Guest guest Posted March 6, 2006 Report Share Posted March 6, 2006 >so you can see that this type of arguing leads to a stalemate since >both parties just use their own paradigms and won't budge... Yes, that's basically what happens! >What about the second Nyaya argument which shows the logical necessity >of someone on top: >- there are many beings in this world >- they are on different levels (from the point of view of 6 bhagas) >- the supreme of them may be called God, #1 or whatever 8) >I don't see a way to negate it. It just doesn't say much about the >nature of that supreme being. But it opens the way to accept more >knowledge. Well, I think there's a way that gives so much doubt to the argument that it looses most of it's power. Try and see if you can counteract this answer: We can imagine that the world consists of beings that all both have power over other beings and are subjected to the powers of other beings. If you imagine that you have a circle, so that A-being controls B-being that controls C-being that controls A-being. Then there's no supreme or most powerfull being. And even if one being can be said to be more powerfull than the others, then it still doesn't mean that this being is at all not subjected to the control of at least one other being. Ys, AKD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.