Search results

No. But atheism, by definition, is simply a lack of belief in any god(s). But that doesn't necessarily make an atheist irreligious. In fact, the majority of Buddhists are atheists. Hinduism is quite diverse, with many beliefs and many schools of philosophy. Hindus can be atheists, theists...

To think that just because one is atheist that they aren't interested in dialogue about their religion or that they have no religion is an assumption, and while that's often the case, it isn't always a correct one. I've known @Aupmanyav for more than a few years now, and while he's a hard...

Fair enough. I really have no interest in debating definitions of magic and derailing the thread. I was just answering the OP's question based on my own understanding.

I'm just seeing this, @RJM. I'm glad you decided to renew. I'm not all that active here, but this forum has a level of maturity and tolerance that other forums surrounding religion and spirituality do not, and I find that refreshing when I visit. Thank you for deciding to stick around for...

In my understanding, those who practice magic are working with or manipulating energies for an intended purpose. If that is the case, I would imagine this could be viewed much in the way one would see the flow of electricity. If electricity is flowing through a circuit someone creates for the...

If you are calling your "Higher Self/Psyche/Soul" a GodSelf, that would imply that it is, from your perspective, a deity, albeit an internal one. Auto-theism is still a form of theism. Therefore, I would consider you a theist.

As I see it, it is PURE being. In vyavaharika. ;)

Okay, so I see you're talking about intent behind action. Certainly motive is factored into one's karmic account. In my experience, there are different consequences between selfish acts and selfless acts, even if the act is the same. That said, man A would certainly have a more favorable...

Karma is connected to morality, but not exclusively. Karma is causality. Certainly good actions bring joy and evil actions bring suffering, but there is nothing moral or immoral about dropping a hammer, and the consequence of it falling on my toe and causing pain has nothing to do with...

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. Can you please rephrase or clarify?

My worldview, and that of may dharmics, have no concept of 'sin.' All actions are subject to karma regardless of society's moral assignment.

Karma is essentially causality...cause and effect. In Eastern philosophy, the one performing the action will also be the one to reap the fruits of that action, so essentially any action done is done to oneself.

From the perspective of those you mention, there is nothing to be in union with. Tat tvam asi. Verily, one is "It." And the perspective on the narrative is changed as a result of no longer identifying the self as the body/mind complex. I'm confident that nothing would show up if one was to...

If the self is illusory, what does that render that self's actions? Who is "one" in your question? What would render these any less illusory than the physical self?

I belong to two forums that use this iteration of Xenforo. I've not experienced any problems with paragraphing on either forum posting on a laptop or mobile device.

My eyes don't do well with walls of text. Even if it's a topic I find interesting, I will scroll past posts that have no paragraphing. If I copy over text from another site and the paragraph breaks disappear, I will re-add them as a courtesy to other readers. In my own writing, if I switch to...

Sat. Consciousness of what? There is only Brahman.

You have your own Brahman? Now I want one! ;) Tat tvam asi.

You have said that you do not die (which I fully agree with). Would it be fair to replace the word "consciousness" here with "being?" Would that being not be eternal?

Who is it?