Vedic definition of atheism

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna Prabhu! Pamho, agtSP!

 

>> >Asura is imho more about attitude - an enemy of dharma, devas,

>> >Bhagavan.

>>

>> But I think that Prabhupada also used for word for more innocent

>> people also. They were small demons but still demons.

 

>Prabhupada sometimes used various definitions, often different from

>the dictionary meanings. I guess this was due to his being non-native

>English speaker trying to present terms from a very different and

>non-secular culture. Thus we have "fruitive work/results" for karma,

>"religion, religiosity" from dharma, etc. Since he equated 'religion'

>with dharma, while in the West since Reformation it is usually seen as

>a hobby (although etymologically, from Latin re-ligio, it is analogous

>to yoga), he sounded quite heavy to Western ears.

 

>There is a problem with both too broad and too narrow definitions.

>Therefore I really try to understand the context.

 

Yes, my experience also tells me that's the best.

 

There may be about 40% of his material. I've used his article since I

liked it and added things from the Vaisnava point of view.

 

Some years back I translated a lot from the article into danish and used it.

After that I read a lot of William Lane Craigs texts. He's very good.

 

>You should probably team up with Jahnu P., my old friend from Korsnas.

>He has a huge backlog of exchanges with atheists. We could throw in

>some more input from this conference and thus produce a book, a

>course, etc. Wiki has the power of synergy. There is no such material

>in ISKCON so far. We can also get some input from Christian apology

>which has an old tradition.

 

Yes, let's try it. Jahnu Prabhu and myself have been talking about it

before. We are both from Denmark, so we know each other from there. Let's

see what happens. I have many texts in Danish, and I will try to translate

them and post them here to hear your comments. I this way we can make them

better. In the end we will have enough material for a book. I was thinking

also to write some strategies for preaching against atheist. Right now in

working on a strategy for debating against defensive (also called weak,

implicit, negative) atheists. They are the most tricky types.

 

>We can use this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

>as a resource of systematized and coherent atheist claims.

 

Yes, we could do that. I usually use books because they are really

thourough. The biggest book on atheism must be "Atheism - a philosophical

justification" by Michael Martin. That book is on an academic level, it's

more than 500 pages and filled with standardized logical argument. Just how

logical they are is of course disputed

 

>> Yes, I was thinking that especially if one has doubts and challenges

>> Prabhupada and his teachings after studying them, then one is an

>> atheist.

 

>Everyone should examine the philosophy before surrendering to it.

>That's encouraged in the Vedic tradition. The mood, however, should be

>of seva and prasna (BG 4.34), not challenging.

 

Sure, of course, but if someone examines it and then says that Prabhupada

was wrong then there is something wrong. Tat was my point. I agree totally

with what you're saying.

 

Imho, the irrelevant crosslinked comments should be removed.

 

I'm not such a techniqual wizard so I need a little time to learn the system

here. But now I think that all posts are going through me as the moderator.

That should solve the problem.

 

Ys, AKD