That's what you are. You just bleat and shit all over the newsgroup
stupidly quoting rather than using your own brain (for obvious reasons)
It is only an absolute, almighty being that can establish reality as
it is. It is not possible for a conditioned living entity to discern.
As the subjective living entities we are, the only thing we can do, is
to have an opinion as to how and why reality came about. Thus,
everyone except God is subjective. Only God can be objective. That's
just a fact. He is the only one who knows past, present, and future.
What's objective about a group of subjective beings agreeing that
whatever is objective? Objective doesn't come about by vote. Modern
science, for instance, cannot be objective because it is being
conducted by subjective entities, who evaluate everything with their
subjective minds. Where and how does objective enter?
Someone may object (pun intended), that I know two plus two is four.
That's objective. Everyone knows the numbers. We learn in school.
The thing is, though, that the only reason we know two plus two is
four, is because someone taught us that. And who taught us? Someone
who had been taught by someone. And he was taught by someone. Who
was taught by someone etc. It is an irrevocable fact that that the
only reason we know two plus two equals four, is because someone has
told us so.
Imagine having grown up with a total lack of human stimuli. No one
had ever talked to you. What would you know? You would know nothing.
The only reason we know anything, what to speak of 2 plus 2 equals
four, anything at all, is because we were taught by someone.
So then the inevitable question is, who was the first one? Who said it
the first time?
Lets examine the modern, so called scientific explanation. And this is
where we again enter subjectivism.
In the theory of evolution according to Darwin, and here it is
important to note that this explanation is being propagated, for the
last five decades or so, as a completely sane, rational, scientific
explanation on reality. It is what is being taught in all educational
institutions in the world.
So lets examine that explanation in more detail ... first there were
some chemicals. Then, by the interaction of those chemicals over LONG
time, an amoeba-like creature was formed. Then this amoeba gradually
grew legs and learned to talk.
But, but, but it happened over millions and billions of years and went
through millions of transitions, comes the inevitable response. It's
not exactly like an amoeba growing legs. That came much later. You
see, first the amoeba became a fish, then the fish became a plant .
The plant became an insect. The insect became a reptile. The reptile
became a bird. The bird became an animal, and the animal became human.
Somehow, this bunch of chemicals managed through millions of
intermediate species, to transform itself into a human being. And then
the human being learned to talk., and figure out that 2 plus 2 is 4.
So how did these first humans learn to talk? Remember, that the first
human who came out of evolution was completely alone. No one to tell
him anything. See, how ridiculous that explanation is? How did the
first human, who had just evolved through millions of
transformations in different species, how did this being learn to
talk, when there was no one to teach him?
But, but no one knows how it really happened, comes the response - as
if that makes the idea more credible.
Ok, granted. No one knows exactly through which transformations the
first human appeared, but it is being suggested that it came about by
the evolution of the species, so it is still a valid and pertinent
question.
But, but, but, it happened by the law of necessity, says the atheist.
There was a necessity, survival of the fittest, and that's how the
first human learned to formulate himself rationally. And who
determines that necessity? Who determines what is right?
That's determined by subjective beings.
Remember, this is what they want you to believe - originally there was
only chemicals, and then these chemicals over vast spans of time
transformed into a human being. It doesn't matter how many
transformations this human had to evolve through, the question still
remains that how did the first human emerged out of the evolutionary
transformation of the species, learn to talk? By necessity? The
necessity of knowing that two plus two equals four?. Is that the first
thing you would think of if you had just emerged out of the wheel of
evolution?
Two plus two is four. The first human is just an animal. No
precognition, no pre-collection, no memory of past experience. You
start completely from scratch. You are the first human - see how
ridiculous that explanation is? But that's what they want you to
believe. Somehow the amoeba grew legs and learned to talk.
Note in contrast to that, the logical, coherent, and authentic
explanation we are offered in the Vedic tradition. Time is eternal.
The human and all other living entities have always existed. And the
first human was taught by the Supreme, and that human in turn told his
fellow humans. That's the only explanation that makes sense. The
explanation of modern science is so silly and improbable. Still, this
is what everyone is being taught as fact.
So what's objective about the idea that everything comes from
chemicals? That's right. There is nothing objective about it.
The modern explanation of creation is not only ridiculous, improbable
and highly speculative, it is also subjective. Still, it is being
taught in all schools as an objective, scientific fact. It is
considered rational and highly probable. See the fun?
And how can you make the whole world believe that? There is only one
answer, and that's the propaganda machine in the form of the media
and education. The media and the education tell people what to think
and believe about what happens in the world.
If you actually examine the theory of evolution intelligently, the
probability of life being the way it is right now, by chance, is as
good as nil. In other words, it's a silly thing to believe in.
And this is what the propaganda machine does to the population. It
makes it none-thinking and none-reflective. Most people, the vast
majority of the population, only think and believe what they are being
told by their superiors. They think and believe according to what they
have learned from others. So you can only make the whole world believe
something wrong and silly through the modern media, the propaganda
machine. It's as simple as that.
I saw a video called The Age of Stupid, and it simply confirmed the
Vedic version, that there is an original person to tell and define
reality for us. And this has always been going one. And it happens
again and again in cycles.
See, how this modern linear conception of time makes no sense? The
Vedic Version - that things have always been going on, makes so much
more sense according to the observable reality? It is a more
intelligent and perceptive explanation. So why believe in something
unintelligent, unless you are one of the broad. mindless masses who
just go with the flow?
That a group of subjective beings have agreed that modern science is
objective, doesn't make it objective.
Where is the proof that science can raise a subjective living entity
to objectivity? Surely. by the aid of technology the human race has
fabricated so many objects, but the ones regarding the objects are
still subjective beings. The human race has not become more wise,
existentially now than they were in the stone -ages. Nobody has
understood why and how we exist better now than since the industrial
revolution.
Who has determined technological advancement is synonymous with
having understood reality of life? Nothing indicates that modern man
is more sane, peaceful, content, satisfied, happy, and balanced than
those who came before him.
Krishna offers a process by which He can be realized and made that
process of knowledge available to all. Of course, He establishes some
conditions. One condition is that to realize the truth about God, you
cannot be envious of Him. Another condition is that one cannot
approach God with an atheistic mindset. It's all thoroughly explained
in the Bhagavad Gita.
If one insists on that God should be available on MY conditions, then,
of course, you will never understand God. Is that God's fault? Nope.
Krishna has already explained the process by which to contact Him, so
it's up to oneself to take advantage of that and engage in the
process. That's the truth, and anyone who is truthful will accept it.
How is it rational to believe that all things have come about by
itself, without any intelligent direction? Everything in our purview
only exists because of intelligent planning. How does a Mercedes
arise, a house, a garden?
Why believe that nature is the only exception to that? Where is the
rationality? The construction of a single, organic cell suggests it
was designed. To believe that it would arise through some mindless,
chemical reactions over long time and trough millions of gradual
changes - it just doesn't make rational sense. But this is the
explanation that is being pushed down everyone's throat in modern
society.
There is no convincing reason that should propel us to think that all
religions are false and without support. Most religion have surely
been subjected to distortions and falsities over time, but the
intention of all religions are the same - to unite a people through a
common adherence to a superior set of principles of life.
And the Vedas constitute those higher, superior principles and
knowledge of life. It is a direct, observable fact. Also, if there is
a God, like logic tells us there is, is it not reasonable to assume He
would reveal Himself via the right process, and tell us what He wants
with us, and why He has placed on in a world of duality? This is all
being explained in the Vedic philosophy and religion.
If one wants to approach te true religion, of course one would have to
employ it scientifically with an open mind free from prejudice. One
must investigate the religions and find which one gives the best
explanations and answers to the problems of life and God and nature.
If you are not willing to do that, one should not expect to find the
most coherent religion.
It's funny, how those who claim to be scientifically oriented are so
little scientifically oriented when it comes to religion and God. The
myth has been created in modern society, that religion is myth and
science is real. But it's just a dogma. No rational reason for it, at
all. Famous atheists like Dawkins, don't argue against God. They argue
against Christianity. How silly is that?... as if Christianity is the
only legitimate religion in the world.
Is that a scientific approach to religion and God?
I can understand if one is an agnostic, ie. ignorant about God, but to
downright deny the existence of a Supreme being is irrational and
signifies a stunted intellect. There is nothing healthy or
open-minded about being an atheist, and the proof of that is, that at
the same rate society throws out its religious values, at the same
rate the consumer culture becomes destructive and indifferent towards
nature and her inhabitants.
Besides, one should note, that whether one calls himself a Christian,
Hindu, or Mohammedan, or whatever, one can still be possessed by an
atheistic mentality. It is not the designations we put on ourselves,
that determines our identity. Our mindsets and actions, and the
knowledge we cultivate, define who we are.
There is a Bengali saying - phalena parichiyate - something is judged
by its result.
Jesus said, you judge a tree by its fruits. So things are not judged
and understood not by their names, but by their effects and influence.
Krishna says:
I am the only enjoyer and master of all sacrifices. Therefore, those
who do not recognize My true transcendental nature fall down. (Bg.
9.24)
We want to be God
Today everyone can be a hero or a perfect man. It's the desire to be
God that drives us. Not that we literally think we are God, but we
regard ourselves as the enjoyers and controllers - that is only God's
position. Krishna is the only controller and enjoyer. The soul has
fallen down into the material world to imitate Krishna in that
capacity.
At the present moment, of course, it is the age of Kali - a time when
the physical and mental properties of man and the universal
interaction is at a very low level, so most people don't know much.
Most people are just mindless consumers going with the flow of
society. But internet has saved us. Now evryone can become the hero
they want to be.
Actually, Krishna is the only hero, but the soul tries to imitate Him.
The natural, eternal position of the soul is to be the passive
principle in relation to Krishna - but instead we play the role of
active enjoyers. That's how we want to be God. In reality, it is only
Krishna who is the most beloved son, the all-loving father, the most
dear friend, and the most beautiful lover.
The soul can have 5 basic relationships with Krishna -
1. Shanta rasa is a neutral relationship with God. God is regarded as
the original creator and cause of all causes, and the maintainer of
everything.
2. Dasya rasa means that you see God as your Lord and master. You are
willing to serve Him with your life and soul. Krishna is the most
perfect and munificent lord one can have.
3. Sakhya rasa is the stage, where you see Krishna as your best and
most intimate friend. Here the soul forgets that Krishna is God. He
only regards Krishna as his best most beloved friend.
4. Vatsalya rasa is the parental relationship. Here the soul is
Krishna's father or mother. You are God's parent. Krishna is your
little kid.
5. In Madhurya rasa the soul only sees Krishna as her most intimate
lover. You are God's girlfriend.
All the relationships we have in the material world to partner,
children, family, friends, and society are nothing but distorted
imitations of the soul's original relationship to God.
But in the material world, I am God.
Now, on internet, I can play God. I kan kill monsters and demons. I
can go to war and win honor and power. I can save the maiden from
peril, and win her heart - exactly as Krishna does. I can create
worlds and lord it over my subjects. In this way, many people spend
whole lives in Cyberspace, and act out their desires to play God.
Or if one is too much of a loser to play roles in cyberspace, you can
sit in front of the TV, and watch all the heros doing what you would
like to do. Accompanied by endless packets of cigarettes, cups of tea,
and beer, you follow fiction characters on the screen, doing all the
stuff you'd like to do.
Internet and movies and series are nothing but a diversion for the
soul's perverted desires to act out as Krishna in His position as the
highest controller and enjoyer.
Krishna says:
I am the only enjoyer and master of all sacrifices. Therefore, those
who do not recognize My true transcendental nature fall down. (Bg.
9.24)
Have a look at my art -
http://youtu.be/FfUHZHE9uko - 7th Heaven
http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street
http://youtu.be/SqNDERZSp7w - Big Apple
http://youtu.be/YHcWgSevItk - Poster Boy
http://youtu.be/5_Q4HgqOVK4 - Microbes
http://www.touchtalent.com//artist/118705/jahnu-das