<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: God is Not One</title>
	<atom:link href="http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 01:29:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jagadish das</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-6581</link>
		<dc:creator>Jagadish das</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2010 01:29:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-6581</guid>
		<description>Harer Nama Harer Nama Harer Nama eva kevalam
Kalau nasteva nasteva nasteva gatir anyatha!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Harer Nama Harer Nama Harer Nama eva kevalam<br />
Kalau nasteva nasteva nasteva gatir anyatha!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Citta Hari dasa</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5172</link>
		<dc:creator>Citta Hari dasa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2010 04:16:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5172</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I am the proverbial horse’s mouth &lt;/blockquote&gt;

I am the walrus! Koo-koo ka-choo!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I am the proverbial horse’s mouth </p></blockquote>
<p>I am the walrus! Koo-koo ka-choo!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nitaisundara</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5158</link>
		<dc:creator>Nitaisundara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 03:31:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5158</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Your best bet is to lose the book, the topic, the effort and the attitude and spend all your energy in trying to do good to your fellow man in some other way.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You have your moments, KB. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Your best bet is to lose the book, the topic, the effort and the attitude and spend all your energy in trying to do good to your fellow man in some other way.</p></blockquote>
<p>You have your moments, KB. <img src='http://harmonist.us/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KB das</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5149</link>
		<dc:creator>KB das</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 11:50:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5149</guid>
		<description>I understand your dissatisfaction with the Abrahamic religions and suspicions of deception. I too felt that way most all my adult life. However, attacking the authenticity of the Abrahamic faiths is an approach that will soon prove futile, ill-conceived and malicious. I am not one to cast stones at you for it, but I have to honestly say that I think the effort to debunk the authenticity of the Abrahamic religions is misguided, unproductive and divisive.
Your book will not be well-received by the yoga world. Some of the New Age people might agree, but even there you will ultimately find that most of them are respectful of the Abrahamic religions because most all the Indian gurus who came in the 60&#039;s spoke highly of Jesus.
So, you say that you are the Horse&#039;s mouth, but anyone that comes out and attacks the authenticity of the Abrahamic religions publicly will more likely be viewed as the Horse&#039;s ass.

I hope you can find the truth someday that will halt such maliciousness towards these religions.
You lack many keys that you don&#039;t have right now and you probably shouldn&#039;t be writing a book that you might someday come to regret. You still have time to grow spiritually in life.
If you grow enough you will get to the point of NOT attacking the faith and the religions of others.

It wasn&#039;t that long ago I would have agreed with your assertions and claims. But, a number of angels changed my mind very profoundly and now I have to say that you and I are both fools for practicing such hatred and contempt for the world religions.

Your best bet is to lose the book, the topic, the effort and the attitude and spend all your energy in trying to do good to your fellow man in some other way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand your dissatisfaction with the Abrahamic religions and suspicions of deception. I too felt that way most all my adult life. However, attacking the authenticity of the Abrahamic faiths is an approach that will soon prove futile, ill-conceived and malicious. I am not one to cast stones at you for it, but I have to honestly say that I think the effort to debunk the authenticity of the Abrahamic religions is misguided, unproductive and divisive.<br />
Your book will not be well-received by the yoga world. Some of the New Age people might agree, but even there you will ultimately find that most of them are respectful of the Abrahamic religions because most all the Indian gurus who came in the 60&#8242;s spoke highly of Jesus.<br />
So, you say that you are the Horse&#8217;s mouth, but anyone that comes out and attacks the authenticity of the Abrahamic religions publicly will more likely be viewed as the Horse&#8217;s ass.</p>
<p>I hope you can find the truth someday that will halt such maliciousness towards these religions.<br />
You lack many keys that you don&#8217;t have right now and you probably shouldn&#8217;t be writing a book that you might someday come to regret. You still have time to grow spiritually in life.<br />
If you grow enough you will get to the point of NOT attacking the faith and the religions of others.</p>
<p>It wasn&#8217;t that long ago I would have agreed with your assertions and claims. But, a number of angels changed my mind very profoundly and now I have to say that you and I are both fools for practicing such hatred and contempt for the world religions.</p>
<p>Your best bet is to lose the book, the topic, the effort and the attitude and spend all your energy in trying to do good to your fellow man in some other way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nitaisundara</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5148</link>
		<dc:creator>Nitaisundara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 04:05:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5148</guid>
		<description>Hi Seven,

Thanks for contributing. Having not yet followed the link you posted, proof beyond dis-proof is a tall claim. Also, one way to understand religion is simply the overt practices and lifestyle of those pursuing a spiritual path. I am suspecting you might be equating religion with bad religion across the board, and thus concluding that truly spiritual people are anti-religion. I think this is a large error by way of generalization.

Without religion and the association of like-minded spiritualists, the &quot;lone ranger spiritualist&quot; tends to move further and further into an imagined enlightenment, compounded with a sense that they are one of the few people (or only person) to attain such a high state. What this practically means is that the ego of being the center of things is expanding, rather than contracting. Traditions and groups have their flaws no doubt, but what is a flawed group but a conglomeration of flawed individuals? Can we say they would always be better off on their own?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Seven,</p>
<p>Thanks for contributing. Having not yet followed the link you posted, proof beyond dis-proof is a tall claim. Also, one way to understand religion is simply the overt practices and lifestyle of those pursuing a spiritual path. I am suspecting you might be equating religion with bad religion across the board, and thus concluding that truly spiritual people are anti-religion. I think this is a large error by way of generalization.</p>
<p>Without religion and the association of like-minded spiritualists, the &#8220;lone ranger spiritualist&#8221; tends to move further and further into an imagined enlightenment, compounded with a sense that they are one of the few people (or only person) to attain such a high state. What this practically means is that the ego of being the center of things is expanding, rather than contracting. Traditions and groups have their flaws no doubt, but what is a flawed group but a conglomeration of flawed individuals? Can we say they would always be better off on their own?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Seven Star Hand</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5147</link>
		<dc:creator>Seven Star Hand</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 03:48:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5147</guid>
		<description>Hello Harmonists,

I am the proverbial horse&#039;s mouth and I am now gifting you with the long sought-after solutions to these ancient symbolic mysteries. By the way, I liked your mention that all religions were a different path up the same mountain. Do you understand what that actually means symbolically?

Here is comprehensive proof that the symbolism of many ancient texts, canons, and concepts is an advanced and extremely ancient spiritual and philosophical technology that predates all extant religions and mystery schools. Consequently, here is proof, beyond disproof, that all three so-called “Faiths of Abraham” are purposeful deceptions. 

Accordingly, related esoterica, mystery schools, and the New Age are rife with error caused by undue reliance upon the assertions of these religions and their leaders. Throughout this book, I present verifiable proof that ancient sages and prophets opposed religion and wisely never trusted religious leaders. As comprehensive validation of this, they redundantly encoded stunning proof of why throughout pivotal symbolic narratives and related concepts. 

Following is a link to a draft-preview of my upcoming new book for parties like yourself, who are more likely to make good use of the information. Please excuse the ads on this site, it&#039;s a free file storage site and I&#039;m not ready to post it to E-Book sites yet. 

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mediafire.com/?zjz5zoijzmu&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Finishing the Mysteries of Gods and Symbols&lt;/a&gt;

Peace and Wisdom,

Seven</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Harmonists,</p>
<p>I am the proverbial horse&#8217;s mouth and I am now gifting you with the long sought-after solutions to these ancient symbolic mysteries. By the way, I liked your mention that all religions were a different path up the same mountain. Do you understand what that actually means symbolically?</p>
<p>Here is comprehensive proof that the symbolism of many ancient texts, canons, and concepts is an advanced and extremely ancient spiritual and philosophical technology that predates all extant religions and mystery schools. Consequently, here is proof, beyond disproof, that all three so-called “Faiths of Abraham” are purposeful deceptions. </p>
<p>Accordingly, related esoterica, mystery schools, and the New Age are rife with error caused by undue reliance upon the assertions of these religions and their leaders. Throughout this book, I present verifiable proof that ancient sages and prophets opposed religion and wisely never trusted religious leaders. As comprehensive validation of this, they redundantly encoded stunning proof of why throughout pivotal symbolic narratives and related concepts. </p>
<p>Following is a link to a draft-preview of my upcoming new book for parties like yourself, who are more likely to make good use of the information. Please excuse the ads on this site, it&#8217;s a free file storage site and I&#8217;m not ready to post it to E-Book sites yet. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.mediafire.com/?zjz5zoijzmu" rel="nofollow">Finishing the Mysteries of Gods and Symbols</a></p>
<p>Peace and Wisdom,</p>
<p>Seven</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KB das</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5146</link>
		<dc:creator>KB das</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 01:38:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5146</guid>
		<description>You state in your post:
&lt;blockquote&gt;It is One: transcendent to and immanent in all existence; the absolute nature of being itself. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

In the Vaishnava society they never refer to the Supreme Absolute Godhead as &quot;it&quot;. The Vaishnava devotees of the Lord would only ask that &quot;it&quot; be changed to &quot;Him&quot;.
The Vaishnava followers of the Vedic authority always place Him above &lt;strong&gt;it&lt;/strong&gt; when it comes to the Godhead.

Is the absolute a person or a field of undifferentiated energy?
What do you think?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You state in your post:</p>
<blockquote><p>It is One: transcendent to and immanent in all existence; the absolute nature of being itself. </p></blockquote>
<p>In the Vaishnava society they never refer to the Supreme Absolute Godhead as &#8220;it&#8221;. The Vaishnava devotees of the Lord would only ask that &#8220;it&#8221; be changed to &#8220;Him&#8221;.<br />
The Vaishnava followers of the Vedic authority always place Him above <strong>it</strong> when it comes to the Godhead.</p>
<p>Is the absolute a person or a field of undifferentiated energy?<br />
What do you think?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Krumpos</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5140</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Krumpos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 02:37:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5140</guid>
		<description>It is rather difficult to follow these comments because they are not in exact chronological order. Gaura-Vijaya, are you responding to my last post?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is rather difficult to follow these comments because they are not in exact chronological order. Gaura-Vijaya, are you responding to my last post?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KB das</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5139</link>
		<dc:creator>KB das</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 20:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5139</guid>
		<description>Yes, I am glad you noticed. However, something happened to me in the last few years and I got recruited into cosmic consciousness after I had already been recruited into Krishna consciousness by Srila Prabhupada..
So, what I know and can teach about Lucifer, Satan, Jesus, Moses etc. etc. has to do with cosmic consciousness and not Krishna consciousness, so I must state such.
I know the whole thing about Jesus, Lucifer, Satan, Abraham, Moses and so many things.
The revelation is there and it is real.
I can answer all the questions about the truth about Lord Jesus whom I know as a personal guru.
It is not in the Bible.
The truth about Jesus is something else and I know what that is, now after a lifetime of confusion and doubt.
I can tell you that the truth about Jesus is beautiful beyond imagination.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I am glad you noticed. However, something happened to me in the last few years and I got recruited into cosmic consciousness after I had already been recruited into Krishna consciousness by Srila Prabhupada..<br />
So, what I know and can teach about Lucifer, Satan, Jesus, Moses etc. etc. has to do with cosmic consciousness and not Krishna consciousness, so I must state such.<br />
I know the whole thing about Jesus, Lucifer, Satan, Abraham, Moses and so many things.<br />
The revelation is there and it is real.<br />
I can answer all the questions about the truth about Lord Jesus whom I know as a personal guru.<br />
It is not in the Bible.<br />
The truth about Jesus is something else and I know what that is, now after a lifetime of confusion and doubt.<br />
I can tell you that the truth about Jesus is beautiful beyond imagination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2010/06/god-is-not-one/comment-page-1/#comment-5138</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 20:18:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=5013#comment-5138</guid>
		<description>I showed this article to a professor of mine and we talked a bit about it.  It was interesting.

&lt;strong&gt;He said:&lt;/strong&gt;  &quot;The main argument is that the world’s religions are climbing different mountains with very different tools and techniques.&quot; This of course invites the response: &quot;the sky pretty much looks the same when you reach the top.&quot;

&lt;strong&gt;I replied:&lt;/strong&gt;  &quot;I have mixed feelings about this article. Something about it seems to appeal to the anti-perennialist part of me, and the grave danger in dumbing religions down and saying, &quot;oh, they&#039;re all talking about the same thing.&quot; The other part of me feels this article (and possibly his book in general), while certainly well-meaning, once again pits one religion against another leaving us back in the sectarian boat again.

I think perhaps the various &quot;tools and techniques&quot; which perennialists are often all to eager to disregard because they claim they are only seemingly relevant when we have yet to reach the mountain top (where we will look back and see them in a more objective light), are the VERY things which ARE of the most importance.

I can agree with the notion that all the world&#039;s religious traditions are in search of Absolute Truth and Wisdom (God), but the variegated &quot;tools and techniques&quot; employed by the different traditions will certainly yield variegaated experiences of that &quot;one&quot; Supreme Reality. I know you (my professor) are fond of saying, &quot;...different experiences of the same Reality&quot;, and I think there&#039;s something here to be worked out. Could it not be argued that there is an optimal experience; one that is inclusive of all other possible experiences.  This may be a poor example, but for instance, 2+2=4. Basic math is undoubtedly correct. But isn&#039;t Algebra a little more comprehensive of that same basic math truth? Moreover, isn&#039;t Calculus still more comprehensive than Algebra? Yes, 2+2=4 and that does not change, but isn&#039;t it plausible to suggest that quantum physics &quot;gets at&quot; the same math truth even more systematically and with more detail and nuance without compromising the basic underlying truth of 2+2?

Maybe there is a case to be made, hopefully without too much arrogance, that some religious philosophies in face DO express the same Truth, in more comprehensive ways than others.  It need not mean they are talking about a completely different Reality, simply that they have &quot;worked through&quot; things to a greater degree than some other philosophy has.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I showed this article to a professor of mine and we talked a bit about it.  It was interesting.</p>
<p><strong>He said:</strong>  &#8220;The main argument is that the world’s religions are climbing different mountains with very different tools and techniques.&#8221; This of course invites the response: &#8220;the sky pretty much looks the same when you reach the top.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>I replied:</strong>  &#8220;I have mixed feelings about this article. Something about it seems to appeal to the anti-perennialist part of me, and the grave danger in dumbing religions down and saying, &#8220;oh, they&#8217;re all talking about the same thing.&#8221; The other part of me feels this article (and possibly his book in general), while certainly well-meaning, once again pits one religion against another leaving us back in the sectarian boat again.</p>
<p>I think perhaps the various &#8220;tools and techniques&#8221; which perennialists are often all to eager to disregard because they claim they are only seemingly relevant when we have yet to reach the mountain top (where we will look back and see them in a more objective light), are the VERY things which ARE of the most importance.</p>
<p>I can agree with the notion that all the world&#8217;s religious traditions are in search of Absolute Truth and Wisdom (God), but the variegated &#8220;tools and techniques&#8221; employed by the different traditions will certainly yield variegaated experiences of that &#8220;one&#8221; Supreme Reality. I know you (my professor) are fond of saying, &#8220;&#8230;different experiences of the same Reality&#8221;, and I think there&#8217;s something here to be worked out. Could it not be argued that there is an optimal experience; one that is inclusive of all other possible experiences.  This may be a poor example, but for instance, 2+2=4. Basic math is undoubtedly correct. But isn&#8217;t Algebra a little more comprehensive of that same basic math truth? Moreover, isn&#8217;t Calculus still more comprehensive than Algebra? Yes, 2+2=4 and that does not change, but isn&#8217;t it plausible to suggest that quantum physics &#8220;gets at&#8221; the same math truth even more systematically and with more detail and nuance without compromising the basic underlying truth of 2+2?</p>
<p>Maybe there is a case to be made, hopefully without too much arrogance, that some religious philosophies in face DO express the same Truth, in more comprehensive ways than others.  It need not mean they are talking about a completely different Reality, simply that they have &#8220;worked through&#8221; things to a greater degree than some other philosophy has.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

