Tolerance is what we show after we have voiced our opinion and people still - thorugh their free choice - choose to ignore us and go their own way.
But acceptance is something we can never be required to do. We are always free to voice our opinion. And as Mazdayasni we are even obliged to do so.
Ushta
Alexander
2010/3/12 Parviz Varjavand
Dear Dino and Martin,
If we see a person slap a child in public, it is a good thing to show our disapproval, is it not? So when a sect teaches girls and boys that they are born in sin and messes their sexual life by messing up their psyche, why should we not at least show a small sign of disapproval and act as if all is normal in that adult-child relationship? Canibalism was part of the tradition of many primitive religions, should we tolorate canibalism by those tribes because it is part of their tradition and religion?
--- On Fri, 3/12/10, Special Kain
From: Special Kain
Subject: Re: [Ushta] Acceptance vs Tolerance
To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, March 12, 2010, 7:18 AM
Dear Martin
Most religions are all about faith. Just look at Abrahamitic religions where people are forced down on their knees and told to bow down in front of one spooky father figure. But Mazdayasna is encouraging and nurturing an evidence-based approach towards existence. It's important to keep this difference in mind when using words such as "religion: The doctrine of Asha is all about the relentless pursuit of the truth. It's the arch-enemy of all spooky father figures out there, if anything.
And we also have to recall the difference between tolerance (enduring, forbearing) and respect.
My two cents,
Dino
--- Martin Grossmann
Von: Martin Grossmann
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Acceptance vs Tolerance
An: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Datum: Donnerstag, 11. März, 2010 20:55 Uhr
Dear Alexander,
thank you that you understand it. I was asking for tolerance and I do understand the difference. I can understand that Parviz doesnt want to accept certain things and he has the right to say his opinion on such topics, but still he has to tolerate things even if not accepting them.
And your last sentence pretty much covers it all. We change each brick to build a whole house after our plan.
2010/3/11 Alexander Bard
Dear Martin and Parviz
Perhaps we are just confusing two very different things here:
Acceptance and Tolerance.
What Martin is talking about is respect (tolerance). But if we respect or tolerate somebody, that does not mean that we have to accept what they say. Actually, we shoud not accept what others say when they disagree with us. It is our obligation both towards them and towards ourselves to speak our minds. And be willing to change our minds in the process.
Actually, it can be argued that to accept somebody or something when we shoud not is the ultimate form of disrespect!
But let's agree to learn to separate acceptance from tolerance, OK?
Ushta
Alexander/who disagrees that we can no change the world, but only ourselves, because if we do change ourselves we also affect the world that surrounds us...
2010/3/11 Martin Grossmann
I am sry but even if I dont refer to Ardeshir on this post, read your posts and maybe you watch the language in your last post.
But what is your point then. No rules ? You have to determine rules in our living and surrounding. Jews are getting circumcized and if after legal law, until a child is turning mature age, the parents are responsible for it. By circumcision the health of the child is not harmed in any way and on medical terms it even has advantages. I will not say it is good that stuff like that happens, but parents have to decide for their children. And they decide as good as they can. If you want to ask a child with 4 years about Mazdayasna and philo-sophia, then do that. Tell him the pro and contra of circumcision.
Its not that easy. If you dont accept something, then give me an alternative. Religious classes are the suspect to the religious traditions the persons live in. Maybe you should go to the Parsis and tell them to stop getting children ordained to Priests since how can a child make such a decision for life. Its not that easy. Traditions will always exist and that is part of our identity. But actually I will not lighten up that topic anymore since we are talking about stuff that is basic to human identity and cannot be changed. Some stuff is certainly bad and small children learning koran verses or tora 24/7 is not good. I know that. But just because someone has religious traditions to make him bad or asking for the opinion of children on such obscure matters if he lives normal and just and is taking decisions for his child. As a parent, you dont do anything to harm your child. A basic rule that is upheld and natural.
But what you are criticizing or asking for is just not applicable and unrealistic for human nature itself.
Sry but after my opinion it doesnt make sense to talk further on this matter. I know your opinion now and since I dont post very much on this forum, you will not be disturbed further.
2010/3/11 Parviz Varjavand
Dear Martin,
You make me feel bad now by returning this to Ardeshir. Ardeshir is a very nice person and I do want to be friends with him. I thought that we were talking in general terms and not specific ones.
You say " If you harm another being or do something against their will then its bad in all ways."
If you believe this, then please try and go to some religious classes where these bad ideas are planted systematically in the minds of innocent children. These children deserve not to get their minds harmed. Do you believe children have rights? What if a little boy does not want his penis deformed by circumcision. Can he have his voice heard against that of the ....
--- On Thu, 3/11/10, Martin Grossmann
From: Martin Grossmann
Subject: Re: [Ushta] Co-creators; Choices and the Origin of
To: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Date: Thursday, March 11, 2010, 8:31 AM
You should maybe read what I had written before. I was not telling you to shut up or anything. I was not disrespectful in any way. I was just showing you the options you have. You can be a kind person but you cannot change the world. You can just change you. I talk with friends and problems but certainly I cannot make them understand if they dont want to or havent learnt it differently.
I didnt say you should be tolerant to people that are hurting their wives or children. I said that if someone is basing his religion on, for you irresponsible or unlogical thinking, then that is your opinion but if they dont harm anyone (meaning not hurting a person or their surrounding) and act in a juste and respectful manner, then it is not your responsibility to tell them otherwise.
I am sure Ardeshir got your point but each time writing the same thing and the same comments, and then being compared to someone fanatic in Islam is not my definition of respectful speech to an individual.
If someone deserves to hear your opinio or not, that is not yours to decide. If the moment comes, then they will want your opinion.
Certainly there are strange ideas and i m not saying I agree with them, but as long as the followers are not breaking certain ethical rules and all followers are doing it of free will, then maybe it is stupid or unlogical, but should not be judged by you. It is a free world and certainly you can tell them. I never told you not too. But you can talk 1000 years and still things wont change since the problem lies within humakind itself. Either you can go and try to persuade people to follow your way of mazdayasna or accept the fact, that there are other views on things.
By not accepting other definitions as yours, you are no different than a person in sunni islam hating shia islam or different jewish streams. They all have the same religion that is talking about good-doing and tolerance towards other ways as long as their defintions of the rules are not broken. You named examples that are out of bounce and I was never talking about such. It doesnt matter which way of Mazdayasna you live. If you harm another being or do somethign against their will then its bad in all ways.
I didnt ask for tolerance on such matters because there cant be none.
I am for free speech but too for respectful behaviour towards other members. If you are taking things too personal and are not able to read carefully, then certainly you are not the right person to talk too. I wont delete your comments since I am not a child to restrain myself from new viewpoints because somebody cannot accept another persons opinion. I will read them and think about them. That is all I can do. But getting personal on me shows a low maturity.
Nuff said.
MArtin
2010/3/11 Parviz Varjavand
Dear Martin,
Why are there so many good persons like you who run around telling everybody "Accept the Facts, accept the facts", that the masses of mankind should and almost MUST remain stupid and glued to strange ideas.
Afghanistan is a disaster area as far as bad ideas goes and most of all they hurt the woman. Why do you not go there and tell everybody "Be tolerant, accept the facts, women should be treated like dogs in this land and this is a fact, accept the facts". Yes, if someone has no legs, I will accept the facts and deal with him/her in kindness. But if someone has an idea that the invisible forces are there ushering in harm and sickness, why are you so protective of his/her destructive ideas. At least they deserve to hear that their thinking has problems, by me. I am no government and have no force to enforce anything, so what do you get by trying to shut me up so benevolently. Z'ism is not your regular department of "let's see what crazy ideas such as the forces of the evil Berjis star making girls menstruate have you got for me today". That crazy dog and pony show of Zoroastrianism you should go to the Khoshnoumists or the Pundol amongst us and have your jaw hang open by the strange ideas they can present you with. I like to talk Philo-Sophia as Mazda-Yasna on this site. Please tolerate me and delete my writings if you do not like them. We cherish our freedom of speech on Ushta. How else are those who seek better ideas going to find them if no exchange of ideas takes place.
--- On Thu, 3/11/10, Martin Grossmann
From: Martin Grossmann
Subject: Re: [Ushta] Co-creators; Choices and the Origin of
To: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Date: Thursday, March 11, 2010, 1:11 AM
Dear Parviz,
They hurt mankind but not each person can have a high intellect and logical thinking. Nature is not made that way. Certainly people are hurting and sometimes killing each other because of stupid ideas and I m not saying that is juste BUT it is an ordinary thing in humankind.
Either you will start missionizing or accept that fact.
2010/3/11, Parviz Varjavand
Dear Martin,
Poor ideas hurt mankind very badly. They say they are not hurting anybody, but they are. The worst place to hurt a man is in his mind and by planting stupid ideas there.
--- On Wed, 3/10/10, Martin Grossmann
From: Martin Grossmann
Subject: Re: [Ushta] Co-creators; Choices and the Origin of
To: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, March 10, 2010, 3:27 AM
I can understand your problems with that and certainly I had such moments too, but as long as these people do not harm anyone and the consequences are good and juste, you can certainly say you dont like it but tolerance should be there too.
2010/3/10 Parviz Varjavand
Yes Martin,
I am absolutely sacrilegious in that I define my own religious path and when I feel it is better than the path others present, I just say so to their face. Life is too short to be politically correct pretending to respect ideas you do not respect. I evolved from a lower animal and became man, so why should I pretend that this is not so. Why should I pretend that Ahoora Mazda made a perfect man first and then because of his/her wrong choices, evil crept in and that is why I have this bad jock-itch. Stupid ideas should be called that early otherwise they get a life of their own and grow on you.
Parviz
--- On Tue, 3/9/10, Martin Grossmann
From: Martin Grossmann
Subject: Re: [Ushta] Ahurå Mazdå 's Creation as his Co-creators; Choices and the Origin of Evil
To: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Date: Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 5:34 PM
So you define your own religion. I am not saying something is wrong with this approach but if people are using scripture to better understand their path, you should not criticize others for doing so. It doesnt mean they are not using their brain, but defining their path a different way. They love G-d (standing for enlightment or wisdom or divine balance, etc) and use different ways to contribute to that. Either prayer or doing certain rituals. As long as they dont see it exclusively, there is nothing wrong with it. Its not your turn to judge that. You have your way of Mazdaism and others have it different. Ardeshir writes this articles to show his remarks about his path of Mazdaism and you can contribute, but shouldnt judge his view to be less than yours.
Martin
2010/3/10 Parviz Varjavand
Dear Martin,
In my religious path that I call Mazdaism, Mazda-Yasna means Philo-Sophia, nothing more, nothing less. What is wrong with this approach?
Parviz
--- On Tue, 3/9/10, Martin Grossmann
From: Martin Grossmann
Subject: Re: [Ushta] Ahurå Mazdå 's Creation as his Co-creators; Choices and the Origin of Evil
To: Ushta@yahoogroups. com
Date: Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 5:06 PM
Dear Parviz,
I am the first one to be free in my thinking. I love to think out of the box and I certainly do not like believing in each word of a book. But religion is faith in something, that is not empirically proven. That makes it different to science and so a scientist will never have to have "Faith" in something, since faith is not even part of his work. If he cannot prove it, it doesnt exist for him. If he cannot prove it, he tries to use metaphysical logic to exterminate other possibilities but still it is NOT a fact until he has proven it.
Mazda-Yasna is certainly the love for wisdom and knowledge, but it is a religion. If you see this way just in a philosophical sense, then you dont need to believe in mazda-yasna but in philosophy. Do I believe you need to have certain rules for believing in G-d or a higher spiritual power. No, I dont. Knowledge and faith in good deeds or good thoughts should be enough. But from somewhere you need a guidance to differentiate which things are seen to be good or bad, and that is the reason books are the basics for religious systems. They give us ethics in form of stories or experiences. I dont need one road to follow, but I need a starting point. Then I can decide which road I want to follow to reach the same finish.
Martin
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar