Lance Vinaire-Scientology boil

For far too long we Hindus have been far too relaxed, laidback and laissez faire about the other religionists,(fanatic, ruthless and Founder-Book-crazed) who invaded India and now live among and around us. Christianity and Islam have become the majority, indeed the only religion in so many continents and countries in such a short time, praise be to the sword and the gun.

Even when we gave away large chunks of our motherland, the only land of the Hindus since humanity began, yet the Semitic religionists demand more of our flesh and/or land, they are never satisfied. Now, compared to all this the absurd Vinaire and his founder's Scientology Book must seem very small beer, true.

Remember, they all started with a founder and therefore in a small way: Judeo-Christianity, Islam, Communism, Scientology. The crimes against humanity they have committed and continue to commit are still to be catalogued fully.

Scientology lost a court case in the UK regarding brainwashing of young, vulnerable converts. They lost another recently about something else. Even Christians have mostly given up the gun and now use brainwashing instead.

The question to ask is why should we lose even one non-Hindu aspirerant newcomer to this Hindu forum who, reading Vinaire's fraudulent stuff of equations, new terms defined in his Scientology founder's image and other such lies and nonsense, upon reading Vinaire humbugs exclaims, "This is the same as mixture of Islam, Christianity and Blusterology in new equations", throws up and clicks away.

The other very important question is, why should Vinaire, the Hubbard's Blusterology missionary, enjoy our hospitality and yet with his officious, offensive words and equations cause any suffering to a Hindu? Vinaire says until he exposed himself to Scientology he knew nothing, he still knows nothing.

I know we do not exclude anyone, therefore I propose that every Vinaire message- and he writes more in one day than some of us do in a year - every such post should carry a faith warning: Beware Vinarie, a Scientology cultist.
None of the organised religions give a platform to fifth-columnists.

Sri Chetan,

Here is an example of your anti-pseudo-seculiarist paranoia. Do you think Mr. Jiten Bhardwaj would go for the idea of universal brotherhood that you wrote under your "Hindu vision for the next Millenium.

He matches Mr. S.P. Attri in his venom and "love" for humanity.

BRAINWASHING

The real brainwashing is the effect of MAYA. If you are attached to this physical universe of matter, energy, space, and time, then you are already brainwashed.

Whether it is Hinduism or Scientology, the effort is to free oneself from the effect of MAYA. Scientology is a bit more insistent on speaking out against attachment. Therefore, Scientology causes more reaction.

Those who are the most attached, they are the ones who react the most, resist the most, and cry out "wolf" the most.

Sri Vinaire,

In stead of a proper response to Sri Jiten, you resort to absurd charges and name calling.

Sri Attri and Sri Jiten are doing much more for Hindu awakening than you can ever imagine. Certainly their methods and language are different but that doesn't make them wrong.

At least they are not considering something else as being purer than Hinduism and a Sci-Fiction writer and founder of a cult, facing endless criminal and civil charges around the world, being a sage of Hinduism. They are trying to bring out Hindu language, culture and dharma instead of polluting these with stuffs from Scientology.

You are, as you have always been, very intolerant of any criticism of Scientology, Hubbard and your faith in them. Your latest response to Sri Jiten just confirms that. You should stop insulting Sri Attri since he has not been participating in this forum since a long time.

P.S.: Scientology's insistence against attachment converts humans into animals and stones. That is not the kind of unattached state Hinduism preaches. Sri Viniare, you are being ridiculous in equating Maya with brainwashing and making statements like "Whether it is Hinduism or Scientology, the effort is to free oneself from the effect of MAYA." I wonder if you have attained another state in Scientology (You said you were a Clear), because you are showing increased devotion and fanaticism about this cult.

I am very disappointed. I would have thought that being perhaps the youngest member of this forum that I would be the most immature of the group. When I see all of these intellegent men resorting to aimless bickering, I start to wonder which generation is most in need of direction.

Perhaps you should all consider what purpose you hope to achieve through all this, and then ask yourselves if there was not a more dignified and respectful way you could have done it.

Stop letting your passions get away with you. Anger and resentment are signs of weakness.

Om peace,
Andrew

Very well said, Andrew.

I would request the moderator to delete this thread, as it only promotes fixed ideas and hate.

Perhaps, or maybe since we are all adults with a strong sense of moral responsibility we could prove ourselves as such and solve this for ourselves.

Sri Vinaire, I will come right out and say that I do not agree with your beliefs. Scientology was known to me before Hinduism, and I made the personal choice to adopt Hinduism into my heart. However, you have proved yourself to be intellegent and rational, and have bested me with a lot of good arguments. I respect your beliefs, though I will hold my own. Your presence has certainly added depth to this board.

Sri Jiten, you're love for Hinduism is extremely evident, and I find that to be quite admirable. I'm sure that there is a lot I could learn from you, and that is my point of coming here in the first place. Though I disagree with you in that I feel that a person with true devotion is not going to lose their faith in Hinduism no matter how many equations are thrown at them. We are not saplings that will be blown around and bent by other religious beliefs. I'm sure that the two of us could sit through the longest Christian sermon on record, and still do puja the next day.

I'm certain that a lot of words have been expressed in emotions, rather than from the soul. I would like to list a few divine qualities mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita to perhaps remind us of what we hope to be:

akrodhah- free from anger
santih- tranquil
apaisunam- free from fault finding
davam- gentle

Om hari,
Andrew

Dear Andrew,

I do not have any beliefs and I am not looking for any agreement with my views. I know what I know, and i also know what I don't know. I only wish to learn from my participation on this forum.

Only those people will fill threatened by my views who are not certain of their knowledge at the first place.

The best way to learn for me has been to compare one datum with another and see what comes up as a result. I must say that I have learnt a lot on this forum this way.

I only hope that others are learning too, and not just sitting in their belief that they know it all already.

Here is an offer to all you guys who wish that I will go away:

I am a bhakta of BRAHMAM (Static). I am merciless in my investigation for truth. I use scientific methodology for this purpose. I do not go about arbitrarily with this business.

I may step on your cherished beliefs. If you can defend them adroitly I respect you for it. Otherwise, I keep on investigating beyond those beliefs.

If this upsets you then the only choice you have is to ask me to leave this forum.

From today till this coming Sunday if more participants ask me to leave this forum than those who want me to stay then I would leave this forum and would never return.

(Of course, you can always find me at the Free Thinkers Forum).

Signed,
Vinaire

The trouble with people like Jiten and Jha is that they are trying to fight ideas with force (invalidation and evaluation). They are trying to do this with other faiths like Christianity and Islam too.

The truth is that you can never successfully fight ideas with force. You can fight ideas only with better ideas. Jiten and Jha are unable to do that, and instead they are resorting to force.

The best idea is the recognition of what is there NOW in PRESENT TIME, and not what was there in the past or which will be in the future. This is what is called AS-IS-NESS.

AS-IS-NESS is the recognition of what exists exactly at this moment.

What exists with Jiten and Jha are some FIXED ideas and not the truths of Hinduism. That is why they are unable to follow those truths. Instead, they are resorting to force.

Vinaire:
So much time on this forum has been wasted by your attacks on the hindu participants on this hindu forum. I will not ask you to leave, but I will ask you to seriously consider the huge number of postings you have made here which have caused us to digress from topics at hand, insulted and denigrated the beliefs of hindus on this hindu forum, and which have implied that Hubbardism (Scientology) is the true and pure form of hinduism. You keep claiming to be so innocent of intolerance, and yet I find you to be the most intolerant of other's views. I don't mind a non-hindu (which I consider you by your own statements) participating in this forum, but I see you answering questions as if you are an authority on hinduism and preaching Hubbardism as if it were pure hinduism. There is nothing wrong with you saying "This is what I think, or this is how I see it" but you, instead, always write as if only you know the truth. As an example you say you don't BELIEVE anything but you KNOW. How arrogant!

I think what bothers me most about your postings is how you are so very, very eager to invalidate and trash anything that certain people you have come to hate (yes, I believe you have proven quite sufficiently that you hate some people on this forum), especially Sri Jha, who has ALWAYS answered your insults with rational, peaceful and tolerant replies. And yet you dare to call HIM intolerant.

No, I will not ask you to leave. But if your avalanche of distracting and insulting posts continues here, then I shall leave this forum. Whatever the outcome, I wish you well, and hope that one day you will see what a foolish man you have been after all. I pity you.

Sri Andrew

It is enchanting to see young people like you, Mukund, Ashegan, Suzy et al taking such enthusiastic interest with inquiring minds in our Eternal Dharma. May your studies, taught and learnt with reverence from both sides, lead you in due course to a path of light and bliss, in whatever way your devotion, knowledge, yoga and nature take you.

Without going into the long history of how we Hindu people have come to such a sorry pass in our sacred land and among the Indian diaspora, suffice to say we have some very determined, ruthless enemies without and alas! some within.

In the larger scheme of things Hubbard the Scientologist and his anointed heir and clone Vinaire are a pair of boils on the body politic, not worth wasting time on except to lance them. (Christian UK certainly keeps pronouncing on them from high courts, adversely so far.)

Hubbard-Vinaire is a human variant of a cross between an ignorant pig and a stupid ass. As such H-V has taken permanent residence on this Hindu forum; with his absurd equations, definitions, datum collection and comparison, STATIC, often officious and offensive remarks against other participants, no wonder my objection to H-V is now as vehement as, well, the UK-Christians.

Therefore H-V messages (is it his full-time job?) should carry the warning: Beware of Vinaire the hypocrite and Scientologist.

For, why should a newcomer to this Hindu forum suffer even a second of distress after reading Scientology psychoBabble from Vinaire? He is free to spout his Hubbard's clear as mud stuff on their Scientology forum or team up with their fellow-organised-religionists. Then they will hear not a bleat from my mouse or me.

Vinaire will not give his full name and address, nor of his lawyer/attorney and boss. Therefore, I have to conduct all this coresspondence in this, our forum, which is meant for devotees, a satsang on the internet. He cannot peddle his Hubbard's Blusterology here.

Until about twenty years ago I, like most of my kind, was asleep, full of faith and hope in our politicians to bring about a re-awakening ... Christian missionaries, Muslim fidels and the rest of their ilk, having had their fill of massacres and of our lands, will at last leave us, the remaining pagans, infidels and idol worshippers alone, then all will be well, veggie pizzas all round and sunshine will follow moonshine of the night before.

But people of the book are never sated. (They give books a bad name, just as Hubbard-Vinaire the Blusterologist is doing something similar to equations, reason and logic. See if I can remember one: Hubbard + Vinaire + STATIC = STATIC + Scientology = Lies ).

Well, since then it is that this is our world too and the fruits thereof, we who are not people of the book, we who do not oppress nor tolerate oppression, we who do not say boo even to a gosling. We stand by our sacred land of Bharat and the Eternal Dharam that first drew breath there.
Jiten

I am not asking that Vinaire leave the forum. I will say that if his actions have caused valued people to leave this forum, the forum moderators would be justified to ask him to leave this forum. Sometimes, you have to bar a suppressive or disruptive from participation so that others may have their say (yes, I know I am omitting nouns, but that's for effect :-).
Note to Jiten: turn off your E-mail preferences in your user profile so you won't have unwanted messages flooding your E-mail account. I use "new messages" on the sidebar to check for new messages on this forum, and I can choose which ones I want to ignore, based on that poster's history.

I agree with what Sri Hariharan said about Vinaire's hating some people on this forum. When Vinaire last announced his leavetaking of this forum, he wrote that he had met some wonderful people on this forum. I wondered, who were these wonderful people? because it seemed that he disliked everyone on this forum, with the exception of Murali.

P.S. I can't take this talk about "analytical" and "reactive" mind seriously, when I hear Isaac Hayes, the voice of the hot-to-trot "Chef" on that raunchy cartoon "South Park," using the same expressions on the 2-hour "Investigative Reports" documentary on Scientology that appeared on the A&E TV network.

I do not wish to force any of my views on you guys. I apologize if I sounded that way.

I only intended you to look. That is all.

Guys,

Please refrain from personal attacks on other forumers. Such attacks hurt the overall forum environment and may result in hurt feelings.

You guys are all adults so I won't bother to preach to you.

Thats all,

Chetan

Vinaire,
All is illusion...........

To the rest of you;
What are we learning?
Is this a school of Hinduism or a school of realization?
All are attached firmly to the discomfort of Vinaire.
Why does Vinaire move you to take a position.
Hypocrite?......hmmm
Wake up, brothers it is time to wake up now.

Richard,

Yes, it is all illusion.
But, you don't perceive it as illusion unless you LOOK at it closely.

As Vinaire has made a conciliatory gesture in his post of 10 Jan at 02:15, I am delighted to respond to it, lets close this particular thread.

Vinaire, you are still at liberty to have a go at me only, but don't be surprised if I do not respond.
Jiten

I think all subjects should be of Hindu/Indian origin. Quotes from other sources are wellcome but not at the expenses of our scriptures and ancestors. Vinay, leaving is not the answer, stick around and make this forum more admirable.

I personally wellcome your points based on scientology, but you should also qoute similarities that you found with Hindu scriptures. Without identifying such similarities, it is going to be difficult from your part to claim scientology as the advance form of Hinduism. What I don't seem to understand from your claims is that, you found scientology as the advance form of Hinduism, in that sence why not we just discuss about that advance form of Hinduism without scientology. Such approach may be a added advantage for other participants.

Just stick around. We are one big family.

Thandabani

Dear Mr. Thandabani,

My intention here is to bring out the clarity of the Vedic Truths. It is not my intention to promote Scientology.

In this forum I have primarily focused on the concepts of "Suppression," "Intolerance," and "Brahmam." If I have used references from Scientology, it is only while discussing these concepts. I do not think that to be out of line. When one presents a view it behooves him to also reveal how one came upon that view.

As far as quoting similarities from Hindu scriptures, I would have to depend on knowledgeable persons like Dr. SSR who can certainly produce references that either support or refute what I am presenting. I would welcome both support and refutation.

"Hindu," "Indian," "Scientology," etc. are just labels. They are reference points for the truths being discussed. But the truths do not depend on any of these labels.

I am not attached to these labels. They are useful only for identifying the truths. And I do not make any claims for Scientology. What is important for me are the truths.

I would like to see others stick to the subject, such, "suppression," "intolerance," or "Brahmam," and refute my arguments if they are incorrect, instead of reacting against what they think of Scientology.

You said, "I think all subjects should be of Hindu/Indian origin." I think the origin of all truths is Brahmam (Static), and you can't limit Brahmam to an "Indian origin."

We should be looking at everything to uncover the truth. We may then apply these truths to resolving Hindu/Indian concerns.

Vinaire

Jiten,

Why should I have a go at you? What will I get out of that? That would just be an unnecessary additive. There are much more important issues to be discussed.

Vinaire

P.S. Please don't take the above as a "go" at you. Lighten up, please.

Dear brothers,
I am terribly confused by the above heated debate. All paths lead to enlightenment as far as the individual is concerned. As to which is an illusion and which is not? who is to say? For us to make that decision is to answer the unanswerable. Perhaps the second chapter of the TAO TE CHING by Lao Tsu may lend insight.
" Under heaven all can see beauty as beauty only because there is ugliness.
All can know good as good only because there is evil.
Therefore having and not having arise together.
Difficult and easy compliment each other.
Long and short rest upon each other.
Voice and sound harmonize each other.
Front and back follow one another.
Therefore the Sage goes about doing nothing, teaching no-talking.
The ten thousand things arise and fall without cease.
Creating, yet not possessing.
Working, yet not taking credit.
Work is done, then forgotten.
Therefore it lasts forever."
As Mr.Vinaire points out we have nothing to fear from him. I know my destiny and my faith. It is not the religions that kill, maim and rape as we have seen all to often, it is us. We are all subject to our emotions, regardless of our perported mastery of them.
Humbly submitted, Thad

Dear brothers,
I am terribly confused by the above heated debate. All paths lead to enlightenment as far as the individual is concerned. As to which is an illusion and which is not? who is to say? For us to make that decision is to answer the unanswerable. Perhaps the second chapter of the TAO TE CHING by Lao Tsu may lend insight.
" Under heaven all can see beauty as beauty only because there is ugliness.
All can know good as good only because there is evil.
Therefore having and not having arise together.
Difficult and easy compliment each other.
Long and short rest upon each other.
Voice and sound harmonize each other.
Front and back follow one another.
Therefore the Sage goes about doing nothing, teaching no-talking.
The ten thousand things arise and fall without cease.
Creating, yet not possessing.
Working, yet not taking credit.
Work is done, then forgotten.
Therefore it lasts forever."
As Mr.Vinaire points out we have nothing to fear from him. I know my destiny and my faith. It is not the religions that kill, maim and rape as we have seen all to often, it is us. We are all subject to our emotions, regardless of our perported mastery of them.
Humbly submitted, Thad

Mr. Vinay & Thad

I understand your points, every Hindu believe in different paths. Truth is universal and so does Brahman.

The point which you missed out is at the community level. Tags are very important too. I call myself Hindu and I follow certain principles as stipulated by our shastras. So does a Muslim and Christian.

What's wrong with a tag as a Hindu?
Be proud to carry the tag. Truth or Brahman is at secondary level and personal. The primary concern should be our community. This Hindu communal awareness is the product of 1000 yrs atrocities against us by babaric faith followers, who are still attacking us from all corners. Drop your neutral stand and voice for Hindu community. Nobody is neutral in this world. Everyone have their own agenda. Hindus should also work with their own agenda. Look Hinduism and Hindus as a community. We have to stand high up to show the world that we mean business and we are one. Our ancestors suffered simply because of their neutral stand in the name of Dharma.

Go through the whole episode of the Indian Airlines highjacking drama and make your own assessment, should Hindus live as a community and defend each other or take a neutral stand and look at our own collapse?

Hindus require more Kshatrias then yogis to lead 21st century.

Thandabani

Brother Bani,
I take your points and find them true. They atrocites commited against the Hindu population are the most profound yet least mentioned in the history of the world. There is absolutly nothing wrong with the "tag" Hindu. Since the British oppression, that tag has been used in a negative sense by westerners. It seems to be an axiom of prevailing nations to associate negativity to nations who do not conform or do not set right with the general population. "Tolerance" seems to be the least applied word in the english lexicon. Westerners have always been arrogant and intolerant and still are. There seems to be a great danger when nationism flowers out of animosity and resentment though. Take for example the plight of Afro-Americans in the United States. Two great but distinctly different leaders, Brothers Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Malcolm X) emerged. Both benefitted the community greatly but ultimately the philosophy of Dr.Martin Luther King Jr. prevailed. (I say this because his philosopy eventually found its way into many "white" homes and into the government itself.)The Nation of Islam was mostly concerned with what happened in the past and was not thinking of the future. Thirty years latter we can look back at the unwinding of time and see where the paths led.
I agree we should take a stand, but for the love of God, country, and family. Not for what others have done. Forgiven but not forgotten.
I agree with a firm stance, but tempered with forethought and organization. That is what we lack. There is passion but no planning.
Humbly submitted, Thad

Dear Brothers,
I do not mean to post too many comments, but I have a nagging question for brother Vinaire. I am deeply bothered by a comment you made earlier. You said "I may step on your cherished beliefs. If you can defend them adroitly I respect you for it." Applying logic to your grammer for you to "step on" means you are above and to acknowledge the belief is "cherished" shows not only arrogance but lack of compassion. Please reply so I may understand what you meant.
Humbly submitted, Thad

Mr. Thad,

I agree with your points. I don't support revenge for past actions, but support moves that can assure that such things don't happen to Hindus again.

Thandabani

Since there are many new forum members, I wish to state some plain facts for their benefit. I write these facts not in the capacity of one of the moderators, but as a participant of this forum:

1. We Hindus are too decent to ask Sri Vinaire to go away.
2. Old timers of this forum know that despite his claims of having read the 'Vedas with all their important commentaries', his posts actually betray a lack of even an elementary knowledge of Hindu texts and religion. Witness the recent confusion between 'kali' in kaliyuga and Devi kAlI by him. All the same, Sri Vinaire repeats tirelessly that he is upholding 'true Hinduism'.
3. Most forum members have a much larger life outside the world of Computers and do not have time to reply to Sri Vinaire's ceaseless rantings. Sri Vinaire never feels the necessity to justify his statements with scriptural citations or by logic. When his own 'cherished' beliefs are questioned, he either does not reply, or brands his opponents 'intolerant', 'reactive minds' and so on.
4. Many members have tried again and again to appease him, to advise him, to teach him something about Hinduism, or to discuss serious issues with him. However, in return we get a monologue from him, a total disregard for other's opinions, use of foul language (directly or covertly) or adjectives like the ones stated above.
5. Sri Vinaire professes to be an ideal person, free of human evils. Yet, most members think otherwise. In the past, he has clearly tried to play politics in the forum, and now he is trying to divide forum members by seeking a vote of popularity or unpopularity.
6.He changes colors rapidly, praising to heavens a person who agrees with him and vice versa when the same person disagrees with him. He tries to pit his perceived supporters against others who oppose his views. A month ago, some Software-Hardware glitch caused loss of several 100 posts. This resulted in some doubts in the minds of some forum members on the integrity of the forum. Sri Vinaire took this opportunity to display a very cheap behavior by enticing members from this forum to another forum set up by Mr. Richard Bethell in competion to this forum. While we wish them good luck for the success of that forum, we are appalled to note statements in that forum that ridicule this ancient and largest Hindu discussion forum.
7. It has been made clear several times that the major purpose of this forum is educational. Yet, Sri Vinaire often displays his calluous behavior in his postings and promotes friction amongst forum members.
8. He is an extremely frustrating person to have a dialogue with. If you reply to his questions, he ignores the replies. He keeps on jumping from one topic to another. He sticks to untenable ideas which he changes every now and then. He keeps posting irrelevant messages under threads whose topic is totally different. When someone exposes Scientology, the cult to which he owes allegience, he responds with personal attacks. He does not even attempt a defence of his beliefs (well, he says now that he has no beliefs!--Then what is he fighting for?)

And finally as a moderator, I add that he is a nightmare. He keeps on complaining about this or that feature of the forum. His egocentric behavior makes him believe that his way is the only right way, that the moderator(s) are prejudiced against him, that they are harassing him with others in the forum and that they are not doing their job! He will keep spoiling the forum by posting his complaints (most of which got lost when the server crashed last month) when he has the option of sending them to the moderator personally. Political motives are clearly manifest in many such complaints. When I respond to them personally, he shoots off another obnoxious reply to waste my time.

So does this mean that I wish him to go away? No! I only suggest that he mends his ways. In the past, I have found that the best way to handle such people is to just ignore them. If you respond even to their querries, you get a barrage of irrelevant messages soon. While I might have faltered many a time in practicing what I am preaching (and get tempted to respond to his posts whenever I perceive a gross distortion of Hinduism here), I think I will try to follow it with more earnest now.

All this will certainly offend Sri Vinaire, and he might enact another "I am leaving" followed by "I am back" drama. But forum members certainly know better now. Some forum members have left earlier because of him, and I certainly do not want others too to leave.

Dear Brother Vishal,
Thank you for your timely and most insightful commentary regarding brother Vinaire. Being new to this forum and not knowing the past events to the present I am now truly shocked. Even Scientology's own morals and dogma or logics and axioms as they call them conflict with his behavior. I do not wish him to leave, but if his comments do not contribute in a positive manner he shall be left alone.
Humbly submitted, Thad

Namaste,

For those wanting to know what exactly the whole deal is with this quite heated (and to some extent, perhaps rather irrelevant - no offence meant to anyone) debate over Scientology, I thought the following links may be of some use:

FOR

Scientology (the official site of the Church of Scientology International)

L. Ron Hubbard (the official site of the founder of the Church of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard)

AGAINST

Scientology & Dianetics: Information & Resources from F.A.C.T.Net (the 'Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network')

Group Resources: Scientology from the Cultic Studies Journal (Journal of AFF, an organisation which provides 'information about cults and psychological manipulation')

Namaste
Aum Shanti

Manish Tayal

Vinaire:-As far as quoting similarities from Hindu scriptures, I would have to depend on knowledgeable persons like Dr.SSR who can certainly produce references that either support or refute what I am presenting. I would
welcome both support and refutation.
__________________________________________________
SSR:-dear Mr.Vinaire,since you have refered by name-I feel I owe an explanation to the members of this forum-otherwise I would not have responded to your "Messages" at all.(1)Please NOTE for Record sake-I do not at all -(100%) agree either with your "Philosophy" nor agree with your interpretation(all distorted meanings)of well known Hindu Terminologies like "Brahman"- "Parabrahmam" etc--(2)I do not know what is "Scientology" at all and I am not at all interested to know.(3)if your arguments are only to propagate the "Philosophy" of "Scientology"-no body in this forum would have objected-though this is NOT the Right forum for that(4) But absolutely (as sri.Vishal pointed out)"ZERO" knowledge of "Classical Hindu Scriptures" if you totally distort the approved meanings of Hindu Religious Terminologies as per your whimsies and fancies-naturally-Hindus would definitely get sentimentally get offended (5)The suggestion that you should be "Removed" from the forum "pains" me.You yourself having understood the sentiments of majority forum members can widthdraw from the forum

Funny, I am being accused of distorting the meaning but nobody has quoted a single verse of substance from Hindu scriptures refuting what I have said.

What a hypocrisy!

Vinaire out.

Vinaire apologising on this forum a couple of days ago has proved as worthless as his usual cloak of Scientology nonsense that he drapes around everything he spouts in Hubbard's name. He is both an ignoramus and a hypcorite, therefore he is unfit to contribute anything in our Hindu forum.

Why should we suffer even a moment's distress at the hands of such a crass conman. On our Internet forum we extended him such hospitality but he continues to abuse it. So we will use the Internet to intern him.

There was a suggestion that I block Vinaire's endless messages flooding my email. Why not lance the boil at the source? No more will we Hindus continue to give ground, our dharma is our lifeblood, if others are entranced by the divine teachings in our Vedas, a thousand welcomes, otherwise just leave us alone.

Vinaire opined a few days ago, "I may step on your cherished beliefs. If you can defend them adroitly I respect you for it." Vinaire the Scientology bully loves doing that. Take this Vinaire, a kick in your solar plexus and another in your backside. Is that adroit enough? It is good thing I am down with flue else it may have been worse.

Did you think Hindus are going to be meek and mild for ever?

Thousand times you have been requested to support your statements with scriptures,by many members of this forum.You have never done even once because you do not know even one WORD of any Hindu Scripture.My contention is all your statements using Hindu Terminologies-lock-stock and barrel- is a distortion of Hindu Scriptures-then where to point out and where not?-You were elequently waxing on "Brahma"-For the first time I only pointed out what you imagine to be talking is "Brahmam (Brahman) and Not sri.Brahma, (Karthru=the creator)one of the Trnity.I have more than once pointed out that all your "sermons' are all "Gata Paashaanam".In every "Messaage Board"-you talk only about BRAHMAM!!!! and nothing but Brahmam without having read even one word about Brahmam.To new comers you pose as if you are an Authority on Brahmam.What does this Brahma Sutram tells about "Brahmam"?--1-1-6:- "Gaunas zen naathma sabdhavat"---1-1-8:- "Heyatva Vacanaacca"--- Can ther be MORE Hypocracy than what comes out of your messages ?

I am sorry to say but you guys cannot look at the truth. You are just stuck with words and getting all mis-emotional.

Emotions without understanding only serve to misguide one. You feel discomfort at my presence. So you target me. But that discomfort is due to your ignorance of the Vedic truths.

Please quote in English the verse that refutes what I have expressed about the concept of Brahmam (Static).

You who are strutting around in the false pride of able to quote from the Sanskrit verses of the Vedas do not understand the very first thing from which everything else proceeds.

What an ego!

Shree Raama
Vinaire, i believe that we have all had this conversation with you before. When you say something about the vedas it is up to you to quote the relevant texts to support your views. Yes, we may all be ignorant and you might have the truth but regardless when it comes to the "vedic truths" you hold so dear then you need the vedas and the scriptures to prove your point. If we are ignorant of vedic truths then point those truths out and you must support them with scriptural quotes. The problem is not that you keep posting or whatever the problem lays in the fact that you hold whatever you say to be a truth and not a opinion. First you must understand that to a hindu the highest spiritual authority is the vedas, next to spiritual experience. Therefore whenever one talks about the vedas and the truths held in them they must give some sort of evidence to back it up. The onus of providing scriptures should fall on the one making the claims.
Now, this concept you keep referring to Brahmam does not exist in the vedas, it is Brahman that exists. Conversely to your meaning of Brahman as static, it actually means, that which causes to grow or that which is ever growing. In otherwords Brahman is that which is great and causes others to be great by it's own will, but in no way is static. Brahman is dynamic and static at the same time. He is static in so far as he is the constant that persists and permeates everything. He is dynamic in that he is the source and the fountain of overflowing love and experience. Love and experience are both dynamic.
Brahman is not limited to "indian origin" either but the reason we place so much importance on the vedas is that they are the experiences of Brahman. The Koran, Bible and the Torah are not religious or spiritual experiences of Brahman but are histories of a people. One may look upon the buddhist scriptures as having some experience of Brahman. Same with maybe the experience of other saints. So this leaves the vedas as being the sole authority on the nature and the qualities of Brahman, jiva and the universe.

Shree Raama
-Mukunda

Please see Viveka Chudaamani

From Dr. SSR: Viveka Chudaamani- -Verse 54
"The true nature of things is to be known personally,through one's own eyes of clear vision and not through others'; what the moon exactly is, has to be known with one's own eyes; can others make him know it? ( the purport is-One has to Realise the Brahmam by one's own efforts)

Vinaire's comment:
That is absolutely correct. In these discussion I find that some participants, if they disagree with what the other person is saying, ask the other person to "prove" his point.

This is the most ridiculous thing that I find. Asking for a proof violates the above verse. The ultimate proof comes from one's own direct examination of a statement. Is it that way or not?

One must examine with total honesty what the other person is saying, and be willing to change his own ideas, if what the other person is saying is the way it is.

Asking for scriptural references from the other person to back up his statement, shows only an unwillinness to examine. That is the height of igorance.

Under the same thread Viveka chudaamani-what sriVinaire has posted:-
January,7,2000
Dear Dr. SSR,I appreciate your sincere efforts to bring forth the wisdom from our ancient scriptures in its most unadulterated form.I would like to honor you as a member of the Free Thinkers Forum. Would you please be kind enough to supply your photo for this forum's photo album.Thank you,
Vinaire
__________________________________________________
By Vinaire (Vinaire) on Thursday, January 13, 2000 - 11:25 am:
You who are strutting around in the false pride of able to quote from the Sanskrit verses of the Vedas do not understand the very first thing
from which everything else proceeds.What an ego!
__________________________________________________
What an arebatics/acrobatics within 7 days!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.The question is who is Hypocrate and who has EGO!!!!!!!!

Under the same thread Viveka chudaamani-what sriVinaire has posted:-
January,7,2000
Dear Dr. SSR,I appreciate your sincere efforts to bring forth the wisdom from our ancient scriptures in its most unadulterated form.I would like to honor you as a member of the Free Thinkers Forum. Would you please be kind enough to supply your photo for this forum's photo album.Thank you,
Vinaire
__________________________________________________
By Vinaire (Vinaire) on Thursday, January 13, 2000 - 11:25 am:
You who are strutting around in the false pride of able to quote from the Sanskrit verses of the Vedas do not understand the very first thing
from which everything else proceeds.What an ego!
__________________________________________________
What an aerobatics/acrobatics within 7 days!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.The question is who is Hypocrate and who has EGO!!!!!!!!

Calm down guys, make up and wake up for a better millenium. Stop all accusations and look forward for a better forum board. Not to investigate who is wrong or right! bury the past and focus on the future. I like to see all remain in this forum board and contribute positively. Enough is enough.
Let's forget and forgive.

Thandabani

I strongly second Sri Thandabani's statement. If you're not building towards peace, why are you building at all?

God bless all,
Andrew

Vinaire,
I have read many of your posts and admired the letters you have submitted from your past examinations of God and self. You have been searching for a very long time, indeed.

I don't think that Scientology has a value equal to the Veda's or Hinduism. I find it confusing and manipulative in its use of words.
Scientology may have worked well in culminating your spiritual development but I can not see the value in validating Scientology with comparison to Vedic truths.
Can Scientology stand alone as a valid philosophy?

It sounds to me like, and I mean no offence, "See, scientology is the same as the Veda only with different words, but they mean the same thing"

I get the feeling that Scientology is trying to re-invent the wheel.

If scientology owes it's roots to Hinduism and the Veda then why not pay homage to that past by using the same words to describe things like Brahman.
What value has the word "Static" that "Brahman" does not?
I ask these questions with a happy heart.
OM

Richard,

Scientology is not the issue here. The real issue is UNWILLINGNESS TO EXAMINE. Scientology may simply insist on such an examination.

Most people when they read something, they absorb only the portions they agree with. They ignore or deny completely what they disagree with. This may add a little more verbiage to their memory, but there is no real learning.

They do not get any realizations because they are not willing to examine what they are disagreeing with. Underlying this unwillingness is the idea, “I know this already.” This complacency is one of the biggest contributors to ignorance.

People who are trapped into thinking that they know it already, endlessly regurgitate what they agree with. They never examine the things they disagree with or which they take for granted. They seldom add anything new to their understanding. They add more only to what they agree with already.

The biggest homage you can pay to Vedas is to study and understand the Vedas by examining them closely. You do not give homage to Vedas by fawning over their greatness, while being complacent with just a shallow understanding.

If you want me to demonstrate the above on the subject of Brahman (or “Brahmam” according to Dr.SSR), I shall be happy to do so. Just let me know.

I have alredy mentioned-"Brahmam" and "Brahman"- both are interchangeable.Only Brahma-is different-one of the "Trinity"-Karthru=creator ---there is another syllable--Bh4Rama-- it is different=(meaning)error/mistake/stupification/ stunning/momentary loss of memory(Syncopy?).In Sanskrit slight difference in pronunciation will take one to places.So also in Veda--."Indra Zatru" and "Inn^dra Zatru" would give exactly opposite meanings.(swaritham/Udhaattham/Anudhaattham)

I personally would not wish the enigmatic Vinaire to quit posting. If he chooses to post he should. Can we not grant him that much freedom? I have also received my share of his onslaught(which I have reciprocated as well as ignored) but that is welcome too.

Dear Vinnaire,
1."We are dealing with Higher level Static-Life Static with the ability to postulate and perceive,
to make conclusions,decisions and resolutions"that
is what you said of Brahma Static.
You proclaim"Perceiver can't perceive itself"
These two contradictory statements point out your confusion.
2."The motionless Brahma is by nature calm consious ,all prevading like space"and then you contradict it by"has no mass ,no motion,
no wavelength and no location in space or time"
How can Brahma who is all prevading like space,
search for a location in space and time?
3.Nothing has been taken for granted.What you are talking about now has been given an exlusive thought in Rigved.Infact,those Great Vedic Sages had gone much beyond to eventually lay the foundation of Upnishads.
i quote the English translation of relevant Rigvedic verses in their exact translated form:

1.Then was not non-existent nor existent;
There was no realm of air,no sky beyond it
What covered in and where?and what gave shelter
Was water there,Unfathomed depth of water?-----
--That One Thing,breathless but breathed by it's own nature
Apart from it there was nothing what so ever.--7

This song has received close attention from eminent Indologists.Prof.Max Muller remarks thus
'Language blushes at such expressions but her blush is a blush of Triumph'.
The Author of the present book says:"Intuition and Intellect both operate in it.The Seer is not
satisfied with the Gods and he appears to have
perceived the"One breathless,yet breathing by it's own nature".
Vinnaire,this is what Brahma (The Origin of all) is, as described in Rigved :Static and Mobile at at any given Time.

2.Dirghtamas,the Blind Sage had the Vision of Self
and the Highest.He had the Vision of the Tree of the world and also the Birth and Re-birth of the Soul.
What thing I truly am,I know not clearly;
mysterious,fettered in my mind I wander.
When the first-born of holy Law approached me,
then of this speech I first obtained a portion--37

He, thus speaks himself of, being a part of the Creator.

Who hath beheld Him as he sprang to being,
seen how the boneless supports the bony?
Where is the blood of Earth,the life,the spirit?
Who may approach the man who knows,to ask it?
4.
He,thus speaks of the Universe,the Creator, the Atman and the body:- boneless supports the bony


Back forward goes he,grasped by strength inherent
The Immortal born,the brother of mortal.
Ceaseless they move in opposite direction:
men mark the one and fail to mark the other.-38

Dirghtamas thus,is now looking beyond this mortal life-the future of the Soul as a Dynamic process!
He goes on and on to seek The Truth.In fact, the truth he sees, as given out in rk 46,forms the basis of philosophical thought by later Indian
thinkers-- the Advait .He has even laid down the foundation of Vedanta Philosophy for in clear terms he asserts the importance of Knowledge in 16

Vinnaire,all our Vedic Rishis are origin of Philosophical thought of this World.They have,
in a child like simplicity started the process of thought and then gone ahead to the Knowledge of Self. And all this,mind you, about 6000 Years (if not more)prior to this date.We have every right to think and analyse ourself but not at the cost of trying to turn back the Wheels of Time.
i am really grateful to you for initiating me to make an attempt to understand atleast a little part of The Rigved.

OM-TAT-SAT

Dear Ninad,

Brahman is not a thing. Brahman is the creator of things.

Brahman is one who perceives. Brahman is not something perceived.

To perceive something Brahman would have to create (postulate) it first.

Do you get it?

Here is an example:

Brahman is not even thought. Brahman is the creator of thoughts. So, don't confuse the "thought of Brahman" with BRAHMAN.

When perceiving, the one who is perceiving is the BRAHMAN. What is being perceived is a postulate (or things proceeding from that postulate) generated by BRAHMAN.

Let me know what disagreements you have with the above.

NINAD: "Vinnaire,this is what Brahma (The Origin of all) is, as described in Rigved :Static and Mobile at any given Time."

------------------------------------------------

BRAHMAN unmanifested is the Life Static.

BRAHMAN manifested is this dynamic universe in all its variety.

Yes, this is so at any given time.

But, do not confuse BRAHMAN with your "thoughts about BRAHMAN."

Questions? Disagreements?

The unmanifested cannot be perceived simply because it is not manifested.

(1) All that can ever be perceived is THAT which is manifested.

(2) BRAHMAN manifests itself through its creation.

(3) Therefore, all that can ever be perceived is BRAHMAN's creation.

(4) BRAHMAN is the creator. BRAHMAN is not something created.

(5) Therefore, BRAHMAN is never manifested. It is only BRAHMAN's creation that is manifested and perceived.

(6) BRAHMAN can perceive "itself" by generating considerations about itself. But then what BRAHMAN is perceiving are only those considerations, and not BRAHMAN itself.

(7) A crude analogy may be given as follows: "You can perceive only a reflection, photograph, or a copy of your face. But you cannot perceive your face. NOTE: This is just a crude analogy.

(8) One knows BRAHMAN by being BRAHMAN, and not by thinking that one has perceived BRAHMAN.

(9) Then one discovers that one has been BRAHMAN all along, but was denying it for one reason or another.

(10) "Being BRAHMAN" simply means that you are taking responsibility as "The CREATOR." You are not being BRAHMAN when you consider yourself to be "something created."

(11) The Vedic Truth is that the YOU are BRAHMAN. You better believe that YOU are creating the situation you are in right now!

(12) Incredible, you say!!! You bet.

According to what Vinaire (and also Richard) has been saying all along for the last year till today, he (Vinaire) himself is the Creator (and so is everybody else as long as they are ethical) and so he himself is God.(and so is everybody else as long as they hang on to their morals). Vinaire equates his ego personality or jiva with the Creator (Lord Vishnu Principle), who most of us go by as Iswara, Vishnu, Brahma, Kali, Allah, Jesus and so on. In a way Vinaire's views are equal to that of an athiest who does not believe in the existence of a Divine Power other than the athiest himself/herself. I still do not understand in what way Vinaire has understood (or misunderstood) the Gita, Swami Vivekananda and other sacred teachings. I do not consider Scientology as sacred.

Vinaire (and also Richard) is entitled to his views but I would not take his messages seriously at all other than that of the postings of a misunderstood arrogant and foolish kid or a lunatic. What does he mean by "you better believe it" and "you bet"? Does he expect everybody in this forum to be morons like he is? No wonder that joker Narad keeeps hounding Vinaire in the other forum. This Vinaire and Richard really do make a laughable pair of enlightened ??? clowns/ nerds living in their own fantasy world. What a joke! And on top of this that Richard is looking for a Guru. For what, when he has realized that he himself is God?

Please for God's sake understand correctly, before you post foolish and idiotic messages. Both this Vinaire and Richard belong in a loony bin the way they post the kind of messages that they have been posting in these couple of forums. Mistaking their jivas and overbloated egos to be God or that Sacred Infinite Energy. What arrogance and preposterous nonsense! Go ahead and post another of your bizzare overloaded Brahmamic message. Brahmam ??? nay, first take notice of your silly petty selves before you meditate if you really know the true meaning of meditation. Go and wash off your humongous pride before you post another of your nutty message.

It is interesting to see Murali's overbloated ego.

He doesn't want to examine even when the truth is staring at his face. He thinks he knows it all already.

He is denying what he doesn't want to face. He is invalidating Vinaire because he cannot come up with any scriptural references that refute the truth Vinaire is presenting.

Murali is identifying himself with his mind and his body. No wonder he cannot see himself as the spirit.

Murali talks about "God is within us" and that "We would merge back into Brahman," but, obviously, he doesn't mean it.

Continue with Brahman tread.

Thandabani

Hi Vinaire,

You are welcome to take as many digs at my ego personality. It is a temporary illusion which disappears upon the death of the physical body. As for the other things you have flung at my religious and philosphical understanding, everything applies 100% to yourself and you are the best example for a lover of mind and body(mind you it is no crime to do that) without an iota of understanding or clue of the Spirit or Brahman that you keep yapping about at the drop of a hat.

Vinaire,
Its known that L.Ron Hubburd stole a few ideas from the Vedas and mixed it up with a bit of science fiction and created some psuedo-Hindu philosophy,which he then presented as Scientology.
So instead of going to Hubburd,come back to the source which is Hinduism.


from Arjun

from another thread but relevant:
"it seems i have wasted my time mounting such a long and detailed argument against you, vinaire... i have read through all your little posts that chop and change at slivers of my post, answering a little here.. posing a question there...

you have attempted 0.1% of my questions to you, but hasten to pose new ones without responding to the old... i am not going to bother reposting all my questions again, to which you will probably reply to by saying all the answers are actually in your masterful little summary of scientology and i haven't read it properly... at this point, i doubt any member of this forum will ever respond adequately to your scientology argument for it is ever shifting and changing like your ephemeral un-vedic brahmam...

you never actually face the question posed to you or the challenge of your narrow beliefs but rather resort to name-calling and pointing fingers at those foolish enough to enter into one of the gordian knots you call discussions...
i am sorry that i wasted so much time and energy researching and invalidating your theories with the texts of the vedas, when you simply tip-toe over them to the other side and shout victory...

i fully agree with jiten bhai in his rather harsh description of you... if any other forum memebers were to read through my arguments and then your scanty, elusive responses, they would understand how frustrating it is goading the dead horse of this thread... i can go on quoting from the first letter of the veda to the last, and you still maintain that your scientological-pseudo-vedantic-hubbardism is the vedic truth, which seems escaped the rshis who were the pioneers of the vedic mind...

this thread is going nowhere.. all you do is regurgitate the same tired points that i have refuted with scriptural proof again and again... this scientology nonsense is a rusty bucket with many holes but you still vainly pour in water claiming its the truth and hoping others will be stupid enough to accept it also, confused by the skein of foreign terminology and riddles and kindergarten exercises ('think a thought..')...

you plan to teach the vedic truth without studying or reading or hearing the vedas, and even though the vedic pointer is in the opposite direction to you, you carry on hankering at the crossroads of faith, a vedantist now, a scientologist later, then neither... a bat belonging to neither the fliers or the walkers as per the old african tale...
and to add the proverbial cherry to the top, you lambaste those who have taken the time and effort to study the vedas as having misunderstood them, far from the perfect realisation of maharshi vinaire...

hence instead of going on typing pages and pages of refutation and solid argument and quoting extensively to disprove your arrogant claims to knowing the one and only truth, i end this post here, and see it as neither cowardice nor inability to respond - but i let the facts speak for themselves... this correspondence is weary and i'm bored with the psychological vomit i have to face in your all too frequent posts...
i wish you luck on your rocky crevicy path to brahma-knows-where..

signing off...

ashegan"

ps: VINAIRE: "Funny, I am being accused of distorting the meaning but nobody has quoted a single verse of substance from Hindu scriptures refuting what I have said."

i wouldn't suggest any of you waste your time trying to do this... i've tried repeatedly quoting ad nauseum refuting almost everything he has said and he just skips daintily over it... if quotations from the ved samhitas and upanishads don't agree with his twisted logic, they are misinterpretations and no matter how strict and correct the method of interpretation, they are irrelevant and faulty compared to the sans-scripture know-how of vinaire...

my advice: compile your own scientology holy book spiced with a little sci-fi-hubbard masala and vedantic chilli powder.. then at least some book in the whole galaxy of religion will agree with you...

Master Ashegan,

Inspite of our own tiffs I have to admit that what you have said above is not only humorous but also true. But once in a way it is necessary to expose Vinaire for what he is. This is for his own good and is like a mirror to make him see his true nature. Inspite of my several disgareements ( this inspite of many of your intelligent and wise one's) with you I admire your humorous way of composing messages whether it is at Vinaire's expense or mine. I hope you had a wonderful vacation.

PS. The same goes to Jiten as well.

vinaire has an interesting way of working, murali ji, that i wasn't aware of before... he tries to attach himself, leech-like, to certain members (like myself previously) hoping for support from at least somebody... and it helps him reintegrate into the forum after his dramatic farewell...
and then when he feels he is established again, he mounts these arrogant un-vedic claims and turns the argument against those he once applauded, changing his attitude completely...

look at this interesting little excerpt:

'If someone has disagreements with what I write then he has misunderstanding of the Upanishads or of my posts, and has an unwillingness to examine'

hmmmmm....

but nevertheless, it takes all characters to make a colourful discussion.. except when it turns ugly : )

i'm glad we're back on good terms, murali... and thanks for your good wishes...

namaste