The alcohol problem

[firedragon]

I am going to directly refer to two movie stars in the Indian world. One is called Kamal Hassan, and the other is called Rajini Kanth. Well, both are known to be the most prominent stars in the industry that produces more movies than Hollywood can think of.

As far as I know these two guys are the biggest and richest stars in the industry, unknown to the western world largely. Stark difference though.

Kamal Hassan is known to be a bit of a perv. Multiple girl friends, super actor, pretty rude to those who seek him trying to take a picture with him. But Rajini dude is a drunkard, drinks morning, day and night, but when someone abruptly arrives at his gate wanting a picture with him. he is famous to have invited them home, given them some refreshments, let them take all the pictures they wish, signatures if necessary and being a humble human being.

One is a drunkard, the other doesnt drink. But the drunkard is a great human being while the other is known to be not.

What's with this drinking thing? Could you shed some light?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I am going to directly refer to two movie stars in the Indian world. One is called Kamal Hassan, and the other is called Rajini Kanth. Well, both are known to be the most prominent stars in the industry that produces more movies than Hollywood can think of.

As far as I know these two guys are the biggest and richest stars in the industry, unknown to the western world largely. Stark difference though.

Kamal Hassan is known to be a bit of a perv. Multiple girl friends, super actor, pretty rude to those who seek him trying to take a picture with him. But Rajini dude is a drunkard, drinks morning, day and night, but when someone abruptly arrives at his gate wanting a picture with him. he is famous to have invited them home, given them some refreshments, let them take all the pictures they wish, signatures if necessary and being a humble human being.

One is a drunkard, the other doesnt drink. But the drunkard is a great human being while the other is known to be not.

What's with this drinking thing? Could you shed some light?

Well, alcohol in Danish is spritus from spirit. Make of it what you what.

 

[sun rise]

First I had to look up Rajni Kanth. Rajinikanth writes about his drinking problem: ‘I should have listened to Sivakumar’ That article had this:

“At a time when I was an addicted to drinking and smoking, Sivakumar used to advise me saying I would become a great actor and not to spoil my health with these habits.”

But that's not the question you asked which is about drinking booze. Your question is unclear to me. Is it why people drink or why they become alcoholics who are addicted to drinking? Or is a broader question about intoxicating substances involved?

 

[firedragon]

First I had to look up Rajni Kanth. Rajinikanth writes about his drinking problem: ‘I should have listened to Sivakumar’ That article had this:

“At a time when I was an addicted to drinking and smoking, Sivakumar used to advise me saying I would become a great actor and not to spoil my health with these habits.”

But that's not the question you asked which is about drinking booze. Your question is unclear to me. Is it why people drink or why they become alcoholics who are addicted to drinking? Or is a broader question about intoxicating substances involved?

That's not the question brother. There is a known drunkard who is a great human being, and there is a known teetotaller who is a dirty, bull****ting, perverse human being.

Whats the religious, or research based, theological or sociological verdict on the drinking problem considering both of these characters?

BTW, dont do research on the people. They are just examples to a question that does not require it. Even without any research on the personalities, you could answer the question which is a dilemma.

Cheers.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I am going to directly refer to two movie stars in the Indian world. One is called Kamal Hassan, and the other is called Rajini Kanth. Well, both are known to be the most prominent stars in the industry that produces more movies than Hollywood can think of.

As far as I know these two guys are the biggest and richest stars in the industry, unknown to the western world largely. Stark difference though.

Kamal Hassan is known to be a bit of a perv. Multiple girl friends, super actor, pretty rude to those who seek him trying to take a picture with him. But Rajini dude is a drunkard, drinks morning, day and night, but when someone abruptly arrives at his gate wanting a picture with him. he is famous to have invited them home, given them some refreshments, let them take all the pictures they wish, signatures if necessary and being a humble human being.

One is a drunkard, the other doesnt drink. But the drunkard is a great human being while the other is known to be not.

What's with this drinking thing? Could you shed some light?

He appears to be a nice guy, but he suffers from alcoholism. It is a progressive disease. It will slowly take over his life, interfering with his ability to work. It will i nterfere with his ability to have quality relationships. It's easy to be nice to strangers. What's hard is maintaining the love between you and your family and close friends.

The first guy may be a jerk, but he is not battling a life killing disease.

 

[gsa]

That's not the question brother. There is a known drunkard who is a great human being, and there is a known teetotaller who is a dirty, bull****ting, perverse human being.

Whats the religious, or research based, theological or sociological verdict on the drinking problem considering both of these characters?

BTW, dont do research on the people. They are just examples to a question that does not require it. Even without any research on the personalities, you could answer the question which is a dilemma.

Cheers.

The drunkenness is almost certainly causing a spiritual state of separation from God. Re-connection to spirituality is a common effect of sobriety. The other character, though, suffers from a different kind of separation. There's something to the disease or at least escapist model of alcoholism that makes it easier for us to sympathize with the "nice drunk," but we cannot let that become enabling behavior, as he is destroying himself physically, spiritually. But the other man has his own issues, which cannot be addressed by detox.

Does that address what you are asking?

 

[stvdv]

One is a drunkard, the other doesnt drink. But the drunkard is a great human being while the other is known to be not.

What's with this drinking thing? Could you shed some light?

All people have to work out certain karma during this life. So, the drunkard reached already a high level of acting friendly to other people, while destroying his own body.

So, he does not even love himself yet, hence how could he really love others? His act of kindness must be an act, which drunkards are known for, unless he is a saint in disguise

 

[Debater Slayer]

So, he does not even love himself yet, hence how could he really love others? His act of kindness must be an act, which drunkards are known for, unless he is a saint in disguise

This is a very judgmental and superficial statement that misses the complexity of substance abuse, in my opinion.

Addicts are ill people who need help. They're not necessarily bad, hateful, or criminal people, and they're not necessarily good people either. The more advanced their substance dependency and abuse become, the more out-of-character their actions may get. Some substances are worse than others when it comes to clouding someone's personality and judgment if they're overused/abused, and alcohol is a particularly horrible one when it comes to that.

So, to answer the OP, it may be that the alcoholic is putting on a facade, or it may be that he's a genuine and kind person who is struggling with addiction. Either way, he should get help and not define himself or be defined by the addiction. It's a treatable albeit complicated and severely damaging (both to oneself and others) medical condition. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Alcoholics and addicts often talk of using a substance to fill 'a hole in the soul'. If I can generalise a little - and I have known many alcoholics - they are often gentle, sensitive and compassionate individuals when sober, though they may behave appallingly when drunk. Alcoholism being in part a spiritual malady, it's no surprise that many alcoholics are spiritual people at depth, though they may be desperately lost and confused.

I would also add, that the families of alcoholics suffer terribly, often far worse than the drinker himself. It's a selfish illness. Active but functioning alcoholics may be wonderful people outside the home, but the cause of untold suffering to innocent partners and children within it.

 

[firedragon]

He appears to be a nice guy, but he suffers from alcoholism. It is a progressive disease. It will slowly take over his life, interfering with his ability to work. It will i nterfere with his ability to have quality relationships. It's easy to be nice to strangers. What's hard is maintaining the love between you and your family and close friends.

The first guy may be a jerk, but he is not battling a life killing disease.

Very true.

 

[viole]

I am going to directly refer to two movie stars in the Indian world. One is called Kamal Hassan, and the other is called Rajini Kanth. Well, both are known to be the most prominent stars in the industry that produces more movies than Hollywood can think of.

As far as I know these two guys are the biggest and richest stars in the industry, unknown to the western world largely. Stark difference though.

Kamal Hassan is known to be a bit of a perv. Multiple girl friends, super actor, pretty rude to those who seek him trying to take a picture with him. But Rajini dude is a drunkard, drinks morning, day and night, but when someone abruptly arrives at his gate wanting a picture with him. he is famous to have invited them home, given them some refreshments, let them take all the pictures they wish, signatures if necessary and being a humble human being.

One is a drunkard, the other doesnt drink. But the drunkard is a great human being while the other is known to be not.

What's with this drinking thing? Could you shed some light?

In Sweden we have a alcohol problem. It is too expensive.

Ciao

- viole

 

[stvdv]

This is a very judgmental and superficial statement that misses the complexity of substance abuse, in my opinion.

Okay, I understand from your POV, not knowing me

I added "he can be a Saint in disguise"

And was not judgmental nor superficial

My Master told me "you are an alcoholic"
Hence
I thought this subject well over since 1997

And have no illusion, nor think I am better than an alcoholic. I just look at the facts, and don't pretend nor make it look better

Only that way I can overcome my addictions

 

[stvdv]

Alcoholics and addicts often talk of using a substance to fill 'a hole in the soul'

And there are many, many addicts when using that criterium. Coffee, chocolate, cheese, sugar, drugs (both pharmaceutical and God given), work addicts, gym addicts, to mention a few

Even RF addicts

All trying hard to avoid their emptiness

God addiction is the best addiction, when trying to improve oneself. All other addictions usually harm yourself, drain body and mind, some lead to harming others. I rather not have these ones.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And there are many, many addicts when using that criterium. Coffee, chocolate, cheese, sugar, drugs (both pharmaceutical and God given), work addicts, gym addicts, to mention a few

Even RF addicts

All trying hard to avoid their emptiness

God addiction is the best addiction, when trying to improve oneself. All other addictions usually harm yourself, drain body and mind, some lead to harming others. I rather not have these ones.

Your addiction works for you. Stop claim that it is universal. That is not a fact, that is an opinion.

 

[stvdv]

Stop claim that it is universal.

Where did I made that claim?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And there are many, many addicts when using that criterium. Coffee, chocolate, cheese, sugar, drugs (both pharmaceutical and God given), work addicts, gym addicts, to mention a few

Even RF addicts

All trying hard to avoid their emptiness

God addiction is the best addiction, when trying to improve oneself. All other addictions usually harm yourself, drain body and mind, some lead to harming others. I rather not have these ones.

Where did I made that claim?

Stop using absolute claims that are open for debate. You don't debate, you only have personal opinions. That is what you told me. Now live up to that.

 

[stvdv]

Stop using absolute claims that are open for debate. You don't debate, you only have personal opinions. That is what you told me. Now live up to that.

I do,

Hence my signature still claims "IMHO"

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I do,

Hence my signature still claims "IMHO"

That it is not the case for everybody else. So your ttick is that you claim something that also applies to others and when caught, it is not the case, because then it is only an opinion. I get the trick. And that is not my opinion.

 

[stvdv]

That it is not the case for everybody else. So your ttick is that you claim something that also applies to others and when caught, it is not the case, because then it is only an opinion. I get the trick. And that is not my opinion.

Now you twist the meaning of my use of "in my humble opinion"

RF Rules advice us to write IMHO, to make clear it's our opinion and avoid confusion, and keep it all respectful and decent

I choose to use my signature for this, for me essential, addition, so that I do not accidentally forget it

You are free to twist things about my genuine intention to not forget "IMHO", that's on you.

FYI: I don't like to be imposed on, hence I try my utmost best not to impose on others, and that's why I use my signature "IMHO". And I never debate on RF.

FYI: I can't help if you or others fail to check my signature OR if you think it's a trick. IF I ever reply a little critical to others (which I rather not do), I first check their signature and their information page, just to be sure I make no mistake. With new RF members I am even more careful

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Now you twist the meaning of my use of "in my humble opinion"

RF Rules advice us to write IMHO, to make clear it's our opinion and avoid confusion, and keep it all respectful and decent

I choose to use my signature for this, for me essential, addition, so that I do not accidentally forget it

You are free to twist things about my genuine intention to not forget "IMHO", that's on you.

FYI: I don't like to be imposed on, hence I try my utmost best not to impose on others, and that's why I use my signature "IMHO". And I never debate on RF.

FYI: I can't help if you or others fail to check my signature OR if you think it's a trick. IF I ever reply a little critical to others (which I rather not do), I first check their signature and their information page, just to be sure I make no mistake. With new RF members I am even more careful

Here is your add on. "... Life's Goal is reached By both Atheists & Theists" Now compare it to what you wrote: God addiction is the best addiction, when trying to improve oneself.
Do you see a problem between these 2 opinions?

So even if it is all opinion, which is the correct opinion?