Interesting and Humour - page 4191
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
If you want to read something on the history of religion, you should not use low-brow jaundiced literature, but normal monographs by adequate and discreet authors, for example:
Карен Армстронг
HISTORY OF GOD
THE MILLENNIAL QUEST OF JUDAISM, CHRISTIANITY, AND ISLAM
http://psylib.org.ua/books/armst01/index.htm
By the way (all of a sudden) an interesting book, I recommend it, especially on history.
If you want to read something on the history of religion, you should not use cheesy jaundiced literature, but normal monographs by adequate and discreet authors, for example:
http://psylib.org.ua/books/armst01/index.htm
By the way (unexpectedly) interesting book, I recommend it, especially on history.
"In the end, though not without regret, I withdrew from the religious life, and this step immediately freed me from the burden of failure and feelings of inferiority. I could feel my faith in God weakening. Truth be told, He never left a significant mark on my life, though I strived for it with all my might. And I felt no guilt or regret - God had become too distant to seem real. "
I am from socialism and I even took exams on such books, such waste paper was published in millions of copies and billions of people still believe... and my compatriots continued to believe, although there are plenty of followers of Ostap Bender..., money doesn't smell, so they write...
For the history of religion, it might be interesting to remember how thedifferent confessions are fighting each other; one could remember how fervently Catholics eradicated Arianism, how enthusiastically they persecuted the Old Believers in Orthodoxy, how they anathematized the Nestorians, how the Pope and the Patriarch damned each other over a dispute over land in Southern Italy, etc.etc. and in such cases a binary Hottentot logic prevails: everyone considers only himself as the only right one and his opponents as heretics/satanists/apostates/traitors, and understandably this is based on the most banal politics and struggle for influence covered up by symbols of faith for justification. Monotheistic religions are extremely intolerant of dissent, give them the opportunity to burn/kill/destroy and they are bound to do so.
This has very little to do with the topic at hand (future of humanity, transhumanism, etc), as the role of religions is slowly but steadily coming to naught and the future will be seen as mere superstition along with the beliefs of savages.
I am not interested in the history of religion - I don't have enough training.
Religion for me is my inner state, and who and whom has been killed there... is not my concern. In religion it's every man for himself. At the core of the three major religions is the requirement to deal with oneself, one's soul
"In the end, though not without regret, I withdrew from the religious life, and this step immediately freed me from the burden of failure and feelings of inferiority. I could feel my faith in God weakening. Truth be told, He never left a significant mark on my life, though I strived for it with all my might. And I felt no guilt or regret - God had become too distant to seem real. "
I am from socialism and I even took exams on such books, such waste paper was published in millions of copies and billions of people still believe... and my compatriots still believe, although there are plenty of Ostap Bender's followers..., money doesn't smell, so they write...
Armstrong is a renowned religious scholar of international renown, while Chetverikova is known only to a small group of connoisseurs...
I am not interested in the history of religion - I do not have enough training.
Religion for me is my innermost state, and who and who got whacked there ... it's not my concern. In religion, it's every man for himself. The three major religions are based on the requirement to deal with oneself, with one's soul.
Yes, this is a very traditional response from "religion": we see what we want to see, we ignore facts, scientific works are called trash, we trust conspiracy theories.
Of the three major religions
Hindus (the third largest) will probably be very upset by this phrase.
inner state
To work with your own state and self-development, religion is not necessary at all... I would rather go to yoga and meditation, at least there is real self-development there.
Since the subject is indirectly touched upon, I'll link to another book at the same time:
Алан Уотс
THE WAY OF ZEN.
Alan W. Watts. The Way of Zen. Penguin Books, 1957.
Translation by Yu. Mikhailin (1993), edited by V. Danchenko (2001)
http://psylib.org.ua/books/uotts01/index.htm
it is for those who want to know about zen, but were afraid to ask
it is very simply written - by a european "for the european mind".
Both parts of the book are easy to read, both historical and informative.
The author is a recognized expert on Eastern philosophy and teachings, not the yellow press.
Since the topic is indirectly touched upon, I'll also link to another book:
it's for those who want to know about zen but are afraid to ask.
extremely accessible - written by a european "for the european mind".
Both parts of the book are very easy to read - both historical and informative.
The author is a recognized expert on Eastern philosophy and teachings, not a tabloid.
what zen, buddhist?
They have more branches than Christianity, all the same thing, some with honey some with sour cream.Which Zen, the Buddhist one?
they have more branches there than christianity, all the same, some with honey some with sour creamBuddhist of course, Zen grew out of Buddhism (which in turn grew out of Hinduism)... first from India, then to China, then to Japan...
Dhyana = contemplation (Sanskrit), Chan = concentration (Chinese), Zen = meditation (Japanese)
there's over9000 directions to suit all tastes )))))
but of course there's also a commonality.
you could say it's a philosophy about enlightenment (and there's no God at all)
Buddhist of course, but Zen grew out of Buddhism (which in turn grew out of Hinduism)... first from India, then to China, then to Japan...
Dhyana = contemplation (Sanskrit), Chan = concentration (Chinese), Zen = meditation (Japanese)
there's over9000 directions to suit all tastes )))))
but of course there's also a commonality.
you could say it's a philosophy about enlightenment (and there's no God at all)
well yes, i like buddhism the most, it's less mystifying and more so to say enjoyable to listen to and understand.
I especially like the absence of God, the afterlife... and the absence of anything that even scientifically could be true :)
Yes, this is a very traditional response from "religion": we see what we want to see, we ignore the facts, we call scientific works trash, we trust conspiracy theories.
As a man who is in command of facts, who respects scientific works and ignores conspiracy the following lines will not be difficult for you to tear down:
A green oak tree lies by the Lukomorye;
A golden chain on that oak:
And day and night, the learned cat
He walks on the chain all the time;
He walks to the right and sings a song,
To the left he tells a tale.
There's a miracle: there's a fairy wandering around,
The mermaid sits on the branches;
There on unknown paths
The footsteps of unseen beasts;
There's a hut on chicken legs
There's a hut with no windows and no doors;
The main thing is to hang up what is not written here and then, armed with scientific knowledge, hack, hack all this anti-scientific horror. And the most important thing is to look so enlightened, and if for this more money will give ...., then this is happiness.
...On the left, he tells a story.
And kitty's a left-handed walker. It's just like us men - when we go left, we tell fairy tales :)