Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Refutation of Charvaka

  1. #11
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Age
    43
    Posts
    117
    Rep Power
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by satay
    Oh yes, but it is much harder to 'deny' the existence of god I think. Even science is saying that there seems to be an 'intelligent' design at place here. Everything is working so nicely with crazy perfection to be a random thing; this universe.
    Say this to an atheist. I wonder if any atheist will accept the "Intelligent Design" model. To them, the first life(abiogenesis) happened by an accidental chemical reaction and then evolved itself. I think it is easier to beleive that a computer found on the sea shore evolved on its own by the constant lashing of the waves on the sand.


    Quote Originally Posted by satay
    karma my brother, karma is at play here. But you are right, 'evil' seems to be rooted in my being somehow and the goodness is there too. But Bhagwan is the source of both. Isn't it?
    Bhagwan cant be the source of any evil. That is too much dry talk. Putting the blame for your faults on Bhagwan? All this maybe his leela but you are still responsible to work out your own salvation. Ignorance in this matter will cause the karma cat to bite you and send you reeling.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    45
    Posts
    3,680
    Rep Power
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by Ram

    Bhagwan cant be the source of any evil. That is too much dry talk. Putting the blame for your faults on Bhagwan? All this maybe his leela but you are still responsible to work out your own salvation. Ignorance in this matter will cause the karma cat to bite you and send you reeling.
    If there is only The ONE there can only be one source of ALL, good, bad or evil whatever, the source is ONE and that source is Bhagwan. Otherwise we are in the realm of christian concept where there are multiple sources...one for good one for evil and so the multi-source nonsense.

    satay

  3. #13
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Age
    43
    Posts
    117
    Rep Power
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by satay
    If there is only The ONE there can only be one source of ALL, good, bad or evil whatever, the source is ONE and that source is Bhagwan. Otherwise we are in the realm of christian concept where there are multiple sources...one for good one for evil and so the multi-source nonsense.
    Satay,

    Let us approach this logically, instead of assumptions.

    There are only two possibilities,

    1. Evil is real.
    2. Evil is unreal.

    If you take the latter approach, you can wash your hands off everything, but the answer is equivalent to saying that you dont know the answer to this question.

    For people who think that evil is real ( I am not a mayavadin), the source of evil has to be one of

    a) God
    b) Soul
    c) Matter

    I leave you to locate the source of evil yourself. Let me know what you conclude with.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    45
    Posts
    3,680
    Rep Power
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by Ram
    For people who think that evil is real ( I am not a mayavadin), the source of evil has to be one of

    a) God
    b) Soul
    c) Matter

    I leave you to locate the source of evil yourself. Let me know what you conclude with.
    since the source of b) and c) is a) there is only really one choice here! unless you are implying that b) and c) have no source? Is that so?

    satay

  5. #15
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Age
    43
    Posts
    117
    Rep Power
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by satay
    since the source of b) and c) is a) there is only really one choice here! unless you are implying that b) and c) have no source? Is that so?
    Obviously, matter cannot be responsible. So it boils down to God and soul.

    If the source were God, we could accuse him of being a saddist isn't it? When God is capable of removing our sorrows without our asking for it, why is the soul suffering in the world? Unless you want to say that God enjoys the suffering of the soul and did it willingly, you cant ascribe the source to God.

    God is just the preraka for the actions of the soul. If the soul desires something, God instigates the soul in a direction to materialize the desire. God is not responsible for the desire itself, for example it makes no sense to say that I murdered my neighbour because God willed so.

    If you desire something, God will grant it. However, the result for your action is taken care of, and God is the granter of karma-phala. If you do something bad, you will face the consequences. If you do something good, you will get the results. The cycle will continue until you sacrifice all fruits of karma consiously and seek his grace.

    On a bigger scale, it is a sport for him. In the smaller scale, it isn't it. You are solely responsible for your actions and God has no role in it. When you do good things, you must assume that God did it. When you do bad things, you have to take the responsibilty. That is the secret of Karma Yoga.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    NorthEast, USA
    Age
    42
    Posts
    246
    Rep Power
    0
    well atheists or scientists cannot answer who gave property to elements. who created energy and all that.

  7. #17
    Jigar Guest

    Re: Refutation of Charvaka

    Quote Originally Posted by Namo Narayana View Post
    well atheists or scientists cannot answer who gave property to elements. who created energy and all that.
    namaste narayana,
    All they can do is play Fetch and run back with something new that they see with their horus blue eye

    maste nam,
    jigar
    Last edited by Jigar; 10 August 2007 at 01:54 AM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    March 2007
    Location
    Lisbon/Portugal
    Posts
    230
    Rep Power
    35

    Smile Re: Refutation of Charvaka

    Namaste Jigar and narayana

    I'm gone tell you what you can! You can only pull out a name and nothing more. I suggest you as i have done in some other previous post the reading of essentialist thought and the way it is connected and connects science and spirituality!
    Last edited by Nuno Matos; 10 August 2007 at 02:03 AM.

  9. #19

    Re: Refutation of Charvaka

    First define atheism before generalizing their views.

    Weak Atheism: I dont beleive in God.
    Strong Atheism: I beleive there is no God.
    agnosticism: The existance of God cannot be verified.( both theists and atheist versions are possible)

    They are fundamentally different positions.

    What is God? Zillions of definitions, so which God is being denied?
    A typical atheist may be strong or weak to specific definitions of God.

    Most atheists are strong when God = a being sitting outside the universe and watching and controlling the show.( the Christian god for instance)

    Most atheists are weak on a deist god.

    Like many Hindus beleive, God=everything, or God=energy ; most atheists are weak or perhaps even take agnostic positions here.
    He is the one on whom our hope depends. For if Hanuman survives, all we though dead are yet alive. But if his precious life be lost though living still we are but dead: He is our hope and sure relief -Jambavan (Yuddha Kanda. 74). Impossibility=Hanuman

  10. #20
    Jigar Guest

    Re: Refutation of Charvaka

    Quote Originally Posted by Madhavan View Post
    First define atheism before generalizing their views.

    Weak Atheism: I dont beleive in God.
    Strong Atheism: I beleive there is no God.
    agnosticism: The existance of God cannot be verified.( both theists and atheist versions are possible)

    They are fundamentally different positions.

    What is God? Zillions of definitions, so which God is being denied?
    A typical atheist may be strong or weak to specific definitions of God.
    namaste,

    If God was walking, he would point you into a direction where you may not be in clearly deep tidal wave of flooded waters. Rather he would align his monumental designs for you all to see with Sekhem Em Pet

    maste nam
    jigar
    Last edited by Jigar; 10 August 2007 at 02:51 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Shaivite refutation Of Advaita
    By Omkara in forum Shaiva
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 04 January 2013, 03:59 AM
  2. Samkhya Karika on Charvaka
    By wundermonk in forum Carvaka
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04 June 2012, 01:15 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 23 September 2011, 02:58 PM
  4. Vadiraja's refutation of non-dualism
    By rkannan1 in forum Dvaita
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12 July 2010, 07:21 PM
  5. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 19 June 2010, 09:58 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •