Philosophy Discussion Forums

Belindi wrote: ↑August 25th, 2019, 9:00 am Divination and theism are not mutually exclusive, except for more rule-bound Christians. Divination is intuitive interpretation.

Gary , you might learn more about 1.syncretic religions and 2. Animism and nature spirits.

Religion is a vast field of study. My bookcases are already overflowing. I would like to warn you against what you read in encyclopedias and such about religion. I know who writes those articles and gets paid for it. They are a timid, but nice lot and stay away from the more hair-raising, scandalous aspects of religion.

Interesting, Gary. It sounds like Kali is a representation of entropy. Each Yes, we all have destruction within us, each needing to kill, harm and compete in order to live.

I'd generally seen Shiva in that role, the forces/drives that push outwards, that break things up, like nuclear fission and ruthlessness. Vishnu is more like the forces/drives that push inwards, such as gravity and love, that create order. Brahma would seem more like the hypothetical hyper black hole that created this universe.

Felix wrote: ↑August 25th, 2019, 12:34 pm

Belindi: The Eastern religions , Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism don't have any supreme deity.

Hinduism has what could be called a hierarchy of dieties, the Supreme or Universal God/Self is known as Brahman. He is both manifest and unmanifest, Being and Non-Being, Existence (sat) and non-existence (asat). But most people have trouble worshipping formlessness, thus we have the pantheon of minor dieties which represent various aspects of Brahman.

Gary, I am not familiar enough with Christian history to say if the shamanic approach to worship you described existed in the European Christian community prior to it's arrival in the Americas.

If you want to understand African influence on American religion watch these six videos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_jEkNi ... -w&index=2

Hindu is an ethnicity, not a religion.

Greta wrote: ↑August 25th, 2019, 9:23 pm Interesting, Gary. It sounds like Kali is a representation of entropy. Each Yes, we all have destruction within us, each needing to kill, harm and compete in order to live.

I'd generally seen Shiva in that role, the forces/drives that push outwards, that break things up, like nuclear fission and ruthlessness. Vishnu is more like the forces/drives that push inwards, such as gravity and love, that create order. Brahma would seem more like the hypothetical hyper black hole that created this universe.

Kali of course is a bit much. Naturally people here have tried to domesticate her and see her terror as protective. They have even tried to make her motherly. I really hasn't worked. Today you now see Kali Dry Cleaners, Kali Motorcycle Repair, Kali Copy Centers, Kali Tour and Transport. Anything you want. I don't think she can be washed off and seen as scientific entropy. That kind of rationalization is too too too clean.

Entropy may seem "washed" to you when laid out as just a "scientific word".

When you consider what entropy is, then you see that large amounts of entropy up close equals horror. Kali.

Sometimes in life much entropy comes to you. Maybe a bad decision. Maybe in the wrong place at the wrong time. And certainly at the end of life.

Many things in reality are beautiful and admirable at a distance but deadly up close. In fact, many of the most beautiful and creative things from afar are also the most lethal if you get within cooee of them.

Greta wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 12:54 am Entropy may seem "washed" to you when laid out as just a "scientific word".

When you consider what entropy is, then you see that large amounts of entropy up close equals horror. Kali.

Sometimes in life much entropy comes to you. Maybe a bad decision. Maybe in the wrong place at the wrong time. And certainly at the end of life.

Many things in reality are beautiful and admirable at a distance but deadly up close. In fact, many of the most beautiful and creative things from afar are also the most lethal if you get within cooee of them.

I would like to read some of your thoughts on Kali worship (puja). I of course would never do it. It would be much too frightening for me. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... ja+worship and here is animal sacrifice, which is very common https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_YheuSrcY0

GaryLouisSmith wrote: ↑August 25th, 2019, 7:25 pm

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 25th, 2019, 1:07 pm

I think it is fair to say that of Buddhism, but Confucianism is more like a "philosophy", or even a method of governance than "religion", and is not so concerned with cosmologies and how to keep account of the grain, whilst avoiding stress.

Hinduism is a dustbin category mostly invented for the convenience of imperialists such as Christians (and Muslims) to lump together a loose association of polytheistic beliefs, in such as way as to be able to count the "Hindoos", and make a distinction between them and "Muslims". But for each belief the particular god of choice tends to be the big guy.

Buddhism in the East and Buddhism in the West are vastly different. Western Buddhism is mainly secular and atheistic, but that is certainly not the case in the East.

Depends of what you mean by "East". From my travels in Laos, Cambodia and Thailand Buddhism has syncretised with local early religions. Buddhism is more like an add on to local polytheisms.
But there is not doubt that Buddha himself proposed no god.

GaryLouisSmith wrote:

Yes, Hinduism has a hierarchy of deities, though that hierarchy keeps transmogrifying and inverting and turning inside out. It's like a torus strip. In Tantra, the most popular form of Hinduism here in Nepal and Northeast India, it is Kali that is beyond even Brahman. See what I wrote to Greta below.

"Turning itself inside out" It's like a torus strip." : e.g. Atman is Brahman.
The supreme and only deity in monotheism can and does intervene in history to change history when it suits the god to do so. This is not what the gods in Eastern philosophies do, they are impersonal and closer to philosophy than the theists' deity. I think this is why a lot of people took up eastern religion/philosophy in the 1960s, because people rebelled against the old authority of the momotheist God.

Krishna is personified, for instance in sacred dancing, but is unlike Christ because Krishna did not atone for sins. By the way, Gary, what if any is the concept of sin in Tantra? Is there any system for atoning for sins either an ndividual's sins or a society's sins?

"Nature ------ red in tooth and claw" . Is an approximation of Kali perhaps?

Belindi wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 5:38 am GaryLouisSmith wrote:

Yes, Hinduism has a hierarchy of deities, though that hierarchy keeps transmogrifying and inverting and turning inside out. It's like a torus strip. In Tantra, the most popular form of Hinduism here in Nepal and Northeast India, it is Kali that is beyond even Brahman. See what I wrote to Greta below.

"Turning itself inside out" It's like a torus strip." : e.g. Atman is Brahman.
The supreme and only deity in monotheism can and does intervene in history to change history when it suits the god to do so. This is not what the gods in Eastern philosophies do, they are impersonal and closer to philosophy than the theists' deity. I think this is why a lot of people took up eastern religion/philosophy in the 1960s, because people rebelled against the old authority of the momotheist God.

Krishna is personified, for instance in sacred dancing, but is unlike Christ because Krishna did not atone for sins. By the way, Gary, what if any is the concept of sin in Tantra? Is there any system for atoning for sins either an ndividual's sins or a society's sins?

"Nature ------ red in tooth and claw" . Is an approximation of Kali perhaps?

You have asked a very interesting question about sin in Tantra. All of Hinduism and Buddhism has the Law of Dharma or Dhamma. One must follow Dharma to be a good Hindu or Buddhist. It’s rather complicated. Tantra is all about gaining Shakti, power. The way to do that is to violate the Law of Dharma. Without “sinning” or violating the law you will never have power. A Tantrik on a moonless night will go to a cremation ground. Remember that a corpse is unclean and you should not touch it or what it has touched. There he must drink wine, eat meat and fish and what is probably fermented barley. And he must have sex with a low caste whore ingesting her menstrual blood. All those things are unclean, forbidden. Then he will receive Power, Shakti.

Hinduism has a very elaborate system of laws that govern all of life. And the rituals that must be performed to rid oneself of the pollution one gets from violating that law are equally elaborate. A lot of it has to do with doing something unclean, like letting an untouchable enter your house.

Krishna is an interesting fellow. When he was 15 years 8 months and 6 days old he performed the Rasa Lila. He was in the forest and he started to play his flute. All of the married women in the area were entranced and went to him. There he had sex with all of them behind sand dunes by the river. Then later when the women were afraid that their husbands and families would come for them, he assured them that he had strong muscles and he could stop them. Also the forest was full of tigers and serpents. They were safe; he assured them. Naturally Hindu pundits have had a problem with that story, because a woman should not abandon her duty to her husband and children. So what they theorized is that all those lovers of Krishna were just Krishna himself. He had fallen into lust for himself and he became many. Today at some temples there are boys who dress in drag and wait at night for Krishna to come to then and make love. Hindu pundits have a marvelous way with logic.

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 5:18 am

GaryLouisSmith wrote: ↑August 25th, 2019, 7:25 pm

Buddhism in the East and Buddhism in the West are vastly different. Western Buddhism is mainly secular and atheistic, but that is certainly not the case in the East.

Depends of what you mean by "East". From my travels in Laos, Cambodia and Thailand Buddhism has syncretised with local early religions. Buddhism is more like an add on to local polytheisms.
But there is not doubt that Buddha himself proposed no god.

I think you might have an argument or two with some Buddhist scholars here.

Belindi wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 5:38 am GaryLouisSmith wrote:

Yes, Hinduism has a hierarchy of deities, though that hierarchy keeps transmogrifying and inverting and turning inside out. It's like a torus strip. In Tantra, the most popular form of Hinduism here in Nepal and Northeast India, it is Kali that is beyond even Brahman. See what I wrote to Greta below.

"Turning itself inside out" It's like a torus strip." : e.g. Atman is Brahman.
The supreme and only deity in monotheism can and does intervene in history to change history when it suits the god to do so. This is not what the gods in Eastern philosophies do, they are impersonal and closer to philosophy than the theists' deity. I think this is why a lot of people took up eastern religion/philosophy in the 1960s, because people rebelled against the old authority of the momotheist God.

Krishna is personified, for instance in sacred dancing, but is unlike Christ because Krishna did not atone for sins. By the way, Gary, what if any is the concept of sin in Tantra? Is there any system for atoning for sins either an ndividual's sins or a society's sins?

"Nature ------ red in tooth and claw" . Is an approximation of Kali perhaps?

You really have this thing against the monotheistic God. I really don't care. We disagree about Christianity/Judaism/Islam but why not? I love a good argument. I also argue with Hindu pundits about just what Hinduism is. Unfortunately, today many of them have tied up their religion with Marxism. I refuse to get involved in Nepali politics, which is mostly Communist and Maoist. I remember the 1960 well. Most of the political activists of the time came out of the small town churches. And my friend's father was a Methodist/Quaker minister and he was that only person who could talk and mediate between the North Vietnamese Viet Cong in Paris and the American government. His mother was a Trotskyite. It was a wild time. And quite fun.

GaryLouisSmith wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 6:27 am

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 5:18 am

Depends of what you mean by "East". From my travels in Laos, Cambodia and Thailand Buddhism has syncretised with local early religions. Buddhism is more like an add on to local polytheisms.
But there is not doubt that Buddha himself proposed no god.

I think you might have an argument or two with some Buddhist scholars here.

Where is "here"?

Wherever it is, if they are scholars then they will know, where you seem not to.

GaryLouisSmith wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 6:41 am

Belindi wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 5:38 am GaryLouisSmith wrote:



"Turning itself inside out" It's like a torus strip." : e.g. Atman is Brahman.
The supreme and only deity in monotheism can and does intervene in history to change history when it suits the god to do so. This is not what the gods in Eastern philosophies do, they are impersonal and closer to philosophy than the theists' deity. I think this is why a lot of people took up eastern religion/philosophy in the 1960s, because people rebelled against the old authority of the momotheist God.

Krishna is personified, for instance in sacred dancing, but is unlike Christ because Krishna did not atone for sins. By the way, Gary, what if any is the concept of sin in Tantra? Is there any system for atoning for sins either an ndividual's sins or a society's sins?

"Nature ------ red in tooth and claw" . Is an approximation of Kali perhaps?

You really have this thing against the monotheistic God. I really don't care. We disagree about Christianity/Judaism/Islam but why not? I love a good argument. I also argue with Hindu pundits about just what Hinduism is. Unfortunately, today many of them have tied up their religion with Marxism. I refuse to get involved in Nepali politics, which is mostly Communist and Maoist. I remember the 1960 well. Most of the political activists of the time came out of the small town churches. And my friend's father was a Methodist/Quaker minister and he was that only person who could talk and mediate between the North Vietnamese Viet Cong in Paris and the American government. His mother was a Trotskyite. It was a wild time. And quite fun.

A bold claim.
What was his name?

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 9:04 am

GaryLouisSmith wrote: ↑August 26th, 2019, 6:27 am

I think you might have an argument or two with some Buddhist scholars here.

Where is "here"?

Wherever it is, if they are scholars then they will know, where you seem not to.

I am in Kathmandu, Nepal. I am surrounded by Buddhist monasteries of all kinds, including Bonpo.