Questions about Hinduism

[COLOR="Blue"]Do not = passive.

[COLOR="Blue"]Be Love = active.

[COLOR="Blue"]Do Be Do Be Do = Stanza VIII, verse 6, The Sayings of Sri Sinatra. 🙂

Do not = passive.

Be Love = active.

Do Be Do Be Do = Stanza VIII, verse 6, The Sayings of Sri Sinatra. 🙂

but is it passive or active especially if you're a stranger to it? 😉

but is it passive or active especially if you're a stranger to it? 😉

Depends on whether you look me in the eye or just exchange glances, Rosie.

At the risk of sparking off more ping-pong posts (:o deep breath, here goes...) ...
Asimov's laws apply to robots,

Hi Barafundle,

I see that without much effort on my part, the risk you mentioned is becoming reality.

Fascinating!

You are absolutely correct about Asimov's Laws, superficially...

However, Asimov was not the first writer to use such literary devices, nor will he be the last. Among the many that come to mind, I shall cite only three

George Orwell
Lewis Carroll
Richard Adams.

That should suffice.

Regards.

Prashna

:rolleyes: Hmmm! ... I wonder... Is there a 'Golden Ratio' as to exactly who will have the 'Phi'nal word ... (have to admit my money's on one man... although I may have put him off now... doh!)



.

:rolleyes: Hmmm! ... I wonder... Is there a 'Golden Ratio' as to exactly who will have the 'Phi'nal word ... (have to admit my money's on one man... although I may have put him off now... doh!)

.

Conspiritualist,

Nearly, but not quite.

Normally, I would have ignored your post as it appeared to contain only banalities. And I don't mean the misspelling 'Phi'nal!

But on closer examination, I find that you have no concept of what Sanaatana Dharma is.

And that does require rectification.

Sanaatana Dharma is not like Islam or any Abrahamic religion.

In Sanaatana Dharma, there is no such thing as final word or even as you seem to prefer it.

On the contrary, Sanaatana Dharma specifically and explicitly states that there is no end to knowledge, that it is ever evolving, and therefore the concept of is a contradiction in terms.

[url]Please read yet again and as many times as you need to;[/url]

the verse 4:7 and 4:8 from Shriimad Bhaagabat Giitaa (transliterated and sandhi broken down for your benefit)

Excerpt:

O scion of the Bharata dynasty,
whenever there is a decline one virtue and increase of vice,
then do I manifest Myself,
to protect the good and destroy the evil-doers
and re-establish dharma again and again.

Hope that clarifies.

Prashna

P.S.

Incidentally, your signature contains a definition devised by your own good self.

[url]I tried to find that word here and failed. [/url]

The result of my enquiry was:

"No results found for conspiritualist."

Looks like you are creating your own language.

Good luck.

Conspiritualist meant that he felt he could place money on who would have the 'Phi'nal word' - meaning final post, but with a Joycean scientific twist to the spelling. With all respect, LOL, that hardly has anything to do with Sanatana Dharma :p . Looks like you don't get it, Prashna. Oops - and in posting this, up to this moment, I've ruined it for him! :p

The result of my enquiry was:

"No results found for conspiritualist."

Looks like you are creating your own language.

I've always thought that was a clever name myself :o.

What about finishing on Unconditional Love as a final definition?

(If not then maybe this should be carried on in another thread? I wouldn't mind, but I don't know what you'd call it. What exactly are we talking about now? I look forward to finding out on another thread maybe.

BTW, Hippocrates is attributed with the medical profession's motto which translates from the Latin as 'Do No Harm'. What he said more fully was something like 'If you can't help, then at least do no harm.' Which is sort of a second best option as I see it :). Thread topic?)

BTW, Hippocrites is attributed with the medical profession's motto which translates from the Latin as 'Do No Harm'. What he said more fully was something like 'If you can't help, then at least do no harm.' Which is sort of a second best option as I see it :). Thread topic?)

hippocrates also said, that "a physician should be experienced in many things, but assuredly also in rubbing". whether that was doing no harm and unconditionally, i dont know! :p

hippocrates also said, that "a physician should be experienced in many things, but assuredly also in rubbing". whether that was doing no harm and unconditionally, i dont know! :p

Now that definitely is another thread.:)

With all respect, LOL, that hardly has anything to do with Sanatana Dharma :p /quote]Yeah how very dare he…
cheeky ain’t it… 🙂
Just coz I was too young to attend Woodstock, it certainly don’t mean I don’t have a fairly thorough understanding and strong appreciation of Carlos and where he stands as both a guitar icon and a beacon of shining light in the south American psychedelic funk stroke rock fusion genre do it?
😎

Just coz I was too young to attend Woodstock,

You were? Get outta here! We need mature, worldly-wise, experienced people of the world here on HP, ye young pip-squeek! What's Castaneda got to do with it anyway? (Yes I know, the 'Star-Spangled Banner' with his teeth guy ... :).)

V

Oh V - roger doesn't mean that Carlos. He's making a very clever play on the word Sanatana. Now just remove one vowel and you'll have the answer! Or as we say in Spanish: 'Oye! Como va?'

xxx

Oh V - roger doesn't mean that Carlos. He's making a very clever play on the word Sanatana. Now just remove one vowel and you'll have the answer!

You're a little slow, tonight, Sunanda. I could send Don Genaro 'round to 'awaken' you up? 🙂

As I already posted: "(Yes I know, the 'Star-Spangled Banner' with his teeth guy ... .)". Actually, he didn't use his teeth to play that simply extraordinary rendition of the song, but he did use just about everything else, including using up just about all of his Dharma.

V

You're a little slow, tonight, Sunanda. I could send Don Genaro 'round to 'awaken' you up? 🙂

As I already posted: "(Yes I know, the 'Star-Spangled Banner' with his teeth guy ... .)". Actually, he didn't use his teeth to play that simply extraordinary rendition of the song, but he did use just about everything else, including using up just about all of his Dharma.

V

What are you blethering on about? What's Hendrix got to do with it? DOH!
xxx

C'mon peeps, you've strayed waaaaay:offtopic:.

Can you please return to it from now on.;)

Thanks

Moonfairy
HP Mods

:005: It's a fair cop, guv, you've got me bang to rights.

Sorry!

xxx

Sorry for the off-topic, Moonfairy. If I may, just to clarify and explain to Sunanda, the Carlos she's speaking about (whom 'Sanatana Dharma' reminded Roger of), was known even to pluck the strings with his teeth, and is greatly famed for the most unworldly rendition of "The Star-Spangled Banner", which is recorded - but played just while tuning up! (I thought Sunanda was from that generation, and would know.)

No more off-topic, then.

V

No more off-topic, then.V

yeah lets get back to 'I Robot' or words that don't exist in dictionary.com... coz that's sooooooooooo 'on topic'
My point?
Didin't this thread go 'off topic' about two pages ago; so why now?:rolleyes:

My point?
Didin't this thread go 'off topic' about two pages ago; so why now?:rolleyes:

It depended on when I read it all and that I couldn't find my magic wand.:dft012:

Anyway, thanks for your co-operation folks.:grouphug:

sorry to still be "off topic" but V...

you're thinking of jimi hendrix and whilst he certainly had dharma, it was different to santana's dharma :p.

i'll shut the door quietly!

Questions on Hinduism

yeah lets get back to 'I Robot' or words that don't exist in dictionary.com... coz that's sooooooooooo 'on topic'

My point?
Didin't this thread go 'off topic' about two pages ago; so why now?:rolleyes:

[My emphasis in quote.]

Why now? Because in addition to Moonfairy's post above in response to this same question, another reason this might have appeared to drag on for two pages* of :offtopic: posts, folks, is that us mods don't like to jump in with the big boots on at the first off-topic comment, but we hope that members will get back ON topic without intervention from us, which usually only comes after we've watched and waited for a while, here seemingly in vain. 🙁

However, as you've already been asked to return to the topic of 'Questions on Hinduism', please do, because otherwise we might have to consider locking the thread. You have been warned! :rolleyes:

[*two pages ... depends what you've specified in your settings, as to how many pages actually appear 😉 ]

Holistic
On behalf of the Moderating Team

[My emphasis in quote.]However, as you've already been asked to return to the topic of 'Questions on Hinduism', please do, because otherwise we might have to consider locking the thread. You have been warned! :rolleyes:

Fair enough Guv!;)

Ahh-hem,
Hinduism (at it’s core teaching) has no real rules for entry, no real stipulations nor real badges of ‘belonging to’ save one (despite what some ‘priest’ classes might tell you) – to exist and to pursue spirituality via a route of your choosing whether by instruction, sacrifice, self-denial, worship, self-gnosis, altered states or any other route you care to think – effectively fits the bill (IMHO you understand).

So…me,
(Hope you forgive me if this sounds banal Happygirl) but I sometimes like to dress up like Ganesh, wear a Lakshmi headdress & an Old Gregg tutu, play Carlos Sanatana at full blast, make like mad Hanuman skills and dance the dance of the universe like Shiva until I’m totally out of it and can only feel the ‘I am’ love…
D’ya’now what? … I do believe at that point …I don’t even care if my moniker doesn't show up in dictionary.com:o

So, you go for it girl... fill yer boots:)

May I just clarify here? The abridged version in your quote box would suggest my post had been addressed just to you, Conspiritualist. Not so ... although answering your specific question about the two pages, the request to return to topic was, of course, addressed to everyone. I had hoped this would be realised when I said:

..... another reason this might have appeared to drag on for two pages* of :offtopic: posts, folks, .....

but perhaps it was a bit obtuse. Sorry! 😮

Holistic

but perhaps it was a bit obtuse. Sorry! 😮 Holistic

No worries Laura, 🙂
I certainly didn’t take yours or Lesley’s posts personally…& hope I didn’t give that impression.:o

Which is frankly why I got straight back ‘on topic’ in relation to the original question… As you can see I was answering as a Hindu, talking on Hindu iconography and more specifically Hindu adornment by both Hindus and non-Hindus in the context of Hinduism (although I fully accept that my concept of Sanatana Dharma is somewhat lacking and may need intensive rectification from the superior source;)).

:confused: Nota bene: Apologies for not using the term ‘Sanaatana’ - but I couldn’t find it in Dictionary.com?

If with profuse apologies to the mods I can just slip this one in, as I'm very red faced! - Rosie, it was Hendrix of course, yes. I know that well (!) so must have just been ultra-tired :confused: when posting. We can shift back to topic, as Carlos Santana became a Hindu of sorts last I heard (don't know if he sustained it) as a follower of Sri Chinmoy. Though I have to say I went to a concert of Sri Chinmoy at the Royal Albert and the guy IMHO was certainly nothing more than a biggest joke.

I'd agree with Roger about not being interested myself in writing of Sanataaaaana or Caaarlos either. It's a big enough shift on a non-academic forum to occasionally write of S. Dharma at all rather than 'Hinduism' which is a word most understand (well, we all have an idea what that might mean). That IMO is as far enough as it needs to be taken: even in my MA uni degree they didn't bother adding extra vowels: the point is simply to know the term and to what we are referring. Then again, each to their own, live and let live, etc. 🙂

V