Genug Genesh

[Guest guest]

You don't honestly think people LIE on the INTERNET now do ya?

 

I didn't read it at first, disliking the smug tone.

 

After I coughed up some of her catty hairballs, though, I did read it, and

found it as shallow and hollow as expected. More trollery designed to

inflame but never enlighten.

 

We see the situation clearly, all of us, but some prefer answers to

questions.

 

Literalists and trolls, in short.

 

I really do think there must be a dogma in order to have a religion. It's

how it's defined. A cult of personality grows around a charismatic leader.

If the cult survives after the death of its leader, it is because of

consistent rules usually distilled from the leader's words or teachings.

That is the dogma. It is a set of principles on which the nascent church

is founded. This is all basic stuff any college text can teach anyone who

can read it. Now, the thing is, the question at hand that arose was, what

church, if any, can have as its dogma an encouraging of free-thinking.

The answer must be None. Why? Because logically there must be a dogma,

however slight and unassuming, at the heart of it -- a kind of litmus test

-- for it to be considered a religion at all.

 

Zen is a good example. It's a philosophy, not a religion, although the

uninformed call it a religion. Quakerism may well be a philosophy, too,

which is why I asked. It is likely to be such, in fact, if it really does

encourage free-thinking, which means it imposes absolutely no restrictions

or restraints. None. An atheist can be a Quaker, a Satanist can be a

Quaker, and a Rampant Pedestrian can be a Quaker, right?

 

Before the smugfest I'd have thought this a simple question. Now I

realize human nature pretty much reduces us all to naked chimps every time.

 

What has this to do with vegetarianism? A great deal, I'd say, especially

for the Vegans among us, who profess to live a lifestyle choice based on

ethical concerns. That is embodying a philosophy.

 

I'm sure all of this passes right over, or past, most here, so genug.

 

On Tuesday, February 18, 2003, at 06:55 AM, (AT) (DOT)

com wrote:

 

> You did indeed reply. Stating that you " did not " read it. So, I

> guess................You lied. It's just not clear *which* time, is all.

>

>

" Inability to accept the mystic experience is more than an

intellectual handicap. Lack of awareness of the basic unity

of organism and environment is a serious and dangerous

hallucination. For in a civilization equipped with immense

technological power, the sense of alienation between humans

and nature leads to the use of technology in a hostile

spirit---to the " conquest " of nature instead of intelligent

co-operation with nature. " -Alan Watts

[Guest guest]

Smug, catty, hollow, shallow and trollery? All these are your

projection. While you ask some interesting questions, the use of

these words tend to come across as baiting. Please stop

this. I will be the only " troll " here, thank you.

 

~ PT ~

 

Truth replies only when first hearing sincere questions,

and how few it hears.

~ Vernon Howard

~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~>

, The Stewarts <stews9@c...>

wrote:

 

> What has this to do with vegetarianism? A great deal, I'd say,

especially

> for the Vegans among us, who profess to live a lifestyle choice

based on

> ethical concerns. That is embodying a philosophy.

> I'm sure all of this passes right over, or past, most here, so

genug.