tisdag 1 mars 2011

God, Mind, and The Universe Part 2

Dear Parviz

No, this is NOT dualism, although I agree with you on every other point you discuss. So my disagreement only concerns the terminology.
Mazda is one of many ATTRIBUTES of Ahura, one of many expressions of the one and same substance.
Just like Parviz and Alexander and Ardeshir and Mehrdad and Ali are attributes of Ahura and also attributes of Mazda as they can all hopefully think.
Just so that we don't confuse people with the wrong terms.
There is no dualism involved anywhere in Mazdayasna. It is truly monistic. And mono-theistic.

Ushta
Alexander

2011/2/28 Parviz Varjavand

Ushta Alex,

You say "God is Whatever IS. God is not that which does not exist. So God is The Universe". In my version patented as Mazdaism, Ahoora is whatever IS while Mazda is only whatever THINKS. So Mazda is part of Ahoora but not all of it. The God of Monism is One and there is no other while in Mazdaism, Mazda is where there is a Mind and not in whatever exists. So Mazdaism is dualistic, but not separating body and soul but rather Ahoora and Mazda.

Next, I think you fall in the same trap where Jafarey has been stuck for ever, holding hands with Zoroaster and looking in his eye trying to figure him out. Who knows what Z. wanted to say, I invented Mazdaism, so I hold a patent on what it is ;-) No other Zoroastrian (or non-Zoroastrian) before me defined Ahoora Mazda in the manner I defined it first (talk about big ego, but what can I say? it is the truth ;-). Ushta archives can prove that.

Mehr Afzoon,
Parviz Varjavand

--- On Mon, 2/28/11, Alexander Bard wrote:

From: Alexander Bard
Subject: [Ushta] God, Mind and The Universe

To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Cc: "Ali Jafarey"
Date: Monday, February 28, 2011, 12:02 AM

I would even go as far as to say that according to Zarathushtra (and I agree) The Mind is The Attribute of God, God's most innate expression. When discussing what God is, I prefer to just go straight to the obvious monist conclusion; God is Whatever IS. God is not that which does not exist. So God is The Universe.
To say that Mind is God is somehow just falling into a new dualist trap:
- So you say that Mind is God? Does that mean that God is only Mind and that which does not have mind is outside of God?
There you have the problem with the statement "Mind is God". It is better to say "The Mind is the Expression of God".
Just like for example "Nature is an Attribute of God" or "Space is an Attribute of God".
Zarathushtra called The Universe "Ahura" and Mind "Mazda". One does not make sense without the other to us as humans (which is what interested Zarathushtra, he was NOT interested in an all-encompassing theological explanation of the world but in a pragmatic explanation of how we as humans are bound to EXPERIENCE existence).
One is the Substance (Ahura) and the other the to us humans most meaningful Attribute of the Substance (Mazda). But please not that Zarathushtra actually rarely mentions the two together in The Gathas (clearly indicating that they should NOT be used together as some omnipotent Abarahamic deity).
Ushta
Alexander

2011/2/28 Parviz Varjavand

Ushta Dino,

Thank you very much for trying to make things clear for me without talking down or lecturing. While I do not believe in Goblins or the Soul and I think they are both cut from the same cloth which is creatures made up by Devyasna, I also do not believe that my Mind and my power to think (Mazda) and a Rock are one and the same and cut out of the same cloth of Monism. Will the Rock some day become my Mind (as if it is not already there ;-), I do not know? But it is hard for me to put a Thinking Mind and a Rock in the same shoe box and call them the same thing and both god.

For me, the Mind is God and a small part of the Big Mind (Mazda) which dwells in Life Forms and not in rocks. This is why I have been calling myself a Mazdaist rather than any of the other categorizations you have listed. I worship the Mind in nature and not the rocks or what volcanoes spew out. Am I very off? I specially would appreciate if Mehrdad Farahmand who is a good scientist if he would post a crit about what I am trying to say.

With you in Mazda,
Parviz Varjavand

--- On Sun, 2/27/11, Special Kain wrote:

From: Special Kain
Subject: Re: [Ushta] Monism vs dualism, monotheism vs polytheism - a clarification!
To: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 27, 2011, 2:56 AM

Hi Parviz

Monotheism = there is only one god
Polytheism = there are several gods

Monism = there is only one substance
Dualism = there are two substances

Monism + monotheism = there is only one god and only one substance and they're both one and the same

Ushta,
Dino

2 kommentarer:

Robert sa...

Hej Alexander
Min kommentar är irrelevant till postningen men då jag inte hittar någon mailadress och förutsätter att du granskar inlägget innan det postas så skriver jag här.

Frågan gäller liberalismen. Ska försöka fatta mig kort.

(konkret söker jag rådgiving och inte debatt)

Jag placerar mig själv på vänsterkanten därför:
1. Jag tror arroganta människor med elitistisk syn tenderar att trampa på andra oförkänt. Jag tycker helt enkelt inte om instinktiv orättvisa eller mobbare.

2. Jag tror att en individ och ett samhälle i stort mår bäst av en grundläggande trygghet, därför bör samhället kunna erbjuda detta, dels av moraliska skäl, men även strikt pragmatiska.

3. Personligen har jag inga problem med att dela med mig av mitt överflöd till andra människor som saknar grundläggande resurser.

4. (anknyter till punkt 1) Jag tror att regleringar och lagar behövs för att skydda oss mot mobbare.

Nu till min konkreta fråga till dig: Motsätter du dig som riktig liberal detta helt och fullt. Eller har du bara andra lösningar för att uppnå samma mål?

Som du förstår trevar jag mig fram mellan de politiska ismerna och har svårt att hitta mig själv.

Mvh

Robban
robertnilsson76@gmail.com

Robert sa...

(radera gärna kommentaren efter läsning då den är av privat karaktär om den publiceras automatiskt)