bw wrote:read by Terence Hardiman




"Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear. It is partly
the terror of the unknown and partly, as I have said, the wish to feel
that you have a kind of elder brother who will stand by you in all your
troubles and disputes....A good world needs knowledge, kindliness, and
courage; it does not need a regretful hankering after the past or a
fettering of the free intelligence by the words uttered long ago by
ignorant men"

goodcitizn wrote:Talking of Indian philosophers, my dad and granddad were admirers of J.Krishnamuthy. I was not impressed by his lectures at all.

bw wrote:read by Terence Hardiman




"Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear. It is partly
the terror of the unknown and partly, as I have said, the wish to feel
that you have a kind of elder brother who will stand by you in all your
troubles and disputes....A good world needs knowledge, kindliness, and
courage; it does not need a regretful hankering after the past or a
fettering of the free intelligence by the words uttered long ago by
ignorant men"

bw wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:Talking of Indian philosophers, my dad and granddad were admirers of J.Krishnamuthy. I was not impressed by his lectures at all.

you don't believe in mysticism and out of body experiences?

FluteHolder wrote:I am not sure how well/deep western philosophers read/understood eastern relgions/Hinduism.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

FluteHolder wrote:I am not sure how well/deep western philosophers read/understood eastern relgions/Hinduism.

Russell carefully used his words when he referred to his religious background - Christianity.

bw wrote:read by Terence Hardiman




"Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear. It is partly
the terror of the unknown and partly, as I have said, the wish to feel
that you have a kind of elder brother who will stand by you in all your
troubles and disputes....A good world needs knowledge, kindliness, and
courage; it does not need a regretful hankering after the past or a
fettering of the free intelligence by the words uttered long ago by
ignorant men"

panini press wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

FluteHolder wrote:I am not sure how well/deep western philosophers read/understood eastern relgions/Hinduism.

Russell carefully used his words when he referred to his religious background - Christianity.

Hmm, did he choose his words carefully only for the title? Or was he being careful when he said this?

Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear. It is partly the terror of the unknown and partly, as I have said, the wish to feel that you have a kind of elder brother who will stand by you in all your troubles and disputes. Fear is the basis of the whole thing -- fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

panini press wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

FluteHolder wrote:I am not sure how well/deep western philosophers read/understood eastern relgions/Hinduism.

Russell carefully used his words when he referred to his religious background - Christianity.

Hmm, did he choose his words carefully only for the title? Or was he being careful when he said this?

Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear. It is partly the terror of the unknown and partly, as I have said, the wish to feel that you have a kind of elder brother who will stand by you in all your troubles and disputes. Fear is the basis of the whole thing -- fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand.

Extremely brilliant scholars forget that religion means Semitic faiths for followers of J, C and I. Russell was clearly referring to his.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:Re: fear - There is a difference between an agent sitting in the sky and dictating terms and believing that the agent and the person are one.

panini press wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

panini press wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

FluteHolder wrote:I am not sure how well/deep western philosophers read/understood eastern relgions/Hinduism.

Russell carefully used his words when he referred to his religious background - Christianity.

Hmm, did he choose his words carefully only for the title? Or was he being careful when he said this?

Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear. It is partly the terror of the unknown and partly, as I have said, the wish to feel that you have a kind of elder brother who will stand by you in all your troubles and disputes. Fear is the basis of the whole thing -- fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand.

Extremely brilliant scholars forget that religion means Semitic faiths for followers of J, C and I. Russell was clearly referring to his.

No, guruvu gaaru, he wasn't. He explicitly calls out Buddhism as a religion in this same lecture. He also refers to a Hindu belief and uses it to dismiss one of the Catholic "proofs" of God's existence.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:Re: fear - There is a difference between an agent sitting in the sky and dictating terms and believing that the agent and the person are one.

In terms of behavior, most Hindus do act as if there are some agents sitting in the sky and dictating terms. A small fraction of Hindus do say, "the agent and the person are one;" a large fraction of even those, like yourself, are far from acting as if that were true.

You seem to imply that it is sensible on Russell's part to say "I am not a Christian," but one should not say "I am not a Hindu." Weird!

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:Russell could not be talking about Hinduism - that was my point. I would be surprised if he did (considering that he believes in understanding the issue before forming opinions on it). Let us look at Buddhism - in what way is it a religion? Where is this external agency that dictates your life?

panini press wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:Russell could not be talking about Hinduism - that was my point. I would be surprised if he did (considering that he believes in understanding the issue before forming opinions on it). Let us look at Buddhism - in what way is it a religion? Where is this external agency that dictates your life?

Russell, as you said, chose his words carefully. He said Christianity when he meant the tradition he was born into. He said religion when he meant all religious traditions. He said some things about his native religious tradition, and some other things about all religious traditions. You would like to believe that he chose his words carefully with respect to the former but not so with the latter.

Who defined religion as requiring an "external agency that dictates your life?"

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

panini press wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:Russell could not be talking about Hinduism - that was my point. I would be surprised if he did (considering that he believes in understanding the issue before forming opinions on it). Let us look at Buddhism - in what way is it a religion? Where is this external agency that dictates your life?

Russell, as you said, chose his words carefully. He said Christianity when he meant the tradition he was born into. He said religion when he meant all religious traditions. He said some things about his native religious tradition, and some other things about all religious traditions. You would like to believe that he chose his words carefully with respect to the former but not so with the latter.

Who defined religion as requiring an "external agency that dictates your life?"

Followers of Semitic faiths do. They, in fact, think that others are misled (by the devil?) and faithless. Some of the derogatory words relate to this. Everyone outside J-C-I is a "non-believer". A recent Pope (Ratzinger?) actually called Buddhism faithless and the cause of downfall of humanity (not exactly in those words). The average follower of Semitic faiths thinks that the rest are destined to go to hell. External agency is a must. In fact, meditation, self discovery and conclusions that are independent of the old book are a heretic's way of living.

panini press wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

panini press wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:Russell could not be talking about Hinduism - that was my point. I would be surprised if he did (considering that he believes in understanding the issue before forming opinions on it). Let us look at Buddhism - in what way is it a religion? Where is this external agency that dictates your life?

Russell, as you said, chose his words carefully. He said Christianity when he meant the tradition he was born into. He said religion when he meant all religious traditions. He said some things about his native religious tradition, and some other things about all religious traditions. You would like to believe that he chose his words carefully with respect to the former but not so with the latter.

Who defined religion as requiring an "external agency that dictates your life?"

Followers of Semitic faiths do. They, in fact, think that others are misled (by the devil?) and faithless. Some of the derogatory words relate to this. Everyone outside J-C-I is a "non-believer". A recent Pope (Ratzinger?) actually called Buddhism faithless and the cause of downfall of humanity (not exactly in those words). The average follower of Semitic faiths thinks that the rest are destined to go to hell. External agency is a must. In fact, meditation, self discovery and conclusions that are independent of the old book are a heretic's way of living.

Russell didn't believe in any of that, so your premise that "Buddhism cannot be a religion because there is no external agency in it dictating your life" is wrong.

The "average" follower of Semitic faiths may believe in all that you say. The average follower of Hinduism also has some pretty narrow-minded (and consequently stupid-sounding) beliefs. The average follower of Hinduism believes in the same external agency that the average Jew, Christian or Muslim believes in. If that weren't the case, you wouldn't have long lines in Tirupati full of people fulfilling their end of a quid pro quo commercial transaction with that external agency.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:My original point was that Semitic faiths doesn't consider eastern faiths religion.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:Let Rashmun discuss with you from now on.