around us is so deceptive we have to do something new with it so as
not to be suckered by fine words from the weasel.
On Oct 24, 5:35 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From Brihadaranyaka Upanishad ( one of the oldest ) :
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of the husband, my dear, is the husband
> loved, but he is loved for the sake of the self which, in its true
> nature, is one with the Supreme Self.
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of the wife, my dear, is the wife loved, but
> she is loved for the sake of the self.
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of the sons, my dear, are the sons loved,
> hut they are loved for the sake of the self.
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of wealth, my dear, is wealth loved, but it
> is loved for the sake of the self.
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of the brahmin, my dear, is the brahmin
> loved, but he is loved for the sake of the self.
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of the kshatriya, my dear, is the kshatriya
> loved, but he is loved for the sake of the self.
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of the worlds, my dear, are the worlds
> loved, but they are loved for the sake of the self.
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of the gods, my dear, are the gods loved,
> but they are loved for the sake of the self.
>
> "Verily, not for the sake of the beings, my dear, are the beings
> loved, but they are loved for the sake of the self.
>
> Verily, not for the sake of the All, my dear, is the All loved, but it
> is loved for the sake of the self.
>
> "Verily, my dear Maitreyi, it is the Self that should be realized—
> should be heard of, reflected on, and meditated upon.
>
> By the realization of the Self, my dear—through hearing, reflection,
> and meditation—all this is known.
>
> On Oct 23, 11:55 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > To feel concern for others or love , is a human feeling and a person
> > tries to better the lot of the less fortunate. There is nothing
> > Eastern or Western about this , but it is only a humane sentiment and
> > is common to all societies. If I make the lives of a few others happy
> > I feel happy about it , but that doesn't mean that my behavior is
> > self-centered , rather it would be so if I acted for my personal
> > well-being at the expense of others.
>
> > On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I do not understand much that has been said here... really.
>
> > > What I can make out is this talk of doing something "for others." This
> > > is shit. You don't do anything for others, because you can't. You can
> > > only do something for yourself. Now, if you believe that owning half
> > > the world or a huge mansion, or a carpeting that takes you 3" into the
> > > ground is what you want to do for yourself... then that's what you'll
> > > do !
>
> > > The entire suggestion of doing something for others rests on the
> > > premise that that's what makes me happy. If it doesn't, then one
> > > wouldn't do it. And, even if one does because one is forced to do, it
> > > wouldn't make one happy. Which doesn't help the person... in his
> > > becoming happy !
>
> > > That's the Eastern thing... I help others because I want to help
> > > myself... because that's the only way I can help myself !
>
> > > On Oct 23, 4:48 pm, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> Somewhat related:
>
> > >> "42
>
> > >> Note how perverse is the attitude of the weak toward their
> > >> benefactors. They feel generosity as oppression; they want to
> > >> retaliate. They say to their benefactors: ' May the day come when you
> > >> shall be weak and we will send bundles to America.'
>
> > >> You do not win the weak by sharing your wealth with them; it will but
> > >> infect them with greed and resentment. You can win the weak only by
> > >> sharing your pride, hope or hatred with them."
>
> > >> from "The Passionate State of Mind" By Eric Hoffer
>
> > >> On Oct 22, 8:42 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > One could hold Marx accountable for the horrors of the Soviet Union
> > >> > and China under Mao. Not his economic analysis but some of
> > >> > revolutionary urging - though surely countless abuses by the "noble
> > >> > class" are worse. I did some shameful stuff handling informants in
> > >> > our stupid war in Northern Ireland, excusing it at the time under a
> > >> > greater good I now know false. We ran an even bloodier war in
> > >> > Indonesia (28,000 dead) most in the UK were not aware of at the time
> > >> > and many don't know about now (though it's no longer secret).
>
> > >> > I've been led to believe we can't really discuss much on society
> > >> > unless we address the realities of world power and its links to the
> > >> > money system the rich dominate. Otherwise one more or less cops out
> > >> > and makes a living. Teaching has led me to realise how scant my own
> > >> > knowledge is, but also the lack of interest most people have in
> > >> > learning more than what gets them by.
>
> > >> > We now have the technology to show how many things link up and that
> > >> > the "riches" developed in a shadow banking system that is bigger than
> > >> > the real economy several times over are fictitious and merely suck
> > >> > value out of toil - and the same technology could also regulate the
> > >> > economy through 'transparent money' - instead it's used for the
> > >> > opposite purpose and also supports the military complex. This is
> > >> > obvious but people still don't get it.
>
> > >> > On Oct 22, 7:47 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > Life is always full of cause and effects. Everyone is accountable for the
> > >> > > effects caused by their actions,, even if you claim to have no choice....
> > >> > > Allan
>
> > >> > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 7:48 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > > People 'escape' responsibility in fictitious ways all the time RP -
> > >> > > > though I agree that inevitably one can't. I'm always saddened by
> > >> > > > those who stress we should have communism or capitalism and can't see
> > >> > > > there is some kind of loop. They want to reduce everything to a kind
> > >> > > > of baby-talk more appropriate to sport locker rooms than responsible
> > >> > > > dialogue. The escape from responsibility is into world-views that
> > >> > > > exclude the other and especially consequences for others.
>
> > >> > > > On Oct 22, 6:26 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > > > To be held accountable for one's actions , doesn't it look scary when
> > >> > > > > you know you couldn't have done otherwise given your personality at
> > >> > > > > the given time and the circumstances. Yet we cannot escape
> > >> > > > > responsibility !
>
> > >> > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:41 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > I like the theme RP - but what of being 'bound' by genetics/evolution/
> > >> > > > > > environment - which gives some clues on how to escape through
> > >> > > > > > knowledge?
>
> > >> > > > > > On Oct 13, 4:30 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> It is God who binds you and not you yourself , and so you are
> > >> > > > > >> accountable to yourself and society , but not to God. In this world
> > >> > > > > >> you are doing everything freely , but in God's presence you are just a
> > >> > > > > >> puppet. If I am bound to err , it doesn't absolve me of the action as
> > >> > > > > >> it has been done by me , and if you hurt me , again you are
> > >> > > > > >> accountable for it as it is done by you. It is only in God's presence
> > >> > > > > >> that you are innocent as you are a puppet in his hand , but in man's
> > >> > > > > >> world you are accountable and responsible for every action unless
> > >> > > > > >> society frees you of that responsibility on the grounds of insanity on
> > >> > > > > >> your part. You are always the agent and as such always responsible for
> > >> > > > > >> your every action and inaction.
>
> > >> > > > > >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 8:36 PM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> > When everything is predetermined... and if we all accept that as
> > >> > > > > >> > fact... accountability is without meaning !
>
> > >> > > > > >> > Accountability has a meaning when I have a choice in the matter, and
> > >> > > > > >> > if I am aware of that personal freedom.
>
> > >> > > > > >> > On Oct 13, 7:46 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >> When everything is predetermined , the obvious truth that it is man
> > >> > > > > >> >> who is acting , makes man accountable to man and society and not
> > >> > > > to
> > >> > > > > >> >> God.
>
> > >> > > > > >> >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >> > But I couldn't see the rational thread between the "God alone..."
> > >> > > > > >> >> > premise and its "Man alone..." derivative !
>
> > >> > > > > >> >> > On Oct 13, 7:20 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> >> >> I rather like the idea RP, of the corollary.
>
> > >> > > > > >> >> >> On Oct 13, 3:02 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > >> >> >> > AS everything good and evil is done by God's dictates and
> > >> > > > everything
> > >> > > > > >> >> >> > that a man endures is from God's pleasure , the corollary
> > >> > > > follows --
> > >> > > > > >> >> >> > whatever a man does , he is free to do and accountable to man
> > >> > > > and
> > >> > > > > >> >> >> > society.
>
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > (
> > >> > > )
> > >> > > |_D Allan
>
> > >> > > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > >> > - Show quoted text -
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário