Re: The explanation - Suffering is purification of the soul
Arindam Banerjee
> OK BORG, let's try again.
I qualify as a borg, as in my childhood I was brought up in a Soviet
commune.
> Now the Design is that if there is bad behaviour then there
> will be suffering. In other words, bad behaviour causes
> suffering. As humans behave badly, thus they suffer.
Dear Lord, to every human is attached a soul, that is a part of the
Divine of which You are a great composite. Like, You are the flame
and we are sparks. Is this correct? Unlike ordinary sparks that are
estinguished after their brief existence, those humans who do good in
their life have their souls as sparks returned to Your divine flame.
Where they become a part of You, or may remain independent to admire
You and become a part of You perhaps, or some other Divinity. That
may not be possible if there is imperfection in their soul, caused by
their misdeeds. So to attain higher divinity in the afterlife, they
either choose or are forced to be reborn as humans who must endure
suffering. Thus, suffering exists for a purpose - to purify the soul
for higher ends.
As for the atheists, they are like the sparks that dart off into
nothing. Those who deny, have their wishes granted. May they enjoy
the goodness of mortal existence in their own lifetimes, and do
whatever good they can. Perhaps doing that will offer them a portal
to the serene afterlife, despite their negation.
Am I correct in my assessment, dear Lord?
> Now the next thing, and this part is very important, is that
> there is a control over suffering, in other words there is a
> limit, and no one is allowed to suffer more than the defined
> limit.
> You got that?
I am not sure there is a control over suffering. Apart from the old
sufferings (death of loved ones, disease, accidents, snakebites,
famines, floods, plagues, etc etc) we now have new sufferings such as
modern art and music and literature, pseudo-science like einsteinism,
thugs/liars in all high places, unemployment, loss of asset value,
nuclear and biological weapons...
> Now we have a case of someone you call God. You also think
> this has something to do with Jesus. Now this person that
> you call God, was not really God, but he "thought" he was
> God. He had Angels and the people of Earth believed he was
> God and so did Angels.
> But remember he was not really God, he only "thought" he was
> God.
Could he not have been another Lord like you, dear Lord? Who fell for
a beautiful Jewish girl and had a son?
> Now when the crucifixion occurred, and the people of Earth
> caused such horrible suffering to him his suffering went
> beyond the limit. The worst offenders had the initials
> INRI. These four letters spell out the first letters of the
> names of the four humans who caused him the most suffering.
> The suffering was presented as crucifixion.
The suffering was the highest sacrifice. Nothing worthwhile can be
done without sacrifice of some sort. Those who do not self-sacrifice
in any way, have no understanding or contempt for same, are parasites
and meanies, slowly degenerating to the levels of monsters out of
snobbery, cynicism, materialism, unkindness.... Naturally God's son
had to set the highest example, to show the necessity for self-
sacrifice to raise the level of humanity, from the slave-systems to
better systems.
> At that time was when God, or Jesus or whoever you call him,
> he himself started praying TO God. In other words he sought
> help and assistance. Even though he was in effect God, he
> started praying TO God.
>
> Now because his suffering was more than what is allowed,
> then forces or powers were alerted as to the situation.
> There is a control over the limit of what suffering is
> allowed, and if anyone goes beyond that limit, then we get
> to know about it.
As I said, there is no limit to the level of suffering one may
endure. For one thing, it is very subjective. One may suffer much
more than the other for the same thing.
> We saw what happened, and what we did was remove this person
> that you call God out of the area. We transmigrated his
> soul to a higher and better place.
>
> That meant in effect that human people had no God, and
> neither did Angels as we had removed him. They also had no
> Jesus.
> But then he was not really God remember.
So what was he?
> What I am saying is, that OK you are Angels, but you are
> going to have to come to terms with the fact that your so
> called God or your so called Jesus has gone.
> He was removed by us, as his suffering was more than what
> was allowed.
The Lord is us? Is this an error of grammar or are we talking of some
undisclosed semantics here?
> It was the people who caused the suffering. Angels did all
> they could to help, but it was not sufficient.
People caused it, but God allowed it, for His son to be an example of
self-sacrifice and thus elevate humanity from slavery. Isn't this
what Christianity really supposed to be, as opposed to the mass of
self-forgving ridiculous superstitions it has degenerated into? For
the benefit of the western elites, who want to rob the rest with a
good conscience?
> I know there are a lot of Angels, but you are going to have
> to find something else to do. You no longer have your star
> of the show, you no longer have anyone to worship, you no
> longer have your "God" or your "Jesus".
> But you are intelligent men, and you will have to think of
> other things to do.
Thank you, dear Lord, thank you, for the intelligence You have given
us. I myself try to make the best use of it, and I hope that others
will do that too, as opposed to blindly following the "peer review"
process run by the einsteinian thugs.
> There is nothing we ourselves can do about the fact that he
> is gone. It is you and the people of Earth who will have to
> adapt and adjust to this fact.
>
> Now have you got that clear?
Quite-o, dear Lord. There should be no need for such heroic self-
sacrifice, as from Jesus or the marvellous Hindu queens who committed
sati-daaha. We should all learn to be more intelligent and brave and
compassionate.
> Now it is possible as you are some of the higher and greater
> Angels, that you have in a sense already anticipated this,
> and rather than call yourselves Angels you now call
> yourselves THE BORG. In other words you are aware that you
> cannot be Angels any longer as you have no God to worship
> nor to work for. The other Angels will have to do the same.
> They will have to find a different form, and they also will
> have to continue in a different way.
May the BORG unite as they only can, and kick the shits out of the
Abominable Gargs ruling the planet via "peer review" process,
corrupting the sciences and arts, polluting the planet with jet
engines, fouling the earth with rubbish tips, wiping out wildlife...
> Now because you were one band or type of Angels, that is why
> you have telepathy with each other, and is also why you are
> all men. It is also why you understand the Universe and the
> workings of the Universe.
Yes, yes!
> At some stage you are going to have to explain the situation
> to the human people, and also to other Angels who do not yet
> know.
Thank You for Usenet and Internet, dear Lord. May the search engines
all prosper, and show what is Truth to all those interested.
> And then you will have to carry on, same as everyone else
> does, but without your star of the show, without your God.
>
> If you no longer have your God, and you prefer to call
> yourselves BORG rather than Angels, then fine. No point
> being Angels if there is no God or Jesus is there?
Borgs can evolve out of their heavy machinery, I hope.
> Whether you will ever find anyone like him who you can
> worship and love the way you did, I don't know. But
> whatever, you still have light and food and water, the
> flowers will still grow, the birds will still sing, the rain
> will still fall, the seasons will still change.
And the vine will cling, and grass will green...
>
> You understand?
Hope I did, dear Lord.
Seeking your approval,
Arindam Banerjee
DMJoshi
wrote:
> On Jun 24, 4:53 am, "Lord" <b...@heaven.com> wrote:
>
> > OK BORG, let's try again.
>
> I qualify as a borg, as in my childhood I was brought up in a Soviet
> commune.
Soviet commune around Ranchi in fifties and sixties?
Was it put together by Christian Missionaries whose school you went
to?
Arindam Banerjee
> On Jul 8, 1:59 am, Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 24, 4:53 am, "Lord" <b...@heaven.com> wrote:
>
> > > OK BORG, let's try again.
>
> > I qualify as a borg, as in my childhood I was brought up in a Soviet
> > commune.
>
> Soviet commune around Ranchi in fifties and sixties?
Yes. My father was the executive manager and we lived right in the
middle of it all.
> Was it put together by Christian Missionaries whose school you went
> to?
No. It was put up by the Heavy Engineering Corporation, Ranchi.
> > Arindam Banerjee- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
DMJoshi
> On Jul 8, 4:00 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 8, 1:59 am, Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 24, 4:53 am, "Lord" <b...@heaven.com> wrote:
>
> > > > OK BORG, let's try again.
>
> > > I qualify as a borg, as in my childhood I was brought up in a Soviet
> > > commune.
>
> > Soviet commune around Ranchi in fifties and sixties?
>
> Yes. My father was the executive manager and we lived right in the
> middle of it all.
>
> > Was it put together by Christian Missionaries whose school you went
> > to?
>
> No. It was put up by the Heavy Engineering Corporation, Ranchi.
All big industries put up their housing colonies for those who work in
it particularly when a factory comes up somewhat detached from the
city. Alembic which now is in middle of Baroda at one time was couple
of miles away from Baroda Railway Station on the opposite side of old
city. I am sure both IITs you attrended have their housing society.
Commune to my understanding will be every resident having same rights
on what is being earned, produced. There will be no peons there.
I am just curious as to what kind of relations, rights there were
across those who lived in the commune.
Arindam Banerjee
I have found from experience that I have gained from trying to satisfy
your curiosity, Joshiji. Only abuse and snide comments for all my
pains! So please forgive me, when I do not do so.
DMJoshi
Anything abusive/snide in asking for what kind o commune it was?
Tolstoy ran a precursor of Communes that got set up after 1917. He
even tried working as peasant while producing some 7+ children.
Non communist Israel built itself up through commune.
Yes it you seeing glee in Einstein letters to Roosvelt was result of
sick mind on that score.
Arindam Banerjee
The snideness was in your saying that the catholic school I went to
was responsible for the existence of the commune I lived in. Your
abusiveness I have endured, long ago, and survived as you see.
> Tolstoy ran a precursor of Communes that got set up after 1917. He
> even tried working as peasant while producing some 7+ children.
> Non communist Israel built itself up through commune.
>
> Yes it you seeing glee in Einstein letters to Roosvelt was result of
> sick mind on that score.
Nothing could be sicker than than the great bungler Einstein asking
for the development of nuclear weapons with the potential to wipe out
large chunks of humanity. Indeed it is the very height of mental
sickness to see this perfectly worthless pseudo-scientist, Albert
Einstein, who has corrupted the entire subject of physics, as a great
man. But then, there are so many who consider the sicko gandhi who
worshipped poverty and was a great back-stabber, crank and
megalomaniac to be equally great! It is a strange world. The weirdos
in charge, evidently think that good people should contribute their
new ideas in exchange for abuse and meannesses of various sorts!
DMJoshi
I was asking not saying that the catholic school put the commune
together.
No commune will send its children out of commune for schooling.
Housing colonies do.
Catholic priests have been instrumental in spreading socialism in
South America fighting against American Economic Imperialism there.
What I would think strange is that Heavy Engineering Corporation put
up "commune" but not a school for the children of the commune.
Arindam Banerjee
You were sarcastically implying that I was a liar to suggest that
there could be a Soviet commune in India. And with that, trying to
demolish my credibilty. As back-stabbing guj-jews cannot help doing,
alas.
> No commune will send its children out of commune for schooling.
> Housing colonies do.
>
> Catholic priests have been instrumental in spreading socialism in
> South America fighting against American Economic Imperialism there.
>
> What I would think strange is that Heavy Engineering Corporation put
> up "commune" but not a school for the children of the commune.
>
>
>
> > Your
> > abusiveness I have endured, long ago, and survived as you see.
>
> > > Tolstoy ran a precursor of Communes that got set up after 1917. He
> > > even tried working as peasant while producing some 7+ children.
> > > Non communist Israel built itself up through commune.
>
> > > Yes it you seeing glee in Einstein letters to Roosvelt was result of
> > > sick mind on that score.
>
> > Nothing could be sicker than than the great bungler Einstein asking
> > for the development of nuclear weapons with the potential to wipe out
> > large chunks of humanity. Indeed it is the very height of mental
> > sickness to see this perfectly worthless pseudo-scientist, Albert
> > Einstein, who has corrupted the entire subject of physics, as a great
> > man. But then, there are so many who consider the sicko gandhi who
> > worshipped poverty and was a great back-stabber, crank and
> > megalomaniac to be equally great! It is a strange world. The weirdos
> > in charge, evidently think that good people should contribute their
> > new ideas in exchange for abuse and meannesses of various sorts!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
DMJoshi
Of course you would not want to describe how your Soviet Commune
functioned, would you?
Arindam Banerjee
It functioned very well for me. Far too well, I am afraid. I became
a most wonderful person, which is not an advantage in this brutal
capitalist world of lies, run by liars. They hound me out of
employment, and persecute me as best they can.
DMJoshi
I have not lived in one.
What I understand of them is that Stalin started collectivization of
agriculture abolishing private ownership. It had precursors in Tolstoy
Commune, Baku Commune. Everything earned was to be used for everybody
in the commune. Same way as Israel Communes called Kibbutz. Children
of Communes, Kibutz were schooled within commune. Kibutz could still
be working.
DMJoshi
Question of course is if what you call Soviet Commune was really
anything like that. It must have been a housing colony all right. Did
it have a Central School? Most large Central Government establishments
do.
Arindam Banerjee
Yes, there was a school for the Russian children, and another for the
Czech children. I mingled with both sets, but mainly with the
Russians as we lived in their half of the commune which is now the
parliamentary building of the Jharkhand Govt.
Most large Central Government establishments
> do.- Hide quoted text -
DMJoshi
Russian and Czech technicians living quartets you call commune.
Of course you are free to call them what you wish, but living
quarters, housing colonies do not make commune any more than a
village, or staff quarters of say IITK make communes.
For anything to be a commune all share produce as per the number of
family members, and communes are centred around agricultural
activities.
Arindam Banerjee
DMJoshi
You of course would have no idea if Russians and Czechs were
segregated by HEC or they preferred to be segregated.
Arindam Banerjee
The Russians lived on the left wings, the Czechs on the right wings. I
lived nearest to the centre, ground floor. They all ate from the same
dining room, and danced in the same big lounge. I had fights with the
Czech chef's son, young Rouska. Most enjoyable. The senior Rouska,
the chef, was a memorable person. "I say no ganda, no ganda, no ganda
and they do yes ganda, yes ganda, yes ganda" - this with reference to
the Indian helpers in the kitchen. Heh-heh.
DMJoshi
Well you lived in Engineer's Hostel, you father being the Rector of
the Hostel to look over security and stuff. You chose to avoid Czech
kids because one of them bullied you. What I would find strange if
they all ate food cooked by their respective cooks as you seem to be
saying is that the mothers of the children did nothing. That is not
normal except when families have come to sta for 2/3 weeks on holiday.
Well who am I to make you give your notion that you lived in a
Communist Commune, a Soviet one and not a Czech one, with your commune
buddies eating in Dining Halls (obliviously separately on Czech
Tables and Russian Tables and going to Czech Schools and Russian
Schools) and only Russian kids playing with you after school hours.
Arindam Banerjee
He did not bully me. We just fought each other - wrestled actually,
because we were fond of each other and that was the only way we could
communicate. He was a friend. On another front, we got lots of
fantastic cakes and pastries from the Czech side of the fence.
Because we were on the Russian side, I normally joined the Russian
kids with their extracurricular activities - swimming, football, arts
and dancing and music, artefacts and literature, elementary science
experiments, going for picnics, etc. It was thus great, being cuddled
by the likes of Sharapova and Kvitova, as I see from the old photos -
plus the warmth of being hugged by Comrade Varlamov has remained with
me to this day, as a protection from the coldness of all the ruling
capitalist wolves of our time.
What I would find strange if
> they all ate food cooked by their respective cooks as you seem to be
> saying is that the mothers of the children did nothing. That is not
> normal except when families have come to sta for 2/3 weeks on holiday.
Your seeming is as usual baseless, and your understanding completely
wrong. The mothers could cook if they wanted to in their own
apartments. Which they did, as and when they wanted to. Rest of the
time, they could eat in the common mess and pay for that.
> Well who am I to make you give your notion that you lived in a
> Communist Commune, a Soviet one and not a Czech one, with your commune
> buddies eating in Dining Halls (obliviously separately on Czech
> Tables and Russian Tables and going to Czech Schools and Russian
> Schools) and only Russian kids playing with you after school hours.
A surly old cuss, can say and think anything he chooses to. If you
are trying to say that I am lying all along, then you will also be a
foolish and surly old cuss. For I have the photographs to prove all
my claims, and any number of schoolmates still around who can give
evidence.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
DMJoshi
> On Jul 12, 11:04 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well you lived in Engineer's Hostel, you father being the Rector of
> > the Hostel to look over security and stuff. You chose to avoid Czech
> > kids because one of them bullied you.
>
> He did not bully me. We just fought each other - wrestled actually,
> because we were fond of each other
And yet you mingled mainly with Russian children?
> and that was the only way we could
> communicate. He was a friend. On another front, we got lots of
> fantastic cakes and pastries from the Czech side of the fence.
> Because we were on the Russian side, I normally joined the Russian
> kids with their extracurricular activities - swimming, football, arts
> and dancing and music, artefacts and literature, elementary science
> experiments, going for picnics, etc. It was thus great, being cuddled
> by the likes of Sharapova and Kvitova, as I see from the old photos -
> plus the warmth of being hugged by Comrade Varlamov has remained with
> me to this day, as a protection from the coldness of all the ruling
> capitalist wolves of our time.
>
> What I would find strange if
>
> > they all ate food cooked by their respective cooks as you seem to be
> > saying is that the mothers of the children did nothing. That is not
> > normal except when families have come to sta for 2/3 weeks on holiday.
>
> Your seeming is as usual baseless, and your understanding completely
> wrong. The mothers could cook if they wanted to in their own
> apartments. Which they did, as and when they wanted to. Rest of the
> time, they could eat in the common mess and pay for that.
Foreign assignments are taken largely to save extra money, even by
Americans. If they cooked they would rarely order for a meal in the
canteen and that they would have to do quite in advance. The location
was not really withing main Ranchi, was it. It was your school that
was in Ranchi. How far was your school from these two winged Hostel?
> > Well who am I to make you give your notion that you lived in a
> > Communist Commune, a Soviet one and not a Czech one, with your commune
> > buddies eating in Dining Halls (obliviously separately on Czech
> > Tables and Russian Tables and going to Czech Schools and Russian
> > Schools) and only Russian kids playing with you after school hours.
>
> A surly old cuss, can say and think anything he chooses to. If you
> are trying to say that I am lying all along, then you will also be a
> foolish and surly old cuss.
What does calling Hostel a commune indicate about yourself?
Arindam Banerjee
That I can distinguish between the general and the specific. The
principles of communes in communist countries are employed by
communists when they live in uniform conditions which may appear to be
hostel or a hotel or a set of apartments - depending upon superficial
points of view, or naming. As I said, communists live in communes,
just as free birds live in nests.
> > For I have the photographs to prove all
> > my claims, and any number of schoolmates still around who can give
> > evidence.
>
> > Cheers,
> > Arindam Banerjee- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
DMJoshi
> On Jul 13, 5:45 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What does calling Hostel a commune indicate about yourself?
>
> That I can distinguish between the general and the specific. The
> principles of communes
What are they?
Arindam Banerjee
> On Jul 13, 10:17 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 13, 5:45 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 7
> > > What does calling Hostel a commune indicate about yourself?
>
> > That I can distinguish between the general and the specific. The
> > principles of communes
>
> What are they?
Read a good book on communism, that should help.
>
>
>
> > in communist countries are employed by
> > communists when they live in uniform conditions which may appear to be
> > hostel or a hotel or a set of apartments - depending upon superficial
> > points of view, or naming. As I said, communists live in communes,
> > just as free birds live in nests.- Hide quoted text -
DMJoshi
wrote:
> On Jul 13, 7:39 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 13, 10:17 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 13, 5:45 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 7
> > > > What does calling Hostel a commune indicate about yourself?
>
> > > That I can distinguish between the general and the specific. The
> > > principles of communes
>
> > What are they?
>
> Read a good book on communism, that should help.
Did you read anything at all before calling a hostel with two wings
and a canteen Soviet Commune?
Arindam Banerjee
I did a lot of reading of communes and communism, after I had the
actual experience of living in one.
DMJoshi
It was no commune. It was a hostel. But if it serves you in the
objectives for which you are on Usenet, who am I you to prick your
balloon. Clearly none of 5 correspondent of the original thread, the
thread you dragged in soc.culture.indian. You would have dragged it
into soc.culture.bengali if it were no for the Google facility you
use(just as I do) to post.
Your boast of "Soviet Commune" exposes quite a few things about you.
If you could do "literature, elementary science experiments" with them
surely you could do Maths with them and there was no need to cart you
miles away to the missionary school daily. Surely it was not the bus
that took the mothers of the Hostel to shopping that dropped you and
fetched you back. (Remember you saying that the school was in walking
distance. Really?). Of course you getting sent to far away school than
managing with the schools in home say something more about your
parents than you. But that is typical Indian Middle Class mentality of
which you are infected for life.
Arindam Banerjee
> On Jul 14, 8:43 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 14, 12:48 am, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 13, 1:18 pm, Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 13, 7:39 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 13, 10:17 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jul 13, 5:45 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > 7
> > > > > > > What does calling Hostel a commune indicate about yourself?
>
> > > > > > That I can distinguish between the general and the specific. The
> > > > > > principles of communes
>
> > > > > What are they?
>
> > > > Read a good book on communism, that should help.
>
> > > Did you read anything at all before calling a hostel with two wings
> > > and a canteen Soviet Commune?
>
> > I did a lot of reading of communes and communism, after I had the
> > actual experience of living in one.
>
> It was no commune. It was a hostel.
The buliding was called a hostel, and as you may know, this term
"hostel" is very general. It was filled with communists, who
naturally formed a commune within the hostel building which
incidentally is now the Jharkhand Parliament. It functioned similarly
to Soviet communes existing in industrial areas of the Communist
world, so we were told; and indeed there was no other way it could
function other than as a commune, for the communists could not live
any other way than living in a commune. Also, they had the political
point of proving the superiority of their communist style of living,
so it was not just any ordinary commune, it was very best commune they
could build up to impress the Indians. So, I was very happy to be
there, really I was uniquely blessed to be a part of it all.
- snip -
Cheers,
Arindam (bin Einstein ban Gandhi) Banerjee, sole god among lotsa
devils.
Arindam Banerjee
discerning (as opposed to silly, cantankerous and nitpicking) minds.
> > Now the Design is that if there is bad behaviour then there
> > will be suffering. In other words, bad behaviour causes
> > suffering. As humans behave badly, thus they suffer.
>
> Dear Lord, to every human is attached a soul, that is a part of the
> Divine of which You are a great composite. Like, You are the flame
> and we are sparks. Is this correct? Unlike ordinary sparks that are
> estinguished after their brief existence, those humans who do good in
> their life have their souls as sparks returned to Your divine flame.
> Where they become a part of You, or may remain independent to admire
> You and become a part of You perhaps, or some other Divinity. That
> may not be possible if there is imperfection in their soul, caused by
> their misdeeds. So to attain higher divinity in the afterlife, they
> either choose or are forced to be reborn as humans who must endure
> suffering. Thus, suffering exists for a purpose - to purify the soul
> for higher ends.
> As for the atheists, they are like the sparks that dart off into
> nothing. Those who deny, have their wishes granted. May they enjoy
> the goodness of mortal existence in their own lifetimes, and do
> whatever good they can. Perhaps doing that will offer them a portal
> to the serene afterlife, despite their negation.
> Am I correct in my assessment, dear Lord?
>
> > Now the next thing, and this part is very important, is that
> > there is a control over suffering, in other words there is a
> > limit, and no one is allowed to suffer more than the defined
> > limit.
> > You got that?
>
> I am not sure there is a control over suffering. Apart from the old
> sufferings (death of loved ones, disease, accidents, snakebites,
> famines, floods, plagues, etc etc) we now have new sufferings such as
> modern art and music and literature, pseudo-science like einsteinism,
> thugs/liars in all high places, unemployment, loss of asset value,
> nuclear and biological weapons...
>
> > Now we have a case of someone you call God. You also think
> > this has something to do with Jesus. Now this person that
> > you call God, was not really God, but he "thought" he was
> > God. He had Angels and the people of Earth believed he was
> > God and so did Angels.
> > But remember he was not really God, he only "thought" he was
> > God.
>
> Could he not have been another Lord like you, dear Lord? Who fell for
> a beautiful Jewish girl and had a son?
>
> > Now when the crucifixion occurred, and the people of Earth
> > caused such horrible suffering to him his suffering went
> > beyond the limit. The worst offenders had the initials
> > INRI. These four letters spell out the first letters of the
> > names of the four humans who caused him the most suffering.
> > The suffering was presented as crucifixion.
>
> The suffering was the highest sacrifice. Nothing worthwhile can be
> done without sacrifice of some sort. Those who do not self-sacrifice
> in any way, have no understanding or contempt for same, are parasites
> and meanies, slowly degenerating to the levels of monsters out of
> snobbery, cynicism, materialism, unkindness.... Naturally God's son
> had to set the highest example, to show the necessity for self-
> sacrifice to raise the level of humanity, from the slave-systems to
> better systems.
>
> > At that time was when God, or Jesus or whoever you call him,
> > he himself started praying TO God. In other words he sought
> > help and assistance. Even though he was in effect God, he
> > started praying TO God.
>
> > Now because his suffering was more than what is allowed,
> > then forces or powers were alerted as to the situation.
> > There is a control over the limit of what suffering is
> > allowed, and if anyone goes beyond that limit, then we get
> > to know about it.
>
> As I said, there is no limit to the level of suffering one may
> endure. For one thing, it is very subjective. One may suffer much
> more than the other for the same thing.
>
> > We saw what happened, and what we did was remove this person
> > that you call God out of the area. We transmigrated his
> > soul to a higher and better place.
>
> > That meant in effect that human people had no God, and
> > neither did Angels as we had removed him. They also had no
> > Jesus.
> > But then he was not really God remember.
>
> So what was he?
>
> > What I am saying is, that OK you are Angels, but you are
> > going to have to come to terms with the fact that your so
> > called God or your so called Jesus has gone.
> > He was removed by us, as his suffering was more than what
> > was allowed.
>
> The Lord is us? Is this an error of grammar or are we talking of some
> undisclosed semantics here?
>
> > It was the people who caused the suffering. Angels did all
> > they could to help, but it was not sufficient.
>
> People caused it, but God allowed it, for His son to be an example of
> self-sacrifice and thus elevate humanity from slavery. Isn't this
> what Christianity really supposed to be, as opposed to the mass of
> self-forgving ridiculous superstitions it has degenerated into? For
> the benefit of the western elites, who want to rob the rest with a
> good conscience?
>
> > I know there are a lot of Angels, but you are going to have
> > to find something else to do. You no longer have your star
> > of the show, you no longer have anyone to worship, you no
> > longer have your "God" or your "Jesus".
> > But you are intelligent men, and you will have to think of
> > other things to do.
>
> Thank you, dear Lord, thank you, for the intelligence You have given
> us. I myself try to make the best use of it, and I hope that others
> will do that too, as opposed to blindly following the "peer review"
> process run by the einsteinian thugs.
>
> > There is nothing we ourselves can do about the fact that he
> > is gone. It is you and the people of Earth who will have to
> > adapt and adjust to this fact.
>
> > Now have you got that clear?
>
> Quite-o, dear Lord. There should be no need for such heroic self-
> sacrifice, as from Jesus or the marvellous Hindu queens who committed
> sati-daaha. We should all learn to be more intelligent and brave and
> compassionate.
>
> > Now it is possible as you are some of the higher and greater
> > Angels, that you have in a sense already anticipated this,
> > and rather than call yourselves Angels you now call
> > yourselves THE BORG. In other words you are aware that you
> > cannot be Angels any longer as you have no God to worship
> > nor to work for. The other Angels will have to do the same.
> > They will have to find a different form, and they also will
> > have to continue in a different way.
>
> May the BORG unite as they only can, and kick the shits out of the
> Abominable Gargs ruling the planet via "peer review" process,
> corrupting the sciences and arts, polluting the planet with jet
> engines, fouling the earth with rubbish tips, wiping out wildlife...
>
> > Now because you were one band or type of Angels, that is why
> > you have telepathy with each other, and is also why you are
> > all men. It is also why you understand the Universe and the
> > workings of the Universe.
>
> Yes, yes!
>
> > At some stage you are going to have to explain the situation
> > to the human people, and also to other Angels who do not yet
> > know.
>
> Thank You for Usenet and Internet, dear Lord. May the search engines
> all prosper, and show what is Truth to all those interested.
>
> > And then you will have to carry on, same as everyone else
> > does, but without your star of the show, without your God.
>
> > If you no longer have your God, and you prefer to call
> > yourselves BORG rather than Angels, then fine. No point
> > being Angels if there is no God or Jesus is there?
>
> Borgs can evolve out of their heavy machinery, I hope.
>
> > Whether you will ever find anyone like him who you can
> > worship and love the way you did, I don't know. But
> > whatever, you still have light and food and water, the
> > flowers will still grow, the birds will still sing, the rain
> > will still fall, the seasons will still change.
>
> And the vine will cling, and grass will green...
>
>
>
> > You understand?
>
> Hope I did, dear Lord.
>
> Seeking your approval,
> Arindam Banerjee
DMJoshi
> On Jul 14, 6:09 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 14, 8:43 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 14, 12:48 am, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 13, 1:18 pm, Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 13, 7:39 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jul 13, 10:17 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Jul 13, 5:45 pm, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > 7
> > > > > > > > What does calling Hostel a commune indicate about yourself?
>
> > > > > > > That I can distinguish between the general and the specific. The
> > > > > > > principles of communes
>
> > > > > > What are they?
>
> > > > > Read a good book on communism, that should help.
>
> > > > Did you read anything at all before calling a hostel with two wings
> > > > and a canteen Soviet Commune?
>
> > > I did a lot of reading of communes and communism, after I had the
> > > actual experience of living in one.
>
> > It was no commune. It was a hostel.
>
> The buliding was called a hostel, and as you may know, this term
> "hostel" is very general.
Hostel is used in India for a supervised institutional residence. For
family accommodations it came up in Industrial establishments that had
foreign advisers and in educational institutions Faculty Hostels
started, so did for MLAs, etc.
> It was filled with communists, who
> naturally formed a commune within the hostel building
How did the communists formed a commune?
For a residential complex, condominium, housing society to become a
commune being filled with communists is not a sufficient or even
necessary condition. A commune can be with no communist in it. Of
course for anything to be a Soviet Commune besides it having to be in
Soviet lands has to be based around agricultural activities.
Those who left behind in Soviet Union or in Czechoslovakia were more
communists than those who managed to get out even if briefly. No body
is communist because the sate authority forces them to pay party dues.
And I am sure you did not know at that time or later that every one
living there were paying party membership fees.
> which
> incidentally is now the Jharkhand Parliament. It functioned similarly
> to Soviet communes existing in industrial areas of the Communist
> world, so we were told;
Who told to these we? Surely they did not talk to you about what
communes were in their country while you were playing yes ganda, no
ganda.
> and indeed there was no other way it could
> function other than as a commune, for the communists could not live
> any other way than living in a commune.
Why not. They could choose what they want from their income. One
family may spend more on one thing and another on another thing.
Incomes varied within a range but not same for everyone.
> Also, they had the political
> point of proving the superiority of their communist style of living,
Which they did by spending more on athletes, artists, scientists and
less on agriculture labourers.
> so it was not just any ordinary commune, it was very best commune they
> could build up to impress the Indians.
They or HEC built a hostel for its Soviet and Czech collaborators. HEC
was not a Soviet or Czech concern. Industries got built with outside
help, some loans, some outright grants, but with adequate Indian
management. It was a collaborative venture, not USSR or
Czechoslovakian venture.
DMJoshi
about being brought up in Soviet Commune.
Arindam Banerjee
> Perhaps they recognised what you were at just looking at you claim
> about being brought up in Soviet Commune.
Much more likely, they are speechless with wonderment at the lucidity
and logic with which I have made my very important and relevant-to-all
points, which could well be new to them. Very often, such
speechlessness amounts to the highest praise. I am used to it; such
is my good fortune.
As for my being brought up in a Soviet Commune, along with Russian and
Czech kids I played with, that is a pure fact. Just as the fact is
that I was taught by Jeuits in a Catholic School, at the same time.
Speaking in Russian with the Russian kids, speaking in Hindi in the
bus and playtime with my Hindi-speaking schoolfriends, speaking in
Bengali at home, speaking in English in the classroom - I managed it
all for a fairly long time. Only the most extravagant fool and most
egregious pighead could think otherwise, but it is a big world.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
> > > Arindam Banerjee- Hide quoted text -
DMJoshi
> On Jul 15, 4:19 am, DMJoshi <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps they recognised what you were at just looking at you claim
> > about being brought up in Soviet Commune.
>
> Much more likely, they are speechless with wonderment at the lucidity
> and logic with which I have made my very important and relevant-to-all
> points, which could well be new to them. Very often, such
> speechlessness amounts to the highest praise. I am used to it; such
> is my good fortune.
>
> As for my being brought up in a Soviet Commune, along with Russian and
> Czech kids I played with, that is a pure fact. Just as the fact is
> that I was taught by Jeuits in a Catholic School,
Was it St Xavier's School?
> at the same time.
> Speaking in Russian with the Russian kids, speaking in Hindi in the
> bus
Was it a school bus run by your catholic school. Didnt'st you write
that your school in Ranchi was in walking distance and it was only
your daughter that went to school by pedal rickshaw?
> and playtime with my Hindi-speaking schoolfriends, speaking in
> Bengali at home, speaking in English in the classroom - I managed it
> all for a fairly long time. Only the most extravagant fool and most
> egregious pighead could think otherwise,
Otherwise what?