and resolve indebtedness
forever!
9th Step: Review why only 33 Millions Canadians cannot enjoy full employment
when dear tax dollars
             In billions are being wasted by CSIS paying idle
brains around the world and military for
             Empowering The Queen of England and her colonizing war
machines when students around
             Canada have to compromise lunch and chastity for ever
increasing tuition and fees;
             most citizens live on coupons to support family;
universal healthcare losing its meaning rapidly!
 
For UK:     
 
. Rename Queen as President, ‘Buckingham Palace’ as ‘Presidential
Palace’
. Rename LORD as MP
. Rename UK as Great Britain (UK is Monarchial)
. Rest is similar to the General Methodology
 
Rest is detail afterwards! Where there is a will there is way! Anyone who cleans
after own mess knows that the filth is more than it appears!
 
<Related Poems: Democracy     Participatory Democracy       Dangerous
World Situation    Confide>
 
God helps Britons, Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders, Swedes (Swedish),
Belgians, Norwegians, Danes (Danish), Netherlanders to rise (wake up),  to end
Constitutional Monarchy (Virtual Military State)  for true
  Participatory Democracy in order to sustain real peace and justice around the
world eliminating all hegemony related wars in an otherwise peace-loving world!
There is nothing ceremonial about the Constitutional Monarchs, who are the
Commander-in-Chief owning the loyalty of military and intelligence (Covert
  & Overt), as well as Government helping elect the loyal party and its leader
as the Prime Minister, throughout History! These Royals don’t like and don’t
want democracy; unitedly they are a colonizing military alliance which has been
creating Oligarchies around the world - even supporting Absolute Monarchs and
Dictators.      
 
<Related Poems: Fallen Soldiers     Canadian Pride    American
  Pride    Body Bag     Dying     Guantanamo Bay     War>
 
 
UK’s Monarchial Celebrations, related massive media coverage are direct slaps
to worldwide democracy!
 
British style Multi-Party politics is not democracy per definition “Government
of the people, For the people, By the people”, rather ruling by clans like
soccer, cricket or baseball where losers mourn until the next game. Political
Parties can never unite a Country; they rule a divided country relishing
strategic victory often over the majority will. In a true participatory
democracy all candidates must be independent campaigning on important local,
national, and international issues determined by non-partisan elected Central
Election Commission headed by the elected president
  guided by the advising committee formed using the best talents of the country
from all subjects to make life humanely better.
 
Here is a poetic hypothesis for true participatory democracy which can be
debated and modified for the best result: Poem “Participatory Democracy” =>>
http://www.kolki.com/poems/Participatory-Democracy.htm
 
[What is killing and destroying people’s democracies?]
<Cecil Rhodes Methodology of Colonizing the World Re-Annexing America>
 
Most world problems are direct or indirect effects of colonialism beginning with
Dorian Greek Alexander the conqueror inflicting divisions, fear of persecutions
among peaceful nations, slavery, and triggering diasporic migrations of people
to uninhabitable parts of Earth especially true in Africa! World as a whole is a
complete resource base which need to be shared and distributed equally among
world citizens to achieve true democracy, human rights, and everlasting peace!
 
There is no Heaven in the sky! Earth was Heaven when colonialists and their
evangelists didn’t convert parts of it as Hell while motivating the slaves
work harder to reach a fictitious better place “Heaven = Haven”! End of
Monarchy and related colonialisms can re-establish lost Heaven on Earth, a place
without borders, class, divisions, and supremacist orders!
 
<Related Poem: Politics      International Republican Party     
Intelligence      Democratic Security>
 
God (The Universal Loving Expression) bless all sentient being for eternal peace
in a neighbourly world unitedly committed to creative cultural and spiritual
evolution.  Kolki]  
 
[When religions coexist, leaders communicate, media respect neutrality, laws not
blinded by immunity, and citizens need take precedence over profitability -
peace becomes reality, world lives in harmony appreciating human rights. Kolki]
About Kolki            ☼Kolki Peace
Foundation☼              Why Kolki?
Author: Deepak Sarkar, 844 Royal Oak Ave, Victoria, BC V8X 3T2, Canada; Tel/Fax:
250-412-2897;
E-Mail: Deepak.Sarkar@...; Poetry & Peace Web Site: http://www.kolki.com/
Sayings of Kolki      Truth      GLOBAL ISSUES
 
<Related Poems: Diplomacy      Global Solidarity       Harmony  
   Religion       Peace Now>
 
How Easily We Can Achieve Undominated Co-Existing Heavenly World? Lot Easier
Than Most Can Think Of! (Simple Methodology as a Starter)
 
Why Countries With Majority Jesus Loving Supposedly Democratic People Need Guns
Without Control?
 
How Much Are Intelligence Service's Contributions To Our Society So Far? Aren't
Hiding Truth & Obstructions To Justice Felonies?
 
▼  ▼  ▼
 
End Notes:
[The Canadian Conservative government shut down debate on a budget bill again.
"This is a (expletive) disgrace ... closure again. And on the Budget. There's
not a democracy in the world that would tolerate this jackboot (expletive)." Pat
Martin, Long time New Democrat MP, Canadian Parliament] It should be noted that
the same Progressive Conservative Pro-War Government Prorogued Canadian
Parliament last year during Budget Crisis, still came back to
  power aided by the media due to the unconditional support to military and
Israel.  
 
Canada must take the lead to end Constitutional Monarchy and let others follow
so that:
. A non-elected Governor General can never close our parliament in session
. No one can take beloved troops to distant foreign lands without a debate in
Parliament
. Every friendly fire related fallen soldier triggers an open public
investigation
. Killings of RCMP officers like in Alberta are investigated openly urgently
. No one can delay Air India Explosion investigation with uncompromised
evidences
. CSIS (Intelligence) can never get away destroying important tapes and
evidences
. All killings by RCMP officers, like Ian Bush, warrant immediate public
investigation  
. Finally 33 Million Canadians can enjoy full employment in the second largest
country
 
How can Canadians expect Canada to remain Sovereign and Democratic under Stephen
Harper’s Royal Regime?
 
United Monarchy is the greatest threat to human civilization using covert
banking corruptions and  mercenaries, Intelligence and military deceptions,
which has been systematically destroying
  democracy and culture around the world for perpetuating Oligarchy hiding behind
Constitutional (Guaranteed) Monarchy! Kolki  
 
If USA is really serious about democratizing the world, why not start with The
United Kingdom, the main colonizing force, its tributaries1 (including Norway,
Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand,
and Luxembourg) and accessories (including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Dubai, Kuwait,
Oman, Jordon, Bhutan, and Japan). Last but not least USA must have a Central
Election Commission and all Senators must be chosen by elections to eradicate
Philosopher Kings whose allegiance are to The United Kingdom of Israel
(Church).    
 
Reference: Developed Constitutional Monarchies
“Poems by Kolki – Absolutely Humane”, a recipe for better world, Trafford
USA, 2007 July
“Real Path To 9 11”, Trafford USA, 2010 March!
 
Songs:  Celebrating Heavenly Life on Earth             
Co-Existence             Universal Celebration
 
Utopia           One World          Poetic Revolution

[Link to article: http://www.kolki.com/peace/Ending-Constitutional-Monarchy.htm]





[From the Author of “Poems by Kolki – Absolutely Humane”, “Real Path To
9/11” & “Sayings of Kolki”]
[Poem: A Day of Non-Violence]
<Planet Earth       Day of Consciousness       Patriot   
  Universal Super Power      Spiritualism      Universal Notes>
 
Easy Methodology To End Constitutional Monarchies Peacefully in the West To Save
And Maintain Democracies Around The World! Deepak Sarkar, www.kolki.com
 
Throughout history of the Constitutional Monarchs Parliament has been closed or
prorogued, elected Prime Minister assassinated or had to step down for being not
so loyal to Monarchy and/or NATO alliance; even for evangelical reason like the
elected Members unacceptance of the agenda and code of conducts of the Church of
England headed by the Queen. Currently Belgium has no active Government for more
than a year but NATO HQ is operating from there in full gear of aggressive war
mode blessed by the Royals as Commander-in-Chiefs. Similar example of democratic
rights violations can be found throughout Monarchial Alliance including Sweden
and Australia. Both World Wars were fought to empower the Monarchial Alliance
and now they are fighting War on Terror defying Rule of Law and Proof of
Conviction,
  avoiding open public investigation of 9/11 type massive attacks blaming alleged
virtual patsies, which can trigger real WW III any time aided by their Covert
Intelligence and high-tech propaganda machineries like Echelon. So, it is time
To End Constitutional Monarchies Peacefully in the West To Save And Maintain
Democracies Around The World!  It is really time for most Western people to
enjoy life as free democratic proud citizens without being labeled as
“Subjects” of non-productive hereditary King/Queen bound by loyalty! 
    
 
<9/11 Truth Smoking Guns       Remote Military Hijacking       Why
Media Is Silent?      What is Al-Qaeda?>
 
Easy Methodology for Peaceful Conversion: (general with Canadian Example)
1st Step: Rename Governor General as President and all Lt. Governor Generals as
Governors
2nd Step: Install pictures of President and Prime Minister in Public places
3rd Step: Rename “Throne Speech” as “Presidential Speech”
4th Step: Call elections for all Senators as convenient to eliminate partisan
loyalty
5th Step: Call for Presidential and Gubernatorial election after one year
6th Step: Start printing money with faces of Good Canadians who served for the
nation
7th Step: Change Royal Canadian Mount Police (RCMP) to Canadian Mount Police
(CMP)
8th Step: Review why Canada has debts, to whom, and resolve indebtedness
forever!
9th Step: Review why only 33 Millions Canadians cannot enjoy full employment
when dear tax dollars
             In billions are being wasted by CSIS paying idle
brains around the world and military for
             Empowering The Queen of England and her colonizing war
machines when students around
             Canada have to compromise lunch and chastity for ever
increasing tuition and fees;
             most citizens live on coupons to support family;
universal healthcare losing its meaning rapidly!
 
For UK:     
 
. Rename Queen as President, ‘Buckingham Palace’ as ‘Presidential
Palace’
. Rename LORD as MP
. Rename UK as Great Britain (UK is Monarchial)
. Rest is similar to the General Methodology
 
Rest is detail afterwards! Where there is a will there is way! Anyone who cleans
after own mess knows that the filth is more than it appears!
 
<Related Poems: Democracy     Participatory Democracy       Dangerous
World Situation    Confide>
 
God helps Britons, Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders, Swedes (Swedish),
Belgians, Norwegians, Danes (Danish), Netherlanders to rise (wake up),  to end
Constitutional Monarchy (Virtual Military State)  for true Participatory
Democracy in order to sustain real peace and justice around the world
eliminating all hegemony related wars in an otherwise peace-loving world! There
is nothing ceremonial about the Constitutional Monarchs, who are the
Commander-in-Chief owning the loyalty of military and intelligence (Covert &
Overt), as well as Government helping elect the loyal party and its leader as
the Prime Minister, throughout History! These Royals don’t like and don’t
want democracy; unitedly they are a colonizing military alliance which has been
creating Oligarchies around the world - even supporting Absolute Monarchs and
Dictators.      
 
<Related Poems: Fallen Soldiers     Canadian Pride    American Pride  
 Body Bag     Dying     Guantanamo Bay     War>
 
 
UK’s Monarchial Celebrations, related massive media coverage are direct slaps
to worldwide democracy!
 
British style Multi-Party politics is not democracy per definition “Government
of the people, For the people, By the people”, rather ruling by clans like
soccer, cricket or baseball where losers mourn until the next game. Political
Parties can never unite a Country; they rule a divided country relishing
strategic victory often over the majority will. In a true participatory
democracy all candidates must be independent campaigning on important local,
national, and international issues determined by non-partisan elected Central
  Election Commission headed by the elected president guided by the advising
committee formed using the best talents of the country from all subjects to make
life humanely better.
 
Here is a poetic hypothesis for true participatory democracy which can be
debated and modified for the best result: Poem “Participatory Democracy” =>>
http://www.kolki.com/poems/Participatory-Democracy.htm
 
[What is killing and destroying people’s democracies?]
<Cecil Rhodes Methodology of Colonizing the World Re-Annexing America>
 
Most world problems are direct or indirect effects of colonialism beginning with
Dorian Greek Alexander the conqueror inflicting divisions, fear of persecutions
among peaceful nations, slavery, and triggering diasporic migrations of people
to uninhabitable parts of Earth especially true in Africa! World as a whole is a
complete resource base which need to be shared and distributed equally among
world citizens to achieve true democracy, human rights, and everlasting
  peace!
 
There is no Heaven in the sky! Earth was Heaven when colonialists and their
evangelists didn’t convert parts of it as Hell while motivating the slaves
work harder to reach a fictitious better place “Heaven = Haven”! End of
Monarchy and related colonialisms can re-establish lost Heaven on Earth, a place
without borders, class, divisions, and supremacist orders!
 
<Related Poem: Politics      International Republican
  Party      Intelligence      Democratic Security>
 
God (The Universal Loving Expression) bless all sentient being for eternal peace
in a neighbourly world unitedly committed to creative cultural and spiritual
evolution.  Kolki]  
 
[When religions coexist, leaders communicate, media respect neutrality, laws not
blinded by immunity, and citizens need take precedence over profitability -
peace becomes reality, world lives in harmony appreciating human rights. Kolki]
About Kolki            ☼Kolki Peace
Foundation☼              Why Kolki?
Author: Deepak Sarkar, 844 Royal Oak Ave, Victoria, BC V8X 3T2, Canada; Tel/Fax:
250-412-2897;
E-Mail: Deepak.Sarkar@...; Poetry & Peace Web Site: www.kolki.com
Sayings of Kolki      Truth      GLOBAL ISSUES
 
<Related Poems: Diplomacy      Global Solidarity       Harmony  
   Religion       Peace Now>
 
How Easily We Can Achieve Undominated Co-Existing Heavenly World? Lot Easier
Than Most Can Think Of! (Simple Methodology as a
  Starter)
 
Why Countries With Majority Jesus Loving Supposedly Democratic People Need Guns
Without Control?
 
How Much Are Intelligence Service's Contributions To Our Society So Far? Aren't
Hiding Truth & Obstructions To Justice Felonies?
 
▼  ▼  ▼
 
End Notes:
[The Canadian Conservative government shut down debate on a budget bill again.
"This is a (expletive) disgrace ... closure again. And on the Budget. There's
not a democracy in the world that would tolerate this jackboot (expletive)." Pat
Martin, Long time New Democrat MP, Canadian Parliament] It should be noted that
the same Progressive Conservative Pro-War
  Government Prorogued Canadian Parliament last year during Budget Crisis, still
came back to power aided by the media due to the unconditional support to
military and Israel.  
 
Canada must take the lead to end Constitutional Monarchy and let others follow
so that:
. A non-elected Governor General can never close our parliament in session
. No one can take beloved troops to distant foreign lands without a debate in
Parliament
. Every friendly fire related fallen soldier triggers an open public
investigation
. Killings of RCMP officers like in Alberta are investigated openly urgently
. No one can delay Air India Explosion investigation with uncompromised
evidences
. CSIS (Intelligence) can never get away destroying important tapes and
evidences
. All killings by RCMP officers, like Ian Bush, warrant immediate public
investigation  
. Finally 33 Million Canadians can enjoy full employment in the second largest
country
 
How can Canadians expect Canada to remain Sovereign and Democratic under Stephen
Harper’s Royal Regime?
 
United Monarchy is the greatest threat to human civilization using covert
banking corruptions and  mercenaries, Intelligence and military deceptions,
which has been systematically destroying democracy and culture around the world
for perpetuating Oligarchy hiding behind Constitutional (Guaranteed) Monarchy!
Kolki  
 
If USA is really serious about democratizing the world, why not start with The
United Kingdom, the main colonizing force, its tributaries1 (including Norway,
Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand,
and Luxembourg) and accessories (including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Dubai, Kuwait,
Oman, Jordon, Bhutan,
  and Japan). Last but not least USA must have a Central Election Commission and
all Senators must be chosen by elections to eradicate Philosopher Kings whose
allegiance are to The United Kingdom of Israel (Church).    
 
Reference: Developed Constitutional Monarchies
“Poems by Kolki – Absolutely Humane”, a recipe for better world, Trafford
USA, 2007 July
“Real Path To 9 11”, Trafford USA, 2010 March!
 
Songs:  Celebrating Heavenly Life on Earth             
Co-Existence             Universal Celebration
 
Utopia           One World          Poetic Revolution



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59412 From: "Dick." <somerset_2@...>
Date: Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:02 pm
Subject: What is Homo Ensophicus they ask 		somerset_2
Send Email Send Email
  
What is Homo Ensophicus they ask
Can you do a short video of it it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WOLZNu8_3A



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59413 From: devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:55 am
Subject: Re: [greenlogic] Reply to Kolki Poem / Poem *Eugenics* 		dgulhati
Send Email Send Email
  
IN ancient times, during the Roman ascendency, there was a great rhetorician,
Longinus by name. According to him the greatness of any writing lies in how far
it echoes the inner Self. The more developed is the soul of a poet the higher
will be the poetic genius. An immature soul can hardly soar very high.
A modern English critic,¹ who appreciated this view, remarked that the
present-day artistic creations are mostly insignificant and futile, for the
modern world is wanting in highly developed souls.            .
Not to speak of a really great soul, we have almost forgotten in these days the
meaning of creation by the inner soul. The source of inspiration nowadays is the
brain or the nerves or a mixture of the two in different proportions.
Intellectual curiosity and nervous excitement and hunger have enveloped the
whole sphere of life, consciousness and being. Anything else of deeper
significance has sunk into the abyss of oblivion. In one word, 'Art for Art's
sake' has been the present-day principle in the field of artistic creation. The
artist does not care for any extrinsic ideal or aim. He finds his ideal and aim
in himself. He grows of himself, he establishes himself and he realises himself
in his own creation. Far from seeking an ideal, even beauty is no longer the aim
of art. What is art? The creation of the artist. Who is the artist? He who
creates himself. Very well; but what does the word 'self' signify? There's the
rub. Everything depends on
  this. In ancient times the word 'self' used to signify either
the Psycqic Being, which is the delegate of the Supreme Self, or the Supreme
Self Itself – "Know Thyself". In modern times 'self' signifies something
exoteric, the surface consciousness acting through the brain and nerves.
The moderns hold that the essence of art and artistic creation consists in
complete expression of one's own self, but like the Virochana of the Upanishad,
who took the body for the Self, they have applied the word 'self' to mean the
consciousness acting through the nerves. But it must be admitted that they have
exceeded Virochana by one step, going either within or above. They have
discovered an intermediate link between the physical sheath and the higher
supra-physical. In ancient times 'self' would always signify the Psychic Being
and never the self-centered body.
The moderns may ask: "Is it obligatory that one should have a great soul in
order to be, a great poet?" In the hoary past it was almost so. Valmiki,
Vyasa and Homer rightly deserve to fall into that category. In his artistic
creation the poet's inner Self comes to the fore. That is why it is said that
the subject-matter and the way of expressing it are nothing but the
real Being in the poet. The outer manifestation of this Being is of course
diverse and manifold. The inner soul of Shakespeare is wide and magnanimous. It
has, as it were, the quality of water. It takes up the form of that very vessel
in which it is put and assumes the colour thereof. Milton's
inner Being represents height, density, weight and seriousness. Dante's
inner Being represents intensity, virility and Tapasya (askesis). Kalidasa's
innerBeing represents beauty, while that of the Upanishadic seers represents
luminosity.
Verily the greatness of the poet is the greatness of the inner consciousness.
And the expression of his inner consciousness is the essence of his poetic
creation. So long as this inner consciousness is vigilant and active in the
poet, his creations and activities never suffer in manners. His creations will
not be vitiated by gross touches. He alone is a great poet whose consciousness
is hardly clouded, although it is said that even 'Homer nods'; to me the lesser
poet is he who at times breaks through the cloud, and a non-poet is he who is
ever strongly shrouded with indelible cloud. 
http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobind\
oAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-7/-16_The%\
20Greatness%20of%20Poetry.htm 
Gulati


________________________________
  From: Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
To: globallistener@...; greenlogic@...;
TheRampaPath@yahoogroups.com; seerseeker@yahoogroups.com;
Wisdom-l@yahoogroups.com; TheBecoming@...; existlist@yahoogroups.com;
dancewithwordstwo@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 16 February 2013 9:39 PM
Subject: [greenlogic] Reply to Kolki Poem / Poem *Eugenics*


 
 
Poem : Eugenics
 
Until it
did hit as inertia of conceit,
Poetry it
was to me.
The inertia
of rest.
 
Spewing
deceptive peace;
Yearning
for price in return;
Price to
comport possessive whim,
Unconditional
and unlimited;
Congealing
into conceit indomitable;
Inertia of
rest it was.
Poetry to me
then;
Until it
did hit as inertia of conceit.
 
A eugenic
purge it soon called for.
This
conceit indomitable.
 
To be the
recessive allele,
It was
bound to dip.
Still in
the garb of bravado though.
This
conceit indomitable.
 
But it was
bound to dip;
Letting the
initiative arrive elsewhere
In allele
dominant.
The uncanny
instrument of natural purge.
 
*Cause in
conceit, no initiative could dwell.
 
Nature
gained, Hitlers lost out.
Oblivion
they were bound for,
Quite
naturally.
They, the
images of conceit.
 
Natural
selection by dream,
They had
contradicted.
Survival of
the wisest,
They had failed
to appreciate.
Still aware
they weren*t
Of Mendel*s
magic.
 
Dominance
of truth so obvious,
They had failed
to perceive;
Even when it
pervaded blood and genes.
 
Still aware
they weren*t
Of Mendel*s
magic.
The magic that
could repaint flowers
And recast
faces.
Even
corporeal inheritance wouldn*t deign
Thenceforth
to be immutable.
 
In egotism
dwelt eugenics vindicated –
Hitlers mused
wistfully;
Until
Buddha*s magnanimity bloomed
Surreptitiously
to thwart.
 
To thwart
this colorful gloom;
This
conceit indomitable.
 
And to turn
it down as the recessive allele.
 
Poetry it
was to me then,
Until it
did hit as inertia terminal.
The inertia
of rest.
 
A eugenic
purge it did ask for soon.

(Bhanu
Padmo)
http://www.bhanupadmo.comYou
may reply this thread upon http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/greenlogic/ 
as well
or consign a copy to greenlogic@...   for extended
discussions.
...........................................................

On Tue, 2/5/13, Global Teacher <globallistener@...> wrote:


Fittest
(Dedicated to an Egalitarian Democratic
World – Deepak Sarkar, www.kolki.com)
<Related
poems:  Free     Best     In
Vain     Harmony     One
World    Universal
Notes     Universal
God     Global Solidarity>
 
Every time I saw a small bird nesting
Having babies without doctors,
nurses, and hospital bills
Surviving and enjoying life in
storms, snow and rain
Without additional clothes, heating
or cooling -
I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!
 
Every time I saw/heard Canadian
Geese flying at night
Alone or as a team for a distant
flight
Navigating towards destination
without compass or light
I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!
 
Every time I watched a small spider
creating web
Out of nothing except own sap and
legs
Then resting in the centre to catch
preys
Enjoying own creation at its best -
I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!
 
Every time a seed germinated in the
soil or water
Grew as plant or trees withstanding
disasters
Shed leaves for the winter only to
be reborn in vigour
I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!
 
Every time I looked at small
sparrows playing in the snow
When I was feeling cozy in heated
home among clothes
I knew humans could survive, but not
the fittest!
 
Fittest are natural knower who
exercise self power
Without unlearning instincts to
technological slave work!
Endless dependency only makes humans
enslaved and weaker
As generations strive for expensive
and competitive future!
 
Birds travelling thousands of miles
without rest
Navigating at night over deserts and
oceans
Even a fruit fly does everything,
more than I crave
Eat, meet, multiply and even fly
without much rest!
 
After I leave -
Many animals and birds will outlive
me
Shrubs and trees I planted
Would be surviving and serving
merrily
Without disturbing and destroying
natural harmony -
Of course, if they are not victim of
modern industry!
 
Thus,
the slogan ‘Survival of the fittest’
Resonates very well with Eugenic1 quest
For aristocrative exploitation of
the masses
With population control whenever
needed -
Encouraging supremacist ideology at
the best!
 
Darwin’s theory is flawed with fundamental mistake
Yet remains unchallenged in royal
heritage  
Discovered while travelling on Royal
H.M.S Beagle
Collecting samples from American and
African Islands
Hypothesised in “Origin of Species”
“The Survival of The Fittest”
Without
realizing evolution doesn’t leave any trace!



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)
#59414 From: "Dick." <somerset_2@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:23 pm
Subject: What are you? 		somerset_2
Send Email Send Email
  
What are you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvSI-v0-Uqk



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59415 From: devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@...>
Date: Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:43 am
Subject: Re: [media_monitor5] [TheBecoming] Hinduism – Religion or Dharma? 		dgulhati
Send Email Send Email
  
What I have gathered so far from the discussion I summarize thus:
The term religion is a western construct that cannot convey the  exact meaning
of dharma. To be a member of a religion is akin to being  a member of a club
where you follow club rules to stay in or else be thrown out. Dharma on the
other hand gives you considerable leeway to follow your individual growth path
so long as it is not in conflict with the growth of others similarly following
their dharma without also coming in conflict with society at large. 
A sampradaya is a variation of a dharmic tradition or path that may ebb or wane
over time, sometimes be totally eclipsed...to be replaced by new sampradayas;
but 'sampradaya' always finds its rationale in the everlasting dharma. 
These two instances here fit neither into the mould of religion, nor of
sampradaya. They find refuge in dharma:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/seerseeker/message/13429
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist/message/59414

Gulati


________________________________
  From: vasant sardesai <vasant_sardesai@...>
To: media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com; "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com"
<thebecoming@yahoogroups.com>; "issuesonline worldwide@yahoogroups.com"
<issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013 11:34 AM
Subject: RE: [media_monitor5] [TheBecoming] Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?


 
It appears that your description of religion is based on these Abrahamic
religions;the fact is that Christianity and Islam are not religions but cults
even though they call it as religion. Dharma is a way of life which includes
religion.
 
V.S.Sardesai

--- On Wed, 20/2/13, Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...> wrote:


>From: Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...>
>Subject: RE: [media_monitor5] [TheBecoming] Hinduism – Religion or Dharma? [1
Attachment]
>To: "media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com" <media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com>,
"TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <thebecoming@yahoogroups.com>, "issuesonline
worldwide@yahoogroups.com" <issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com>
>Date: Wednesday, 20 February, 2013, 11:10 PM
>
>
> 
>Kumar Jee
>Namaste!
>Please do read the posting carefully before opining. Otherwise, you did not
understand what I wrote. The whole point is, 'Dharma is not religion.' Dharma is
like joining school. Religion is like joining army. Please read my earlier
posting carefully twice. In case you miss it first time. Let me attach an
article on the issue AGAIN.
>Tilak
>
>
>
>________________________________
> To: media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com; thebecoming@yahoogroups.com;
issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com
>From: kumar_8134@...
>Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 07:35:18 -0800
>Subject: Re: [media_monitor5] [TheBecoming] Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?
>
> 
>
>
>>>Religion is like joining an army. Once you join, you loose your
individuality, must believe and do whatever been told. It always looks own
members as brothers, and others as enemies. Only your religion is true, all
others are evil. Such doctrines and practices always leads to violence. >>
> 
>I beg to differ. Following a religion or faith, one does not lose his
individuality, and need not follow the edicts told to you (esp. Hindu-s who are
free to follow the entire sprectrum of aetheism to full time piety and prayers),
and no Hindu thinks followers of other faiths as nemies!! Otherwise the Arab
traders would not have been welcomed in Kodungalloor in Kerala and given land
and funds to build a mosque nor the Christian Missionaries welcomed and allowed
to propogate the faith by the King Zamorin of Calicut(Kozhikode) by providing
all facilities?
> 
>Hinduism never attacked other faiths or invaded any Country or grabbed the
wealth and women of others. Hindu-s have only acted defensively when attacked to
the breaking point and even then pardoned the attackers repeatedly until they
were killed()Prithivraj Chauhan)
>
>
>From: Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...>
>To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <thebecoming@yahoogroups.com>;
"media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com" <media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com>; "issuesonline
worldwide@yahoogroups.com" <issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 8:21 PM
>Subject: RE: [media_monitor5] [TheBecoming] Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?
>
> 
>Sardesai Jee Namaste! India and all over the world. Do not take my word for it.
Ask any member of any Sampradaya and any religion, "Do you claim that only yours
is true and others are wrong?" Let them answer. Tilak
>To: media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com; thebecoming@yahoogroups.com;
issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com From: vasant_sardesai@... Date:
Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:46:42 +0800 Subject: RE: [media_monitor5] [TheBecoming]
Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?  
>Where do you find the difference between Sampradaya and religion as shown by
you?
> 
>V.S.Sardesai --- On Tue, 19/2/13, Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...> wrote:
>
>>From: Tilak Shrestha <tilakbs@...>
>>Subject: RE: [media_monitor5] [TheBecoming] Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?
>>To: "media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com" <media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com>,
"TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <thebecoming@yahoogroups.com>, "issuesonline
worldwide@yahoogroups.com" <issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com>
>>Date: Tuesday, 19 February, 2013, 9:09 PM
>>
>>
>> 
>>Dear all: Namaste! Sampradaya and religion are not same. Similarity is only
superficial.  Sampradaya is like joining a social organization. It has certain
philosophy, practices, and culture. However, it is neither militant nor condemns
others. Religion is like joining an army. Once you join, you loose your
individuality, must believe and do whatever been told. It always looks own
members as brothers, and others as enemies. Only your religion is true, all
others are evil. Such doctrines and practices always leads to violence. The root
of Sampradaya is Dharma or a way of inner progress. Gurus are there to teach
what they know. The root of Religion is tribal survival and conquest by
militarizing society. Moses or Muhammad are for political command and control of
Jews and Muslims. They are not there teaching any spiritual values. Do you know
any? Thanks, Tilak
>>To: TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com; media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com;
issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com From: kumar_8134@... Date: Tue, 19
Feb 2013 05:23:20 -0800 Subject: [media_monitor5] Re: [TheBecoming] Fw: Hinduism
– Religion or Dharma? 
>>1. Sampradaya in Sanskrit means what had been advised by (Sadupadesa or good
advice) a Guru to the follower orally.
>>"Vardhanam Chhedanedha Dwey Aanandanasabhajaney
>> Aapracchanadhey Mnaaya:Sampradaya: kshayey kshiya" Amarakosa Thritheeya
Kanda- Sankeernavarga:
>> 
>>Sampradaya literally means tradition followed by generation afetr generation,
transferred orally.
>> 
>>On the other hand, Matha: means doctrine, opinion or view which is closer to
religion as used to refer Hindumatha!..etc.
>> 
>>2. Dharma means established order, usage, custom prescription,, rule, duty,
virtue, moral, merit, good works, virtue, right, justice, law,..etc. e.g.
Yamadharma means Judge of the dead and Prajapati
>>From: Deen Khandelwal <Ddk1007@...>
>>To: "TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com" <TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com>
>>Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 9:16 PM
>>Subject: Re: [TheBecoming] Fw: Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?
>>
>> 
>>Here are a few comments as I understand.
>>1.    Right translation of word religion in Hindi is sampradaaya.
>>2.    Two meanings of word dharma can help a lot in understanding Hinduism.
 Duty and nature.  Both are eternal. Thus Hinduism is eternal, not other
religions.
>>3.    Religion is a path that you choose or you design for yourself for your
spiritual goals or for intensifying your relationship with the divine/god. Sent
from my iPad
>>On Feb 15, 2013, at 2:15 PM, MOHAN DADLANI <mohandadlani@...> wrote:
>> 
>>>Dharma is a part of a religion
>>>Religion includes philosophy, mythology and rituals etc
>>>Religion is like an ocean. Dharma is an essential aspect.
>>>Regards
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>
>>>From: Ram Angod
>>>Sent: 15 Feb 2013 15:00:13 GMT
>>>To: TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com
>>>Subject: Re: [TheBecoming] Fw: Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>It boggles my mind to think that this confusion with translation persevered
in India for over 150 years and there has been no serious attempt to fix it,
considering the difference is as big as between a cow and a chicken! What other
mega idealogical delusions have we acquiesced to over this same period?
>>>On 2013-02-14, at 9:22 PM, Leena Mehendale wrote:
>>> 
>>>>It is understood by some that DHARMA is not the proper translation of
RELIGION and vice-versa. However this translation has been in vogue since nearly
150 years -- eversince the British came here  and established the RULE OF
ENGLISH over our minds.Now most COMMON PEOPLE understand the two words as
SYNONYMOUS. Words have a very powerful methodology of creating MENTAL ATTITUDES.
>>>> Hence, unless we COIN a new word in Hindi for RELIGION and a new word in
English for DHARMA, people will continue to treat these two words as a
translation of each other and the di-harmony and confusion coming out from this
inapt translation will continue. 
>>>>On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:25 AM, vavamenon <vavamenon@...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--- On Wed, 3/11/09, vavamenon <vavamenon@...> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>From: vavamenon <vavamenon@...>
>>>>>>>Subject: Re: [VRI] Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?
>>>>>>>To: vedic_research_institute@yahoogroups.com,
hinduism_environment@yahoogroups.com
>>>>>>>Date: Wednesday, March 11, 2009, 4:29 PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The following comparisin between DHARMA AND RELIGIONS would be apt in
this regard :
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>   Dharma Religion
>>>>>>>1  It was/is determined by the Creator.   It is founded by a human being.
>>>>>2 It is eternal. It has no beginning and no end too. We cannot live without
it. It was born on a certain date. What takes birth must die too, and hence, it
will not exist for ever. We lived without it and we shall again live without it.
>>>>>3  It doesn't go through any modification/ revision.  It needs to be
modified with the passage of time.
>>>>>4 It is applicable to all human beings irrespective of their gender, color,
culture, national origin, etc. It favors none. Every human being has fundamental
right to heed and follow it.  It originates from a mortal human being, and
therefore, it's likely to be preferential to a section of the human population.
It may have discriminatory clauses.
>>>>>5 The world is dependent on it like it depends on the sun, air, water, etc.
It is as basic as anything we can imagine. The day dharma vanishes from the
world, the world will vanish too. Dharanat iti dharmah, i.e. dharma holds the
creation, the creator being the Dharmaraja. It is a fabrication of a mortal
human being who is not likely to be all-knowing and as benevolent as the Cosmic
Spirit is. It can certainly not be a basic thing because the humanity managed
without it before it came into being.
>>>>>6 It is so natural that a few wise people can sit together to discuss and
search in their conscience what our dharma is. It requires an extraneous
authority for its determination.
>>>>>7 It has universal acceptance. It can never have universal acceptance.
>>>>>8 It has nothing that contradicts the laws of nature because the dharma and
the laws of nature originate from the same source, the creator. It often
contradicts the laws of the nature.
>>>>>9  Its purpose is to guide the humanity towards righteousness for our
overall personal and collective good.  Its purpose may be the selfish interest
of an individual or a group of individuals.
>>>>>10  It brings universal love, brotherhood and peace among the entire
humanity as parents desire in their family.  It often causes conflicts and
strife leading to wars among followers of different religions.
>>>>>11  It can be understood by an intelligent person through his/her
intellectual faculties. It discourages us to use our intellectual faculties. It
requires blind faith in a human being.
>>>>>12  It appeals to the natural human compassion and love. It may give rise
to hatred among its followers towards the followers of other religions.
>>>>>13 It encourages us to know and understand the Cosmic Spirit and to be in
communion with Him directly.  It gives importance to a human being, past or
present and positions that man between us and the Cosmic Spirit. Thus, it
creates an artificial distance between 'me and God.'
>>>>>14 One is encouraged to maintain pure innocence to see and enjoy every
event as a miracle, such as a bud blossoming into a flower.  It brings in false
concepts of miracles and thereby snatches away our pure innocence, encouraging
irrationality, blind faith, conceit and hypocrisy.
>>>>>15 There is considerable individual freedom for personal growth provided it
doesn't hurt others.  There is no freedom because there is fear that an
individual may become equal or even superior to the person who founded that
religion.
>>>>>16 One can follow dharma anytime, anywhere at any age.  One must go through
certain rituals to be initiated into a religion. There may not be an appropriate
guideline applicable to every place and at all times.
>>>>>17 If dharma sees its decline then … …..religions flourish and create
havoc for the noble people.
>>>>>18 Dharmais one and only one. Religions are many.
>>>>>19 Dharmagives rise to higher moral and intellectual stature.  Religions
may cause decay in moral and intellectual stature.
>>>>>20 Dharmais a unifying force towards a global village of the entire
humanity.  Religions are divisive that the entire earth can become a
battlefield.
>>>>> 
>>>>>This comparison chart is saved from some mail I received.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>anilbhanot <abhanot@...> wrote:
>>>>>Dr Raj Pandit Sharma ji
>>>>> 
>>>>>Brilliant as ever! Thank you for that explanantion and analysis. I did
suspect that the 3 not included would be covered by the 10 which you have
pointed out so correctly.
>>>>> 
>>>>>It is not that the 3 kaxan were not there in Dharma but the sub-laxan's 3
are merely in religion. The article was wrong to suggest that Manu did not
include them in Dharma.
>>>>> 
>>>>>anil bhanot
>>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>>From:Dr Sharma
>>>>>To:'anilbhanot' ; 'ramans shriman' ; 'pratinidhi sabha' ; 'Swami Agnivesh'
; 'photografics bhatia' ; 'Anand Kumar Arya Bangal' ; 'arun soni' ; 'arya
samajon,ine'
>>>>>Cc:aaam@... ; adkum35@... ; akshaykapoor1973@...
; akv@... ; amarerry@... ; amorsty@... ; anil@...
; animalahimsa@... ; arun1@... ; aryagan@... ;
aryaguyana@... ; aryasamaj@... ; aryasamaj@... ;
aryasamajlondon@... ; aryavrt39@... ; aryayouth@... ;
aryayouthgroup@yahoogroups.com ; asharanirai@... ; asoni@... ; 'ajay
arya' ; 'arya veer' ; 'Ashwini' ; 'Delhi Sabha' ; 'Dr. Ashok Arua' ;
bhaktivedanta.manor@... ; Unitedhindufront@googlegroups.com
>>>>>Sent:Tuesday, February 05, 2008 10:48 PM
>>>>>Subject:RE: dharma vs religions
>>>>> 
>>>>>Namaskar
>>>>> 
>>>>>Anil ji the ten attributes (lakshan) of Dharma are described in this verse
from the Smriti
>>>>> 
>>>>>“dhriti kshama damo stute yai shaucamindri nigrah
>>>>>dhividya satyakrodho dashakam dharma lakshanam”
>>>>> 
>>>>>1.  Dhriti-patience, tolerance
>>>>>2.  Kshama-forgiveness
>>>>>3.  Dama-self control
>>>>>4.  Asteya non-stealing, honesty integrity
>>>>>5.  Shaucha-cleanliness and purity
>>>>>6.  Indriya-nigrah-restraint over the senses
>>>>>7.Dhi-wisdom
>>>>>8.  Vidya-knowledge
>>>>>9.  Satya-truth
>>>>>10.  Akrodha-calmness, equanimity, non anger
>>>>> 
>>>>>I understand that there is an implicit indication from these ten attributes
that ahinsa, prem (love) and Shanti (peace and tranquillity) are included.
>>>>> 
>>>>>“Ahinsa” is often misunderstood in Sanatan Dharma and I would like to
offer my analysis.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ahinsa is a Sanskrit term and concept, which is central to Sanatana
Dharma. Now the etymology:
>>>>>
>>>>>ahinsA = a + hinsaa
>>>>>a = Not or non-,
>>>>>hinsaa = MALICIOUS violence.
>>>>>
>>>>>It is NOT just violence.
>>>>>
>>>>>For example, a Peregrine Falcon swooping on a field rabbit or a bird
carrying a worm to its nest to feed its children most certainly constitutes
violence. However, it does NOT constitute hinsaa.
>>>>>
>>>>>Malice or malice aforethought is an essential ingredient of hinsaa. Thus,
an action may itself be violent, but when necessary and carried out with total
detachment it does not contravene dharma.
>>>>>
>>>>>This is the concept enshrined as 'mens rae ' in the British justice system.
To qualify as murder, not only the killing has to be established but also a
deliberate intent to kill must be established.
>>>>> 
>>>>>"hinsA" or violence, injury, harm etc. is categorised in three ways,
>>>>>
>>>>>1. Mansik (mental) as `" bearing malice” (mens rea-guilty mind)
>>>>>2. Vaachik (verbal), as "abusive language"
>>>>>3. Karmik, (actual) as `" acts of violence”
>>>>>
>>>>>That is why it is important to realise that 'ahinsA' does not equate to
"non-violence" or inaction, just as 'dharma' does not equate to 'religion'.
>>>>> 
>>>>>Derivation of 'hinsA in my humble opinion is from the Sanskrit verb 'hins'
meaning to "injure, kill or harm,” e.g. hinsati-he injures. In the itihaas
such as Mahabharata, it appears as 'hinasti', which may be interpreted as "to
degrade.”
>>>>> 
>>>>>Prem (love) emanates from tolerance and forgiveness, which are two of the
lakshan described by Manuji and shanti or peace will come if one observes all
the attributes of Dharma.
>>>>> 
>>>>>What the author of the article has failed to recognise is that just as all
other colours are derived from the primary colours, similarly these ten
attributes are the building blocks of all Dharma and all other qualities will
arise (such as love, compassion, peace etc.) by following Dharma.
>>>>> 
>>>>>The other religions have not invented these basic parameters, they simply
revamp them and present them to unwitting followers as something new, whereas in
reality they are the original tenets of Dharma laid down by aadi Manu.
>>>>> 
>>>>>Raj Pandit Sharma
>>>>>--- On Wed, 3/11/09, mega_irreverant-he@...
<mega_irreverant-he@...> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>From: mega_irreverant-he@... <mega_irreverant-he@...>
>>>>>>Subject: [VRI] Hinduism – Religion or Dharma?
>>>>>>To: vedic_research_institute@yahoogroups.com,
hinduism_environment@yahoogroups.com
>>>>>>Date: Wednesday, March 11, 2009, 2:31 PM
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hinduism – Religion or Dharma? 01/03/2009 11:06:04 By Sunil Tuppale
Growing up in Bharat, I have heard people proclaiming out time and again that
“All Religions are the same and they teach the same thing”. Elders,
teachers, great men of Bharat, leaders and intellectuals, all of them have been
drumming the same tone. Naturally I believed in it till I could think for
myself. I have seen that it is only in Bharat one hears the above expression. I
have lived in the West for quite some time and I must say I haven’t seen any
staunch Christian say the same. I have seen that practicing Christians believe
that they alone are right in their beliefs and everyone else who is not a
Christian have no chance of being saved. The same goes for Muslims. I have some
Muslim friends who are pious and committed to Islam. But they are sincere in
their belief that they alone are the chosen people and that they have the last
word on Religion, Truth, God and that
  all non-Muslims are doomed. It made me wonder why are Hindus so keen on
speaking for the other religions? I have heard Hindus eagerly quote the mantra
from the Rig Veda “Ekam sad vipra bahudha vadanti” to mean that truth is one
and that truth is called as Allah or Jesus by different religions. They don’t
quote the entire mantra. They quote only a fourth of the mantra. The entire
mantra is Indram mitram varunam agnim ahuhu atho divya sa suparno garutman ekam
sad vipra bahudha vadanti agnim yamam matarisvanam ahuhu (Rigveda 1.164.46)
‘They hail him as Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni or the Divine Garuda. Truth is
one and the Wise ones refer to the truth by different names as Agni, Yama, and
Matarisvan.’ To use this verse to say that all religions are the same is a
blatant misuse of the profound verse. To say all religions are the same, one
must have studied deeply all the different religions. I have seen that people
who claim that all religions are
  the same have rarely studied other religions. They are just parroting that
statement they heard from someone and it is not a conclusion that they arrived
at by their own study, understanding and conviction. Also I wish to raise a
fundamental question.Is Hinduism also a religion like Christianity and Islam?
Why should we consider religions on par with Hinduism? Before I begin, I want to
decipher the word religion. A word means one thing in one part of the world
whereas in another part of the world, the same word means something totally
different. Take the instance of the word secularism. In the West it means the
separation of the Church and the State. Where as in Bharat, the definition of
secularism is "Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava" which means all religions will be
considered equal and given equal preference. Thus the meaning of secularism is
totally distorted in Bharat. And particularly secularism in the current context
implies animosity towards anything
  Hindu. What does the word religion connote in the Western world? It connotes
that a religion should be monotheistic. In other words they should believe in
One God. It should have a Prophet and that Prophet is reckoned to have been the
person who started the religion at a particular point in history. So the three
main religions we have are Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Of course there are
other religions like Zoroastrianism, Shintoism, Bahai and so on. But for the
purpose of this discussion let us consider the Monotheistic religions,
particularly Christianity and Islam because they are the only two religions
aggressively competing for converts among the entire humanity. The rest of the
religions are non converting and therefore non aggressive and non invasive.
Judaism is a non converting religion. In other words, you can’t convert to
become a Jew. Either you are born a Jew or you are not a Jew. But Christianity
and Islam thrive on conversion. In
  fact they feel that if they don’t convert, their statuses are in peril. So
they have perfected the art of conversion. Another feature of the monotheistic
religions is that they all believe that this One God, who they claim created the
world, is located up in Heaven. And all the monotheistic religions have a ‘Day
of Judgment’. In case of Christianity and Islam in particular, the theology is
imposed so strongly that people are told that if one doesn’t accept their
doctrines, one would have to be punished with eternal damnation or hell fire and
all believers of the respective doctrines would go to Heaven and stay with God
forever. That is what is meant by the word Salvation. They all believe in one
birth and you have to proclaim your faith and adherence to the particular
doctrines of your faith in this birth or you will burn in the eternal pit fire
of hell. And there is no chance of  redemption. In the East, the word religion
has a different sense
  all together. We call it Dharma. There is no English equivalent for the word
Dharma. It is loosely translated as religion. But it is definitely not religion
in the Western sense. Hinduism is Sanatana Dharma. Sanatana means timeless.
Meaning there was never a time when it was not. Dharma is a profound word. It is
also called Vaidika Dharma because it is based on the Vedas. The
Vyakhya(elaboration ) of Dharma is “Dharyate iti Dharma”. That which upholds
everything is Dharma. There is a Cosmic order in the Universe. That order is
manifest as everything in this Universe. That which holds this vast and
wonderful universe with all its millions of stars, galaxies, planets with all
the things and beings in harmony is this Rita, the Cosmic order. The Cosmic
order includes the Physical, Physiological, Psychological and Spiritual order.
All these are the manifestations of Bhagavan. For Hindus, Bhagavan (The Lord) is
present in the form of the Cosmic order. In
  fact Bhagavan is never separate from this Universe. The Shastras (scriptures)
say that all that is here is Bhagavan.“Isavasyam idam sarvam” meaning
Bhagavan pervades everything like Akasha (space). Nothing is separate from
Akasha. The Creator and the created are non separate like the spider and the
web, like the dreamer and the dream. That which holds this Rita, this cosmic
order is Dharma. So to me, Dharma is a Way of Life, Values of Life and
Expression of Life that is in keeping with the Vision and understanding of
Isavasyam idam sarvam. Being committed to Dharma means having this grand vision
of life that all that is there IS Bhagavan and expressing that vision and
understanding through our thoughts, words and deeds. That in essence constitutes
a Dharmic life. A Dharmic person never goes against the Natural Cosmic Order.
Why? Because if I rub against the order, I will get rubbed in the process. If I
hurt somebody, I may get away from man made
  laws because my brother in law is in the Police Department, but I will not be
able to escape from the Cosmic law. It is this sense of Dharma that should be
the basis of all our endeavors. I should not hurt anybody or anything because I
don’t want to be hurt and also by hurting anything or anybody I am hurting
something of which I am a part. I should not steal because I don’t want
anybody to steal from me. The Mahabharatha speaks of a time when Dharma ruled
the world when it says Na Rajyam Naiva Rajasit Na Dando na ca Dandikaha
Dharmenaiva Praja Sarvaha Rakshantisma Parasparam The verse above means that
there was a time long ago where there was no Kingdom nor a King and no
punishments nor a person who would administer punishments. Everybody protected
each other with a sense of Dharma. In other words, Dharma was the protector of
the people. Everybody acted according to Dharma. So that is our notion of
Dharma. Secondly, our Dharma was not founded by an
  individual Prophet like the Monotheistic religions. Bhagavan Krishna or
Bhagavan Rama did not start our Dharma. They were born into our Dharma. They
were born as Vaidikas. I have had a few people in the West ask me when our
‘religion’ started. I would respond to them saying that the question is like
asking “When did Physics start?” Did the laws of Physics start on a
particular day? Isn’t it that the laws of Physics have always been there as
long as this creation has been? Similarly, our Dharma has always been throughout
the myriad cycles of manifestation (Shristi) and dissolution (Pralaya). So it is
not that our Dharma originated at some particular point in History. Hence it is
called Sanatana. It has always been there. It was manifested by Bhagavan at the
time of Shristi and it becomes unmanifest at Pralaya. Thirdly, our concept of
Heaven is not where you go and stay permanently. Our Shastras tell us that
heaven is a temporary place one goes
  to enjoy the fruits of one’s good Karmas (Punyas). It is said “Kshine Punye
Martya Lokam Vishanti”. After ones Punyas are exhausted, one will have to go
back to Martya loka or the earth where one gets another chance to work for
Moksha (liberation from cycle of births and deaths) which is not salvation.
Salvation means you are condemned and then you need to be salvaged. Our
scriptures do not consider us as condemned. It refers to us as “Amritasya
Putraha” meaning immortal children. Moksha is the outcome of Self Knowledge.
Dharma doesn’t divide humanity into believers and infidels as religions do. We
also have amongst us those who are Nastikas. Nastikas are those who don’t
accept the Vedas as a valid means of knowledge. The Nastikas include the Baudhas
(Buddhists), Jainas (Jains) and Charvaks (materialists) . Vaidika Dharma
recognizes that all forms of worship of the Lord to be true as elucidated in the
Rig Vedik Mantra above. Since the Lord
  is not separate from this Universe, we can invoke the lord in any form.
Pushpadantacharya’s Shiva Mahimna Stotram says Ruchinam Vaichitryat Ruju
Kutila Nana Patha Jusha Nrinam Eko Gamya Tvam Asi Paya Samarnavaiva According to
ones disposition, one takes to a form of worship or a path of Sadhana (Spiritual
Practice) which may be direct or meandering and all those paths are valid as
long as they are ultimately the worship of Bhagavan which in turn leads us to
Atma Gyan or Self Knowledge. Bhagavan also says in the Bhagavad Gita “Ye Yatha
Mam Prapadyante, TansThataiva Bhajamyaham” (Ch 4 Verse 11) which means “In
whatever form people worship me, in that form I respond to the devotees and
bless them”. That is why we have so many forms. We can invoke and worship the
lord in whatever form we wish to, according to our taste and disposition. And we
are not idol worshippers as the others like to accuse us. We are Bhagavan
worshippers. We worship Bhagavan
  in the idol. So we have all the different panthas (paths) each specializing in
the worship of Bhagavan in one form or the other. Thus we have the six main
recognized forms of worship according to Bhagavan Bashyakara Acharya Shankara
which includes Shaiva (worshippers of Bhagavan Shiva), Shakta(worshippers of
Bhagavathi or Goddess), Vaishnava (worshippers of Bhagavan Vishnu),
Ganapathya(worshipp ers of Bhagavan Ganapathy), Kaumarya(worshipper s of
BhagavanKarthikeya) and Saurya(worshippers of BhagavanSurya) . Many forms of
worship are of recent origin and we accept them also as long as they lead us to
the Knowledge of the Atma (Self). Above all, Dharma cannot be imposed. It can be
revealed or taught, but never imposed by force. Again, to quote from the
Mahabharatha ‘Dharmasya Tattvam Nihitam Guhayam’ which means the expression
of Dharma comes from within a person. It can never be imposed. Religions are
almost always imposed on people either by lure
  or by force. So when you consider these, it is not difficult to recognize the
profound differences between religions and Dharma. How can we consider Hindu
Dharma as a religion? How can we accept that Dharma and religions are the same?
People who claim that All Religions are same are ignorant of Religions as well
as of Dharma. I would like to say that there may be many religions, but there is
only one Dharma and that is the Sanatana Dharma or Vaidika Dharma or Hindu
Dharma. We are belittling this Dharma by calling it religion or even worse,
calling it faith. Religion when elaborated properly according to the Western
concept turns out to be dogmatic and cannot be accepted as valid or cannot be
compared to Sanatana Hindu Dharma which is vast, profound and timeless.
Acknowledgements “Foundations of Dharma”– Shri Swami Iswarananda Giri
“What is Hinduism?” – Shri Swami Dayananda Saraswathi “Hindu view of
Christianity and Islam” – Shri Ram
  Swarup “Defence of Hindu Soceity” – Shri Sita Ram Goel
http://www.haindavakeralam.com/HkPage.aspx?PAGEID=8285&SKIN=D--
ईशावास्यमिदं सर्वं यत्किंच
जगत्यां जगत्। तेन त्यक्तेन
भुञ्जीथाः मा गृधः
कस्यस्विद्धनम्।। for learning easy HINDI TYPING
click here
>>>>http://bhasha-hindi.blogspot.in/2010/09/blog-post_30.html
>>>>
>>>>Leena Mehendale Member CAT, Mumbai Gulistan Building (LIC) Fort, Mumbai
400001 Ph (off) 022-22072678 Mo. 09869039054
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)
#59416 From: "Dick." <somerset_2@...>
Date: Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:46 am
Subject: Thanks for all the contacts 		somerset_2
Send Email Send Email
  
Thanks for all the contacts

Thanks for all the in-depth emails and contacts which came over-night.
It would take an age to reply to them all individually and in detail,
but I have read them all. In the days before computers and the web it
was usual to find at least a dozen letters waiting on the mat when going
downstairs of a morning, and each had to be replied to individually
(enough to give one writers elbow; and it cost enough in postage stamps
too). But when cyberspace came along and the website wet up it was usual
to have between two and three hundred emails every day; and before one
could answer a fraction of them it was the next day, and another great
pile of them waiting (scary). But this of course was never anticipated.
So, it just goes to show something or other.

Just a quick note about psychic experiences here. No, I do not regard
these as rubbish or illusory, for all human experience is real
experience, and most psychic experiences reveal much to us. One even
saved my life once. But they should not be mistaken for mystical
experiences. In simplistic terms Psychic Experiences are about what we
can do and various powers and potentials which we have. But Mystic
experiences are associated with what we are and the essential depth
nature of our being. Transcendent experiences are transcendent of TIME
and SPACE.  ONLY that which comes from Eternity can return to it 
you cannot even take your memories there with you, for they are made in
Time and Space. Nothing constructed in Time and Space can reach
Eternity. One cannot even THINK in the ground of BEING. So it is
Childs-play sorting out the Psychic from the Mystical. We are
constructed of THREE parts, a Trinity of Emanation. The Essential
Consciousness in the Timeless Ground of Being, then comes the Psyche and
Subconscious; and then the third part is the Incarnate Temporal form and
the personality (ego, as some like to call it). And we can and do have
experiences from all three levels of our Being. Some Major ones and many
minor or mini ones. But there is no such thing as a human experiences
which is not a human experience. So, we should STUDY all of our parts,
not just one or two of them. But to go into all this in detail requires
a book; and I have already done that :- )  You cannot get it into a
letter or an email.

As for SYBOLS (which were mentioned) then I have nothing against them,
they can be very useful. I even invented one myself. The Encircled
Saltire Cross. I first saw it on an old stone up on Exmoor (The Culbone
Stone) it is the only one  in the world like it, and nobody knows what
it represents. But I thought it would be ideal as a symbol for the mind
and consciousness of man encapsulating both Time and Eternity. So I got
it put up on the website. (X)

Anyway, tis my wife's birthday today (twenty one again) so I had
best get on with things now. Tis great having five grown up kids though,
for they can do most of the work as the old war horse is getting tired
and weary now. These carcases are only made for a lifetime :- )  Have a
nice day. PS. I have put up what will be my last uTube video. It is
about the harmony of the Observer and the Observed. Show them to your
kids as food  for thought.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8ox4DBZRUQ
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8ox4DBZRUQ>

Dick Richardson





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)
Messages 59387 - 59416 of 59785   Oldest  |  < Older  |  Newer >  |  Newest
Add to My Yahoo!      XML What's This?
Copyright 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines NEW - Help