React to insults--Why turn other Cheek

[Bhaktajan II]

Hannibal Lector is a "selfish hypocrite"?

"Vedas" translates as "Intelligence".

"Intelligence" translates as "The ability to discriminate" especially suble differences.

IE:
Part I: Butter and Ice Cream are made of the same thing.

Part II: Butter and Ice Cream are different things.

IE:
Part I: 1 + 1 = 2.

Part II: 1 + 1 = 22.

IE:
Part I: Don't cross the street in the middle of the Block.

Part II: Cross the street at the crossroads where multiple streets converge.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Subtle differences make all the difference.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

Speaking of which, Just to Clarify, that my title for this thread should be made clear:

"How to React to insults", or, "Why one should turn the other Cheek".

The reason I posted the OP of this Thread was to show, from an Ancient Indian Epic, where the Idea of "Turning the Other Cheek" finds deeper analysis.

BTW, The same relationship to 'indian origins' has been long known & analysed in regards to the Golden Rule:
"Do unto others as you would have them do to you" ---from the Indian side of the Euphrates River, the maxim of the "Golden Rule" is known to originate in Vedic Literature.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

Whoa! Upon closer inspection I discovered an error.

Part I: 1 + 1 = 2.

Part II: 1 + 1 = 11.

Encore!

Part I: 2 + 2 = 4.

Part II: 2 + 2 = 22.


Thank you very much you've all been great!
Goodnight!

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

I meant your read and translation was horrid, from my perspective.

Did I skew the message of the OP's intended information?

 

[Thomas]

"How to React to insults", or, "Why one should turn the other Cheek".

Break the cycle?

Clean the slate?

Move on?

God bless,

Thomas

 

[Aupmanyav]

Bhisma replied, “In a debate the tactics of a truthful person are limited, but a deceitful person can utilize any abominable method. However if the truthful person were to use the same tactics as his opponent, he will find himself at a greater disadvantage, for he is acting contrary to his nature. Therefore a truthful and honest person should always avoid an argument with an unscrupulous person.”

Bhisma was apparently ignorant of the power of God, and a self centered hypocrite.

Leucy7, I fail to understand your reason for bringing in God in a practical advise by Bhishma. Does one of your posts in this thread give any reason. If so you may kindly point it to me.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yudhisthira then inquired, “O Bhisma, is there any rule that should never be violated under any condition?”

Bhisma replied. “The worship of true brahmans and giving them all kinds of respect must never be given up under any circumstance”

Its possible I am projecting my ideas onto him or am misunderstanding him. Would he not restrain a madman, ... Also, I'm not lecturing you on your own faith. I'm arguing however. Call it an opportunity to educate me.

Here again I am at loss. Dream, in your quoted portion, where does the madman come in? I think you are misunderstanding the question and the answer.

It was a simple question by Yudhishthira - what rule should never be voilated?
Bhishma replied - 'True' brahmins, learned wise and kind people (otherwise the person would not be a 'true' brahmin), should always be respected.

Is there anything wrong with Bhishma's advice? A few quotes about who is a brahmin:

Upanishad: 'brahma janati brahmanah', One who knows Brahman is a Brahmana.

Ramana Maharshi: A Brahmin is one who has realised Brahman. Such an one has no sense of individuality in him. He cannot think that he acts as an intermediary.

Buddha: Who is a brahmin? It is a long poem from Dhammapada, that is why I am not posting it here). It can be accessed at The Dhammapada: The Brahmin | Blue Mountain Center of Meditation & Nilgiri Press.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Leucy7, I fail to understand your reason for bringing in God in a practical advise by Bhishma. Does one of your posts in this thread give any reason. If so you may kindly point it to me.

Kindly note that Yudhishthira and Bhishma are talking about a debate and not about the efforts of a righteous person to uplift an unscrupulous person. That can be achieved in some cases and is impossible in many other cases, whatever the power of the supposed God be.

If God was as powerful as you seem to believe and full of love for everybody, then why did he allow evil to exist?

 

[luecy7]

I see the OP as "Good Advise".
Where did I skew from it?
....
BTW, "What is your Perspective?"

From my perspective, there is no teaching of 'Turn the other Cheek' in anything that you have presented on this thread. None. Bhisma speaks of greed as the origin of all sin, and his words demonstrate his greed. He speaks of 'repenting' to a King, and tells him that the weaker person must repent, and appease the stronger enemy. From my perspective there is folly and evil in the teaching of Bhisma, and I submit: every person is enslaved by their own sins, regardless of stature, and has the need to repent.

You say "Vedas" translates as "Intelligence", which translates as "The ability to discriminate". Discriminate, like many verbs, takes on two meanings: 1. Discern the difference between things. 2. Discern the difference between people (discriminators), and treat them differently accordingly. Bhisma does teach to discriminate: Discern whether a person is a higher power, so that you know whether or not you should repent and appease. Discern whether a person is unscrupulous, so that you know whether or not you should debate, or argue. Discern whether a person just wants your things, like a beggar, or whether they are a true brahman, and then worship accordingly, and give all kinds of respect to the true brahman.

Well, I guess I am saying that it is good to discriminate in the opposite way, on purpose, for the sake of the other person. Imagine a person like a child, with a clean slate. As a reward, you do get to examine and be able to see the root motivation of the discriminations.

bhaktajan, where do you see in your original post, or anywhere on this thread, an example or reason to, "Turn the other Cheek?" What does "Turn the other Cheek" mean to you? I know some alleged Christians have said that it means to turn your back on the person, to show them your butt cheeks as you leave them. I think that could be in line with what Bhisma teaches.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

From my perspective there is folly and evil in the teaching of Bhisma, and I submit: every person is enslaved by their own sins, regardless of stature, and has the need to repent.

Your perspective is Fuzzy, inarticulate and specious ---apparently you are NOT conscious of this fact.

You say "Vedas" translates as "Intelligence", which translates as "The ability to discriminate". Discriminate

Congratulations on sumething new that you have learnt.

Thank you for your questions,
Bhaktajan

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

You still have NOT made YOUR Opinion or stance or analysis Understandable.

I can't even discern IF you are hiding some animosity or hidden agenda in your posts ---because they are cryptic rather than "Articulate".

Are you nervous posting to me?

Let me be very emphatic:
There is NO such thing contained in the Citation of the Mahabharata Excerpt that forms this Threads Opening Post that indicates nor purports to say:

"weaker person must repent"
nor
"words demonstrate his greed"
nor
"Folly and evil in the teaching of Bhisma" nor "translation was horrid" ---NONE WHAT SO EVER.

This is totally strange of you to post!

Of course, you may be a covert operative inseminating anti-hindu propaganda ---which would narrow down to reasons for your "anti-intellectual" digressions.

Maybe you're being paid to speak "Double Speak".

PS:

Nor is there any such thing contained in the this Threads Opening Post that attests & pays witness to your statement:
"Bhisma was apparently ignorant of the power of God"
nor,
"Bhisma was apparently ignorant, and a self centered hypocrite."
nor,
"I was framing the teaching of Bhisma as ... Analogous to anyone who behaves as a selfish hypocrite ... from my perspective. Hannibal the Cannibal would be proud."
nor,
"Bhisma describes his passion and ignorance"

"Bhisma describes his desire to not be a victim"

"Bhisma describes his "darkness of the unscrupulous." ---what????????????????
Grammatical Typo??????????

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This is the problem I see with your un-founded staements:

"no teaching of 'Turn the other Cheek' in anything that you have presented"

Bogus Dude!
Beware of Bogie Yogis!

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
May be you should debate the Korans' injunctions on the topic of "Charity"?

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Discerning whether a person is unscrupulous,
Bhaktajan


PS: "Discerning whether a person is unscrupulous" ---is a good thing to teach to children. No?

And to new employees too.

every person is enslaved by their own sins

Isn't that the parameters of the topic known as "Karma"? Yes it is.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
You may not have to be "Tricked into reading the Bhagavad-gita" ---I could just show up and knock on your door and we can sit down and I'll read it to you.

You might find this chapter enthralling:
Chapter 16. The Divine And Demoniac Natures
http://www.asitis.com/16/

Excerpt:

Chapter 16, Verse 13-15.
The demoniac person thinks: "So much wealth do I have today, and I will gain more according to my schemes. So much is mine now, and it will increase in the future, more and more. He is my enemy, and I have killed him; and my other enemy will also be killed. I am the lord of everything. I am the enjoyer. I am perfect, powerful and happy. I am the richest man, surrounded by aristocratic relatives. There is none so powerful and happy as I am. I shall perform sacrifices, I shall give some charity, and thus I shall rejoice." In this way, such persons are deluded by ignorance.

Beware of Trickery!

 

[luecy7]

"Bhisma describes his "darkness of the unscrupulous." ---what????????????????
Grammatical Typo??????????

I tend to adopt and use the language of others: 'darkness' from chapter 18 of Gita, 'unscrupulous' from Bhisma. I meant: 'Ignore-ance' of an alleged unscrupulous person. Bhisma teaches to ignore.

Are you nervous posting to me?

Certainly not. Why didn't you answer my questions of you:

bhaktajan, where do you see in your original post, or anywhere on this thread, an example or reason to, "Turn the other Cheek?" What does "Turn the other Cheek" mean to you?

Your words, your viewpoint, not another copy and paste or reference to scripture.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

Why didn't you answer my questions of you:
[PLEASE WRITE YOUR REPLY IN] Your words, your viewpoint, not another copy and paste or reference to scripture.

from the "the maha-bharata":

y inquired,
“how to react to people who insult you?”

b replied...............................................................
...............................................................
...............................................................
...............................................................
............................................................... [/font]

maybe you didn't
read it yourself
???????????????????

It's there in black and white.

How did you miss it?

 

[radarmark]

Hint, "scripture" is only some version of the OT and NT.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Bhisma speaks of greed as the origin of all sin, and his words demonstrate his greed. He speaks of 'repenting' to a King, and tells him that the weaker person must repent, and appease the stronger enemy.

Leucy7, kindly read Yudhishthira's question again. You have missed something. I quote:

"Yudhisthira inquired, “What should a weak person do if out of foolishness and pride he provokes a powerful enemy?” "

It is not just a week person, but someone who is proud. Pride is an emotion which a wise person should avoid. Perhaps it is the pride which creates the enemy. So, this proud weakling foolishly provokes a powerful enemy. Who provoked the confrontation? The weakling. It is like al-Quaeda saying 'death to America'. I do not think much option is left for him but to repent and appease the stronger enemy of his own creation. Bhishma is giving a simple practical advice. Why are you unnecessarily giving other meanings to the conversation?

 

[luecy7]

maybe you didn't
read it yourself
???????????????????

It's there in black and white.

How did you miss it?

I see the words of the maha-bharata, the words of Yudhisthira and Bhisma. Looks like a copy and paste.

Where are your words? What does "Turn the Other Cheek" mean to you? Why would you turn the other cheek? When in your life have you turned the other cheek? If confronted with an unscrupulous person, will you avoid argument with them? Do you try to take away the pious merit of others, and to transfer abuse upon an abuser: to do unto others as they do unto you?

 

[luecy7]

Leucy7, kindly read Yudhishthira's question again. You have missed something. I quote:

"Yudhisthira inquired, “What should a weak person do if out of foolishness and pride he provokes a powerful enemy?” "

It is not just a week person, but someone who is proud. Pride is an emotion which a wise person should avoid. Perhaps it is the pride which creates the enemy. So, this proud weakling foolishly provokes a powerful enemy. Who provoked the confrontation? The weakling. It is like al-Quaeda saying 'death to America'. I do not think much option is left for him but to repent and appease the stronger enemy of his own creation. Bhishma is giving a simple practical advice. Why are you unnecessarily giving other meanings to the conversation?

Yes I read that; however, the powerful may also have foolishness and pride, and have need to repent to those low life poor, weaker peasants. Bhisma is talking to an alleged King. If Bhisma responded and said something like, "Anyone that does unto others as they would NOT have others do unto them, provokes and makes an enemy, has need to repent and should do so expediently, no matter whether the other is considered weak or powerful", then I would agree with him.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

alleged King

It a 5,000 year Old "alleged King".

Welcome to academia!

Am I now CONTESTING YOUR ALLEGATION.

Bhishma was addressing the Emperor of the Planet 5,000 year Old ---3,102 BC.

You allege you can call Alleged based on some "Official Alleger Certification"

[Maybe I wasn't expecting the Spanish Inquisition???!!!!]

There was a civil war of {literally} Epic proportions ---you haven't even referenced the "Bad Guys in this Epic" ---Bhisma wanted to stop the feuding Cousins on the Royal Court.

The OP is a conversation with one of "Good Guys" ---the other Parties [The Bad Guys] aren't even mentioned except indirectly.

This wasn't some stand alone all-weather advise being given ---it was the Good Guy receiving advise from the Great Uncle.

The Feuding Cousins consisted of the Bad Guys vs the Good guys ---might you apply the word "Alleged" here to some favored side of the two parties?

So far you have manage to Call the Good-Guys [ie the White Sheep] hypocrites etc ---so I guess you have been cheering for the Black Sheep of the Family.

Bhisma is advising the UNDERDOG in this civil-war contest.

Bhisma is directly advising one of the four Brothers of Arjuna [the Good-Guys].
(FYI: Arjuna is the famous Prince of the Bhagavad-gita)

Arjuna and his four Brothers the Good-Guys had assassination attempts against them since they were kids ---from their Cousins the "Kauravas"

Apparently you have ben un-informedly denouncing the Good Guys; without regards for the pursuit of the Bad-Guys that are being counteracted via an all out global civil war that took place 5,000 year ago.

Kurukshetra War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I guess you can explain away all the assassination attempts against Arjuna and his four Brothers ---after you finished Your Turn denouncing the compassionate council given.

The Five brothers were up against their Cousins.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Turning the other Cheek has practical application in the art of Sport.
The Projectile launched directly at me causes me to flinch and loss-focus and distract me and cause verbal outbursts that drain ones single-minded attention.
Do I allow distractions from the Season Seat Holders?
Do I allow distractions from the other teams coaches?
Do I allow distractions from the Flashing Lights?
Do I allow distractions from the Haughty banter at the weigh-in?
Do I allow distractions from the Sports agent that didn't get me an endorsement deal?
Do I allow distractions from my own personal life?

No, I must stay in the Zone, and save my self from loss.
I must stay on task while all the world swirls around me!
That is why I must turn the other cheek ---lest I falter over the shadow of my ego.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

"Anyone that does unto others as they
would NOT have others do unto them,
makes an enemy

has need to repent expediently,

no matter whether the other is considered weak or powerful",
then I would agree with him.

Cheer-leading for "Duryodhana" then are we????

"Duryodhana" was the bad guy.

Yudhishthira is the Good Guy ---BTW, He Won!

BTW, "Duryodhana", the bad guy Lost!

Now you know who you have been anti-advocating for.

I would tell you all about "Duryodhana" ---but it might give you a stroke--- knowing your temperment and trigger-finger spontaneous writing moods.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

Looks like a copy and paste.

Wow. This is not your Grandfather's Rocket Scientist.

I'd like to see how you'd discuss Plato.

 

[luecy7]

Turning the other Cheek has practical application in the art of Sport.
The Projectile launched directly at me causes me to flinch and loss-focus and distract me and cause verbal outbursts that drain ones single-minded attention.
Do I allow distractions from the Season Seat Holders?
Do I allow distractions from the other teams coaches?
Do I allow distractions from the Flashing Lights?
Do I allow distractions from the Haughty banter at the weigh-in?
Do I allow distractions from the Sports agent that didn't get me an endorsement deal?
Do I allow distractions from my own personal life?

No, I must stay in the Zone, and save my self from loss.
I must stay on task while all the world swirls around me!
That is why I must turn the other cheek ---lest I falter over the shadow of my ego.

Ah yes, thank you. That does look selfish to me. When the sport is to help others, 'turn the other cheek' takes on a different meaning and motivation. I see better how you agree with Bhisma, and disagree with me. Thank you for the education.

 

[luecy7]

Cheer-leading for "Duryodhana" then are we????

"Duryodhana" was the bad guy.

Yudhishthira is the Good Guy ---BTW, He Won!

BTW, "Duryodhana", the bad guy Lost!

Now you know who you have been anti-advocating for.

I would tell you all about "Duryodhana" ---but it might give you a stroke--- knowing your temperment and trigger-finger spontaneous writing moods.

From my perspective: The good wins when the evil choose to be good. The evil wins when the good choose to be evil. If the evil person lost, the good person lost. If the good person wins, the evil person wins. You believe I am an advocate for evil?

I will read up on Yudhishthira and Duryodhana.