[QUOTE=Surya Deva;47282]My view on god: god does not exist.
The divine exists. See if you can spot the difference ;)[/QUOTE]
Too bad your answer proves that you’re still drowning in duality & don’t know it… :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Nietzsche;47294]No no, think about it again.[/QUOTE]
Yes, think more about it, that’s the trick! 
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;47341]Almost all mystics from every religion and tradition have said that the divine is indescribable, beyond words, descriptions, infinite etc
On the other hand, false religions do try to describe divine. They create a concept called “god” and then give this god attributes and form, personalitiy, history and put words into god’s mouth. This is certainly false, for it is all just human imagination. Why is it anymore valid than the tooth fairy or santa claus?
Why should we give the Abrahamic scriptures anymore credibility than Harry Potter?[/QUOTE]
If descriptions of “the divine” is truly a sign of a false religion, then Hinduism wins all. What religion has more varied descriptions, personalities, stories & whatnot of “the divine” than Hinduism? None.
No, because Hinduism knows that all personal gods are constructions of humans. This is why we have the concept of Saguna Brahman and Nirguna Brahman. We know our entire pantheon is just our artistic imagining. On the other hand, Abrahamic religions, take their imaginings to be literal and absolute.
For the record I think Hinduism should be purged of even Saguna Brahman.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;47341]Almost all mystics from every religion and tradition have said that the divine is indescribable, beyond words, descriptions, infinite etc
On the other hand, false religions do try to describe divine. They create a concept called “god” and then give this god attributes and form, personalitiy, history and put words into god’s mouth. This is certainly false, for it is all just human imagination. Why is it anymore valid than the tooth fairy or santa claus?
Why should we give the Abrahamic scriptures anymore credibility than Harry Potter?[/QUOTE]
You just cant say that Surya…Perusha has a human representation for every human offered in way that is familiar to the individual at hand.
You are being foolish to discount the validity of the millions who have experienced this phenomena relating to their faith.
When a Catholic says they saw a saint or Mother Mary, this is Perusha.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;47350]No, because Hinduism knows that all personal gods are constructions of humans. This is why we have the concept of Saguna Brahman and Nirguna Brahman. We know our entire pantheon is just our artistic imagining. On the other hand, Abrahamic religions, take their imaginings to be literal and absolute.
For the record I think Hinduism should be purged of even Saguna Brahman.[/QUOTE]
So all Hindus know that their personal god is BS?
That “all personal gods” are BS? :rolleyes:
By your argument, the Rig Veda, the Ramayana, the Bhagavad Gita, they’re all the BS? Arjuna having a personal god in Krishna, Hanuman having a personal god in Rama, that’s all BS?
No, Hindus recognise that their personal gods are just a means towards an end. Even Ramakrishna, a devout Kali bhakta, eventually relinquished his saguna Brahman. Patanajli also mentions that the use of a personal god(ishta devata) as a temporal means is valid.
Rig Veda does not have any bhakti within it. Bhakti is a later development. The Rig Veda has the concept of devas which are natural powers which are part of the ONE.
But again I will reiterate I think even Bhakti Hinduism needs to go. To me it is only one step removed from the Abrahamic theology. It is not needed in a scientific world. I am consistent in applying criticism equally to my religion and to others. I do not only just want to purge the world of the Abrahamic religion, but also Bhakti Hinduism. I want to get rid of the entire pantheon of Hinduism. And go back to the Vedic ONE. The divine.
what does BS mean?
[QUOTE=kareng;47351]You just cant say that Surya…Perusha has a human representation for every human offered in way that is familiar to the individual at hand.
You are being foolish to discount the validity of the millions who have experienced this phenomena relating to their faith.
When a Catholic says they saw a saint or Mother Mary, this is Perusha.[/QUOTE]
Just like that little buddha sitting in lotus posture is ishvara?
This is nothing more than fantasy. If you believe in your fantasy hard enough you will start seeing your fantasy.
You still deny this as a fact ???
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;47358]No, Hindus recognise that their personal gods are just a means towards an end. Even Ramakrishna, a devout Kali bhakta, eventually relinquished his saguna Brahman. Patanajli also mentions that the use of a personal god(ishta devata) as a temporal means is valid.
Rig Veda does not have any bhakti within it. Bhakti is a later development. The Rig Veda has the concept of devas which are natural powers which are part of the ONE.
But again I will reiterate I think even Bhakti Hinduism needs to go. To me it is only one step removed from the Abrahamic theology. It is not needed in a scientific world. I am consistent in applying criticism equally to my religion and to others. I do not only just want to purge the world of the Abrahamic religion, but also Bhakti Hinduism. I want to get rid of the entire pantheon of Hinduism. And go back to the Vedic ONE. The divine.[/QUOTE]
Precisely. Bhakti movements started occurring in the C.E millennia and progressively gained adherents. It was notable for its egalitarian ideals (no caste system, all paths are equal). Today, it is so hard to distinguish this kind of Hinduism from other forms and it is indeed what most Westerners think of when they hear “Hinduism.” I too believe that Bhakti Hinduism has to go. It has created much superstition and misconceptions in India and has debilitated the fabric of Hinduism.
[QUOTE=kareng;47359]what does BS mean?[/QUOTE]
Bullshiznit