• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Search results

  1. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    That is what Vedanta philosophy is, an exegesis of the Upanishads. Every Vedanta philosopher has interpreted the Upanishads and come up with a certain view. Now, whether Shankara already had a pre-existing interpretation which he looked to justify by finding it in the Upanishads, or whether he...
  2. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    ^^ Yanjnavalkya is considered an Advaita Rishi, as the Advaita interpretation is more visible in his teaching. However, I am not sure how Yajnavalkya supports your position(which by the way you still have not clarified) which is either Brahman is beyond consciousness or not conscious. It makes...
  3. Spirit_Warrior

    I need to ask a Hindu a question about Kundalini.

    I think you may find my thread "The nature of Brahman in the Upanishads" helpful. Non-duality or Advaita refers to 'Brahman' in the Upanishads. The Upanishads constantly make statements like "Everything is Brahman" "You are Brahman" "Self is Brahman" which lends to a non-dualistic...
  4. Spirit_Warrior

    I need to ask a Hindu a question about Kundalini.

    I think it is worth saying, as Aupmanyav was the first to strike, that 'Hindus' like Aupmanyav, often jump on other Hindus, in this case a non-Hindu asking Hindus about common Hindu concepts that Hindus believe, and I find it disruptive. In other threads Sayak has jumped on me for "peddling...
  5. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    I can add a bit more now, because of lack of time last night, I omitted these points: Matter and consciousness dualism, known famously(basically to anybody who knows Indian philosophy) as Samkhya philosophy is the main philosophy that underpins Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism. All of...
  6. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    Action/response is not sentience. As your usual your inventing definitions of words.
  7. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    My position: Although I would think that anybody who understands the English language, reading my posts will make it absolutely clear that my position is Brahman is God. I have, as a rational actor in a debate like this, backed up my interpretation directly from the Upanishads. I have shown the...
  8. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    What is this man's problem? The Upanishad, and the Bhagvad Gita do indeed argue for dualism between consciousness and matter, it is a very well known philosophy called Samkhya. Some of the Upanishads such as Shvetavatara Upanishad and Maitriyani Upanishad are called Samkhya upanishads. It was...
  9. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    Nope, saying that a contradiction is not logically possible, is not the same thing as saying that you believe in duality. A lot of people know that I am in fact an Advaitist, a non-dualist. That does not mean non-dualists are illogical. This is going nowhere, it is clear you are not rational.
  10. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    You don't get it do you? You just admitted your position is absurd. You are saying Brahman is both sentient and insentient. It is like you saying you both alive and dead. I knew you were not rational for a long time, but I never thought you would admit to it.
  11. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    Brahman cannot simultaneously be sentient and insentient. No, you have not defended it with the Upanishads, you have cited an Upanishad that says Brahman is sentient. You are clearly not rational. A rational debate can only happen between rational actors. Good day.
  12. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    It seems like English might not be your first language I am not sure how it cannot be clear that I arguing FOR the side that Brahman is a sentient entity, the Hindu concept of God, a conscious, thinking, feeling entity. I have repeated in several posts. On the other hand, your position is not...
  13. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    By the way I just had to respond to this Upanishad: It is clear this man revels in ignorance.
  14. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    ^^ I think it is clear from the above Sayak has no position to debate, and is neither willing to engage the arguments of his opponents. Instead he just wants to waste our time with endless fallacies, avoiding arguments, strawman, adhominems, bait and switch and emotional appeals. He has clearly...
  15. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    Spooky action at a distance(i.e. quantum entanglement) force fields chemical and electrical reactions Are not sentient.
  16. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    Fallacy 2: Strawman. I have never during the course of this debate disputed that the Upanishads use personal and impersonal language to describe Brahman. He has misrepresented my position, because my actual argument is stronger which he has not even responded to. I have consistently said that...
  17. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindus Only: The nature of Brahman in Upanishads

    In debates with Sayak over the last few weeks, I have come to spot patterns in the way he debates, which is very sorry to say not honest and honourable. He employs two fallacies in particular a lot, I will mention those fallacies and then show how is has used them again in his most recent post...
  18. Spirit_Warrior

    What is wrong with smashing the idols?

    I am late comer to this thread, and I have not read every one of 39 pages, so I don't know if it has been said yet but it is glaringly obvious, Sovietchild is an obvious troll. No, not because he holds a view that it is OK to smash others idols, if he can provide arguments for it then he can...
  19. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindu Proof of God: Best Arguments

    Same, random events cannot happen in a functional system, because a system being made up of several interconnected parts, would then have to resolve to accommodate that event i.e., there can never be any local random events. Whitehead makes a very similar argument criticising simple locality...
  20. Spirit_Warrior

    Hindu Proof of God: Best Arguments

    One of the predictions made by ID is that so-called junk DNA which the the theory of natural selection predicts, as it says mutations are random, is that it would be eventually proven that junk DNA is not junk at all, but serves a functional purpose: In the 1970s, when biologists first...
Top