True enough, but you said "Man cannot live in matter." Man can live in matter, they simply can't live forever.
Created by vs. Descended from?
- Thread starter Carcano
- Start date
True enough, but you said "Man cannot live in matter." Man can live in matter, they simply can't live forever.
I didn't realize I was under any obligation to do so. My comment was in response to yours, not hers. And yours didn't address the full thrust of her claim--"The fall happened because..."--but rather the bit about man not being able to live on God alone. My response really has nothing to do with hers at all, nor should you expect it to.
If you'd like to address what I said, feel free.
Just because something is stated in an old text or by some person, doesn't mean it is true, or that it is to be regarded as true within the context of a conversation like this.
Again, you are talking about the inherently unwilling servant. As if you are, again, extrapolating from the example of ordinary human servants and human masters, to divine matters.
That doesn't work.
No, you should look it up. Since you seem to think that God sets the Universe in motion, but then doesn't interact with it anymore.
It's not enough. It doesn't explain the pre-Fall situation.
Sure. What's your point?
In that case, you're saing that even before the Fall, the person could be in illusion!!!!!!!
And you're also saying that someone who knows he is a servant of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, could fall!
Do you even realize what you are suggesting????
If I knew that my master is someone whose land and crops are not subject to droughts, floods, fires or thieves, whose funds are not subject to inflation, whose cattle is not subject to disease and death, whose property cannot be lost due to envious heirs or gambled away, who can ensure me with a job for as long as I shall live - if I knew all that, and still chose to betray and leave such a master, then I would have to be one utter idiot. By inherent, God-given nature so, not by mistake or temporary poor judgment.
No, I refuse to believe such a thing is even remotely possible. What you are suggesting is utterly repugnant, and is character assassination against God.
Yet all too often, you resort to it.
Like when you argue that it is possible that a perfetly obedient, perfectly knowledgeable servant could one day come up with the idea to disobey.
But she is one of those super-advanced beings who can find total happiness in matter!
Currently I am thriving in matter, thank you very much! After my life is over (death) THEN WHAT? I do not know. Does anyone here? Like everyone else, I wonder, I imagine but alas, I just do not know. For me the possibilities are endless even the possibility of nothingness.
Would you care to share with us the secret of thriving and enjoying in matter?
Damn Wynn look around, even with all of the terrible events that occur, all the problems we have to overcome as a civilization, I get to be alive and witness this miracle.I get to explore as much as my intellect, my economics and my will desires. So much to learn in such a small amount of time. For me it is wondrous and if I need to thank someone or some THING at the end of my time I will gladly do so.
wynn,
I'm not suggesting it's ''truth''.
It answers your questions. If you're not satisfied with what it says, then go elsewhere to get you questions answered.
No. You are.
Where did I say this?
If it's not enough, then there's nothing I can do.
Either you accept what the scriptures say as an answer to your questions, or don't.
Then you have some idea of what ''desire'' is.
So why ask questions about something that is inherent to you?
No I'm not. That is your version of it.
Read it all again, and if you think that is what I said, then point it out, don't just make empty claims.
No I didn't. I said the exact opposite.
???
Who say's ''they choose to betray'' and ''leave'' their liberated state?
So what do you suggest occurs?
I'm not arguing anything. Go look in the scriptures and see for yourself.
If you don't want to get answers from scriptures, then go look elsewhere.
jan.
I'm not suggesting it's ''truth''.
It answers your questions. If you're not satisfied with what it says, then go elsewhere to get you questions answered.
No. You are.
Where did I say this?
If it's not enough, then there's nothing I can do.
Either you accept what the scriptures say as an answer to your questions, or don't.
Then you have some idea of what ''desire'' is.
So why ask questions about something that is inherent to you?
No I'm not. That is your version of it.
Read it all again, and if you think that is what I said, then point it out, don't just make empty claims.
No I didn't. I said the exact opposite.
???
Who say's ''they choose to betray'' and ''leave'' their liberated state?
So what do you suggest occurs?
I'm not arguing anything. Go look in the scriptures and see for yourself.
If you don't want to get answers from scriptures, then go look elsewhere.
jan.
well my response was a response to hers - not yours. Given that you just kind of jumped in, I f took it for granted that you were at least aware of the context, even if your view may be somewhat different from hers.
:shrug:
well for a start, if you are willing to entertain a possibility other than nothingness after your death, the playing field has just opened up quite remarkably compared to your earlier comments ... (IOW we are no longer talking about "just another option" that doesn't distinguish itself in any meaningful manner from the myriad of other so-called options material existence affords)
I doesn't answer my questions. Although at this point, I am curious how come some people think it does.
When you say things like this:
Having desires doesn't automatically make them wrong or criminal.
You yet have to explain the pre-Fall situation and how a pre-Fall person can come to envy God.
You have said plenty about post-Fall, but provided no reasoning for the Fall.
Again, then you still need to offer some explanation for the pre-Fall situation.
How else do they fall then?
What else is their true nature, if not a liberated one?
I don't know.
But a scenario in which it is posited that jivas are evil by nature and so can choose to fall, just doesn't make sense; other than if we are also to believe that God, in His infinite wisdom and goodness, has parts and parcels of Himself who choose to be evil by nature or who are evil by nature.
Again: I doesn't answer my questions. Although at this point, I am curious how come some people think it does.
See, there's the rub: the materialists refuse to explain how come they have learned to enjoy in materialistic pursuits; some theists refuse to explain the logistics of the Original Fall; etc..
There are many things I don't understand. One of them is how come some people are content with explanations of the Fall as given in some theisms. How can they be, and I can't?
You didn't answer my request.
wynn,
It does answer your questions but you aren't satisfied with what it say's.
I'm sorry, but I'm non the wiser.
What are you talking about?
I've explained it already. It's not my problem that you think the explanations aren't enough.
Read what I wrote, it's all in there.
They fall because they want to enjoy independently of God. You can understand that because you yourself have desires.
Their ''true nature'' is sat - cit - ananda (eternity - knowledge - bliss),.
So what are you arguing for?
Either accept it, or not.
Read above.
It does answer your questions, but what you mean is you're not satisfied with the answers.
It's not just about ''being content'', it's about understanding your own experiences without bias. You are trying to understand things intellectually (probably because you think that's what it is to be intelligent), meaning you discard your own experiences. The scriptures do not mish mash with hypothesis, or theory, it simply tells it as it is. Once you can identify your own experiences, they will connect to what the scriptures show. The more self-realised you become, the more the scriptures reveals to you. It is entirely interactive.
Such cultivation is not dependent on reading or understanding scriptures. The scriptures are there because we, in this age, need them.
jan.
It does answer your questions but you aren't satisfied with what it say's.
I'm sorry, but I'm non the wiser.
What are you talking about?
I've explained it already. It's not my problem that you think the explanations aren't enough.
Read what I wrote, it's all in there.
They fall because they want to enjoy independently of God. You can understand that because you yourself have desires.
Their ''true nature'' is sat - cit - ananda (eternity - knowledge - bliss),.
So what are you arguing for?
Either accept it, or not.
Read above.
It does answer your questions, but what you mean is you're not satisfied with the answers.
It's not just about ''being content'', it's about understanding your own experiences without bias. You are trying to understand things intellectually (probably because you think that's what it is to be intelligent), meaning you discard your own experiences. The scriptures do not mish mash with hypothesis, or theory, it simply tells it as it is. Once you can identify your own experiences, they will connect to what the scriptures show. The more self-realised you become, the more the scriptures reveals to you. It is entirely interactive.
Such cultivation is not dependent on reading or understanding scriptures. The scriptures are there because we, in this age, need them.
jan.
well, you did just say the possibilities were endless .....
I was perfectly aware of the context of your response--I even read it back to you--so I don't know what you're going on about now. Is your position really that tenuous?
:shrug:
Talk about discarding my experience!
What I said.
In that case, they cannot fall, they cannot desire to enjoy independently of God.
Unless they are actually eternally full of knowledge, bliss - and evil.
Pfffffffft.
Typical Hindu power trip you have there.
Has it occured to you that I am not your student and you are not my teacher, so you can't propose to me to just accept what you say?
Oh, and that's because there's something wrong with me, eh?
More of your power trip.
Yeah, power can go to one's head, very much so!
Of course it is. He embraces the sort of epistemology that leads to wildly different theological and metaphysical conclusions, and from the platform sitting atop this shaky structure, has the nerve to launch attacks against far more cautious empirical methodologies and agnostic philosophical stances.
It's a running joke.