It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

There is no "divine right to rule" and the Bhagavad-Gita is just another book....

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: BattleSausage




No you don't. Like most people you get stuck at reading spiritual texts from a material perspective. It's ridiculous, they are SPIRITUAL texts.


The german nazi-ss used that book, the Bhagavad-Gita as a justification for what they ACTUALLY, in reality, did. Ever heard about the holocaust?




The battle described in the Gita (or in Revelations since you seem to be interested in them too) is a SPIRITUAL battle, thus it takes place inside the mind, between the different human drives.


Ever heard about the unpleasant fact that a mind can be divided against itself? Nowerdays we have psychological terms for that kinda thing.




I'm always baffled when people read spiritual texts with a materialistic eye. How can anyone read myths LITERALLY? They are myths, their teachings are symbolic. For a supposed writer, you seem quite oblivious about this.


And I always wonder how easy it is for some to call others "materialistic" while dealing in "spiritual materialism" themselfs. You don't know my personal history regarding studying spiritual texts. And I certainly do not deny that the Bhagavad-Gita contains certain important spiritual lessions. What I deny is that someone can not deny or change one's so called dharma-path, if one chooses to do so. Once a thief always a thief, or what?





edit on 26-2-2016 by Willingly because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Barzini



Where can I read about Brahma? Hindu scripture doesn't seem to mention him. I started the Gita, it's like reading any scripture with multiple readings required to understand the exo and esoteric interpretations, I don't know much about Hindu.

Brahma is where I would like to start.


I forgot where I picked up my knowledge about the hindu deitys, but Brahma is considered as the creator-god in the hindu-mythology trinity and Saraswatis is his female companion. Brahma, not to confuse with Brahman, is said to be created out of Vishnus navel (Vishnu is the sustainer-god and Lakshmi is his female mate.). So...that means that Brahma is "created" by Vishnu. And there are many Brahmas, who create many worlds, but there is only one Vishnu, at least that is what I got out of the myth. (Shiva is the destroyer-god and his female mate is Parvati. They are also a trinity, called Shiva/Shakti/Parvati, who are the destroyers of the "evil" destroyers.).

I would recommend to read Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj's work. For starters I think his teachings in I AM THAT are interesting. But he is not talking about deitys.



edit on 26-2-2016 by Willingly because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Willingly
Awesome thanks.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Barzini



Awesome thanks.


You're wellcome. It's my pleasure and my duty.

"Should I stay or should I go now?" Is it time to get me another bottle of wine or just go to bed? Sometimes I don't know. But that's just some rethoric question anyway. I make my own choises....I'M not tired yet.





posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Willingly

I'm all about 4:20 and reading scripture these days. Great enhancement factor. I like wine though, I like a glass of yellow tail shirazz I think it's called.

Abraham was A Brahman Sarasvati is Sarah his wife.

Both were siblings and consorts

Jesuits and Islam even Hindus recognize this.



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Barzini




Abraham was A Brahman Sarasvati is Sarah his wife.


Sorry for correcting you, but BRAHMAN and Brahma are not the same. Brahma is a creator deity in hindu-mythology and his consort is Sarasvati. Brahman is not a deity. Brahman is the impersonal aspect of the substance of existence. At least that's how I use to define Brahman in short terms.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 02:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Willingly
The german nazi-ss used that book, the Bhagavad-Gita as a justification for what they ACTUALLY, in reality, did. Ever heard about the holocaust?


Some people read a religious text literally and appear to be idiots. News at 11. What is even your point?


originally posted by: Willingly
Ever heard about the unpleasant fact that a mind can be divided against itself? Nowerdays we have psychological terms for that kinda thing.


So what you describe is a spiritual interpretation, not a literal one promoting violence as you claim in this thread. Thanks for making my point.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: BattleSausage




What is even your point?


My point is that it is unavoidable that some people will read what ever text the wrong way. I guess that's why the USA has so many interesting user-instructions for every day products. I wonder if they have the instruction...do not eat this product...written on the back of a bag of toilet-paper.

I'm still waiting for someone who claims he or she had killed their parents because Jed McKenna, in some of his books, said, "you have to kill your parents (metaphorically) to be an adult."

My point also is: There will always be people who claim they did what they did because some "god" in some "scripture" was demanding it. Therefore I say that there is no "divine right to rule" because The Divine denys and rejects to rule. Only loosers want to become rulers. Winners want to become artists/comedians/musicians/dissidents...etc.

And I really wonder why Arjuna became a warrior anyway.
edit on 1-3-2016 by Willingly because: added a typo



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join