DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Mantra

**Koayrbzh** · 05-14-2011, 09:19 AM

Dear Saidevo,

When too many things are raised, a situation I liken to a dust storm, obscures what we are talking about. So, I am taking the liberty of refocusing on the four major points. BTW, these are nothing new, we have talked about these issues often, as often as some people vote in elections

.

1. outside the realm of believers, the mantras might as well be gibberish
You agreed with this, with the caveat that the efficacy will not be lost -- this is the second point

2. the sound of the mantras will have effect even for a non-believer, so it is utterly wrong to describe them as gibberish
This is just your assertion with no evidence at all. The YouTube video is a joke. This is where Shri Sangom's point about the reproducibility of efficacy is crucial. Just making claims is unacceptable.

3. which version of metaphysics
Like you are asserting that your version of creation is the apex, a follower of the Abrahamic tradition will certainly assert his version is the apex. Further, he may assert that your view is completely false and only his metaphysics is true metaphysics. So, my question about which version of the called metaphysics to choose remains unanswered.

BTW, the Hindu (Brahmnical I suppose) version of creation of the universe involves substances like mahat, ahankara, tanmathrai, etc. None of this is based on any observation or analysis, but simply asserted based on some religious text. Why should anyone believe these religious texts, whatever may be the religion?

4. science and metaphysics
You want to draw an equivalency between a scientist and a yogi. This is a false equivalency for reasons we have already discussed often. So, I will spare the readers, and you also, with repeating them again.

Cheers!

05-14-2011, 09:19 AM	#18
Koayrbzh Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 440 Senior Member	Dear Saidevo, When too many things are raised, a situation I liken to a dust storm, obscures what we are talking about. So, I am taking the liberty of refocusing on the four major points. BTW, these are nothing new, we have talked about these issues often, as often as some people vote in elections . 1. outside the realm of believers, the mantras might as well be gibberish You agreed with this, with the caveat that the efficacy will not be lost -- this is the second point 2. the sound of the mantras will have effect even for a non-believer, so it is utterly wrong to describe them as gibberish This is just your assertion with no evidence at all. The YouTube video is a joke. This is where Shri Sangom's point about the reproducibility of efficacy is crucial. Just making claims is unacceptable. 3. which version of metaphysics Like you are asserting that your version of creation is the apex, a follower of the Abrahamic tradition will certainly assert his version is the apex. Further, he may assert that your view is completely false and only his metaphysics is true metaphysics. So, my question about which version of the called metaphysics to choose remains unanswered. BTW, the Hindu (Brahmnical I suppose) version of creation of the universe involves substances like mahat, ahankara, tanmathrai, etc. None of this is based on any observation or analysis, but simply asserted based on some religious text. Why should anyone believe these religious texts, whatever may be the religion? 4. science and metaphysics You want to draw an equivalency between a scientist and a yogi. This is a false equivalency for reasons we have already discussed often. So, I will spare the readers, and you also, with repeating them again. Cheers!
	Quote