u/zelenisok

I often to walking or marching in place, like in the morning, in the afternoon, at home, to get the body moving, and not be sedentary, but I dont want to get out. I often do it near a window and I look outside, to give my eyes some rest from looking at screens and just at close things.

And I got an idea - why dont I try slow jogging in place? Has anyone done that?

Živim u stanu već dve godine, i sad mi je stigao račun za nekog prošlog podstanara od MTSa, 20k, za nevraćenu opremu za Iris TV. Na računu piše ime tog prošlog podstanara.

Ja sam javio stanodavcu da vidi da kontaktira tog prošlog stanara, rekao je da će probati, međutim znam iz prošle neke priče da nisu ostali u dobrim odnosima, bilo je problema, pitanje je da li će uspeti da ga kontaktira uopšte.

Šta sad treba da se desi u ovakvoj situaciji, da li treba ja i stanodavac da jurimo tog starog podstanara da mu damo ovaj račun? Šta ako ne uspemo? Šta ako uspemo a on odluči da ne plati? (Ne znam dal ovo poslednje pitanje ima smisla, ali def ne želim da mi dolazi iko na vrata da me optužuje da sam ja uzeo tu TV opremu.)

It's kinda buggy tbh, I have trouble going up and down the text if the comment I'm typing, the popped up space for typing the comment will flip down, it just seems weird and less functional than the previous way of typing comments in Reddit mobile. Can I revert to that?

Imam ponudu za internet na 24 meseca gde prvih 12 meseci imam za po dinar, i onda sledećih 12 meseci plaćam 3500din.

Ako se u budućnosti desi da dignu mesečnu cenu, što će vrv da se desi, jer te cene stalno skaču, znam da kada se cena digne imam pravo raskida bez nekih penala.

Međutim, recimo da se za godinu ipo dana desi da dignu na 4500din, i ja želim da na osnovu toga raskinem ugovor, šta se dešava sa ovom prvom godinom gde sam plaćao po 1din, jel bi mi tražili nešto da platim? Tj da li bi uslovili taj popust time da odradim ceo ugovor, i ako raskinem pre kraja druge godine da moram da platim te prethodne mesece? Iako je raskid na osnovu povećanja mesečnog računa?

Basque pagan religion is interesting, one reason because they are the only surviving Paleo-European nation, whose language is European, but from before the Indo-Europeans took over the continent.

The pantheon is headed by goddess Mari, an underworld goddess of motherhood, nurture and protection, connected to caves. Her consort is Sugaar, a fire serpent who is god of fire, lighting and rain.

Next are three goddess - Amalur - mother Earth, and her daughters Eki - Sun, and Ilargi - Moon.

Two spirits are helpers of goddess Mari: Aker - black goat spirit of (protective) magic, and Aatxe - red bull spirit that punishes criminals.

There are several minor deities - Aide, goddess of wind, Egoi, god of wind, Orko, god of thunder, Eate, god of storms, fire, and ice.

And there are two classes of minor spirits: Lamiak - nymphs, beautiful women with duck feet who live near rivers and help people, and Iratxoak - faries, who might be helpful or mischievous.

In addition to that, the Basque religion has a few malevolent deities or spirits. Inguma - god of nightmares and death in sleep, Gaueko - spirit of night who might snatch away a person, Gaizkin - spirit that causes disease. Also there are monsters, Herensuge - seven headed dragon, and Tartalo - one eyed giant who eats people.

Interestingly, the Basque mythology has a notion of beings called basajuan - 'wild men', hairy humanoids who live in the forest, who taught humans agriculture and smithing. Some have suggested that this is a memory of Neanderthals who used to populate Europe. In addition to that they have two races of giants - Jentilak and Mairuak - who built megalithic structures, like dolmens and stone circles.

An important part of Basque paganism are the Sorginak - witches, assistants of Mari, basically her priestesses (sometimes priests) who were taught magic by Aker.

The society was largely matriarchal and matrilineal, and functioned in an egalitarian, democratic manner, even after christianization, Basques were unique in medieval Europe in having free peasants, and electing their leaders from the bottom level.

How much do you know about Basque paganism? Do you know anyone who practices it?

AFAIS the pantheon consist of:

Dyeus, the Sky Father, Dheghom, the Earth Mother, Perkwunos, the thunder god, as the three main gods; and along with them three secondary heavenly gods - the Diwos Suhnu ('sons of Dyeus'), the divine twins, whose chariot pulls the Sun, and who help humans in trouble, and there's their sister Hausos, dawn goddess.

Three earthly gods exist: Manu, Yemo, and Trito, with a primordial cow. Manu, 'man', is the creator, Yemo, 'twin', is his (hermaphroditic) brother, that Mano sacrifices and out of his body makes some elements of this world (his blood becomes water, his bones mountains, his brain clouds, his skull the dome over the earth), and humans (with the help of Dyeus, Perkwunos and Diwos Suhnu). After the sacrifice Yemo becomes the lord of the dead and the underworld. Manu also sacrifices the primordial cow, making plants and animals out of it. Trito 'third' defeats Negehi, the three headed cosmic serpent, during that he is helped out by drinking an intoxicant drink. Out of Yemo's body three social classes are made - priests, warriors and commoners, tho also Manu is the first priest, and Trito the first warrior.

Additional gods are three nature gods - Hagnis, the fire god, Hepom, water god, and Huveh, wind god; three social gods - Pehunos cattle (and agriculture) protection god, Prewya, love and marriage goddess, and a Smith god; and also Fates, three sisters who spin the fate of humans, influencing the biggest events in their life, esp birth, length of life and death. For the Smith god and the Fates there is no PIE root name reconstructed currently AFAIK.

In addition to the heavenly world, this world and the underworld, there is also a blissful land on the edge of world, where everyone is young, immortal and happy, and a person after death can reincarnate into this world, the underworld, or that blissful land.

Also it is proposed that at least some PIE communities held to an eschatological cataclysmic event, where this world is destroyed, possibly with the Trito the Negehi fight being said to happen at that future time.

In terms of religious practice the PIE religion practiced sacrifices to the gods, using fire, the biggest, public ones being cow and horse sacrifice, a sacrifice of throwing a weapon into a body of water, circling a fire during marriage and childbirth rites, and also ritual drinking of an intoxicant drink.

Like, seeing them as separate from and opposed to the Triple Goddess and Horned God.

Both could be seen as being lords of extremes and of desolation and famine, or in bit more detail individually:

- Holly King as the lord of (extreme, harsh) winter, harsh cold, blizzards, frozen bareness, and maybe also selfishness and callousness;

- Oak king is the lord of (extreme, blazing) summer, drought, deserts, and maybe also anger and violence.

As opposed to them:

- Horned God could be seen as the lord of fall, which is like a mitigation that avoids the extremes of hotness and coldness, and makes like a fix for them, so he would also be the lord of fixing, crafts, also of harvest, and balance in nature.

- Triple Goddess would would be lady of spring, which also avoids the bad extremes of heat and cold, but in a more transcendent way, as the ideal place for joy and thriving, and she would of course be the Maiden, Mother, Crone, goddess of beauty & freedom, sex & nurture, and magic & wisdom.

I now ended up an laying out in this post an entire view that occurred to me, lol but I'm basically asking about the gist of at, as in the title, does anyone hold to such a view, as the Holly King and Oak King being these deities beside the Triple Goddess and Horned God, and that are 'bad'?

Please read what I mean by "linear view of cosmic history" first.

Typically Buddhist schools of thought are either agnostic on the issue, or have a view of beginningless (and endless?) samsara (in the sense of general existence, not for an individual being). This is what is called a cyclical view of cosmic history. I'm wondering about alternative views.

Here's what I've found so far:

The closest I've found is "Chinese salvationist religions", schools of thought derived from the (Pure Land) White Lotus societies, they seem to have a linear view. In their view the eternal Mother (of Buddhas) generated all the minds, then there was some sort of fall that made many minds fall into samsara and get trapped in it, she sends the Buddhas to help, and eventually all the minds will be saved from samsara, samsara will be empty of beings, or not exist any more. So there's a beginning and an end. This is a linear view of cosmic history.

I know Mahayana schools have the idea of a bodhisattva vow of liberating all beings from samsara, which seems to suggest that there will be an end to samsara / that it will at one point remain 'empty', tho IDK if any schools explicitly say so.

Dhammakaya school is claimed by some to have a secret teaching according to which the timeline is linear, there was a creation of Nibbana by Dhammakaya and the creation of samsara by Mara, and the conflict between them will end with Dhammakaya winning and beings will be saved from samsara.

Does anyone know of more of such examples? Do you know of any Mahayana (or Vajrayana) traditions that mention and end to samsara (in general) - in the sense that it will become empty of beings, or cease to exist?

​

Typically Buddhist schools of thought are either agnostic on the issue, or have a view of beginningless (and engless?) samsara (in the sense of general existence, not for an individual being), and whats called a cyclical view of time /history. I'm wondering about alternative views.

Here's what I've found so far:

The closes I've found is "Chinese salvationist religions", schools of thought derived from the White Lotus societies, they seem to have a linear view of time, there's the eternal Mother (of Buddhas) who generated all the minds, then there was some sort of fall that made many minds fall into samsara and get trapped in it, she sent the Buddhas to help, and eventually all the minds will be saved from samsara, so there's a beginning and an end.

I know Mahayana schools have the idea of a bodhisattva vow of liberating all beings from samsara, which seems to suggest that there will be an end to samsara / that it will at one point remain empty, tho IDK if any schools explicitly say so.

Dhammakaya school is claimed by some to have a secret teaching according to which the timeline is linear, there was a creation of Nibbana by Dhammakaya and the creation of samsara by Mara, and the conflict between them will end with Dhammakaya winning and beings will be saved from samsara.

Does anyone know of more of such examples?

I've encountered a hefty number of people who wonder about how can we get some (practical) moral norms just by thinking about it, and not like taking them from the Bible or Buddha or Quran, or some other such source, or just kinda taking the socially present ideas and norms and working from that by modifying them.

Of course Kantianism and utilitarianism are famous examples where they are formed starting from scratch and just thinking about it. WD Ross's pluralist view is not that famous, tho it is known among people who have taken an ethics course. This view is IMO better than kantianism or utilitarianism in terms of practical norms it gives us, but Ross was an intuitionist, so its doesnt really tells us how he got to those moral norms, they just occurred to him. I think moral rationalism can do a bit better explaining that, getting to very similar moral norms, and I've taken a crack at laying that out. I've put the moral norms I reach in bold font. Of course this is just a layperson /intro lvl spelling out of a view, like a rough draft, to show the general idea of how you could go from just rationality to practical moral norms, which you could them use to guide your moral behavior and social organization.

BTW, for those who dont know, in moral epistemology there are three view on how we can get to know moral facts - moral inuitionism, moral empiricism, and moral rationalism. I primarily accept moral rationalism, tho I think there's going to be overlap, that our purely moral intuitions will point towards the same norms, and (from the moral empiricist perspective) that the views of the experts (ethicists) and the tendency of moral progress will go towards the same norms. Moral rationalism as opposed to those two says we can derive moral norms by analyzing the nature and norms of rationality. We look at what does it mean to be rational, what are the rules contained there such that when someone violates them we say they are irrational; and then we see if some of those rules have implications for morality, and thus produce moral rules.

I would say we get first moral norms like this.

We note that morality is about our behavior, behavior towards others, that is of substantive effects (and not negligible, like rules of etiquette). We note the fact that we are agents, and as agents, we necessarily pursue goals, pursue happiness, value those, and consider them good. And a bit extended, we also value well-being, as the basis for pursuit of goals and happiness.

Then we see in norms of rationality some sort of universalizability /impartiality norm, something like it cant be that 2 plus 2 is 4 for me but not for you. Applying that to most substantive facts about our behavior we get the view that if well-being, goals and happiness are good, they cant be good for me but not for you.

This line of reasoning seems to lead us to there being a basic moral norm of valuing not just our own goals and happiness (and those close to us), but also those of others in general. We could also say this seems to include the broad principle (so called 'platinum rule') of dont do to others what they dont want to be done to them, and positively do to others what they want done to them.

More practically, this basic moral norm would include further norms such as: if you can (pursue your about-equivalent well-being, goals and happiness about as well in other ways) - avoid harming others, avoid inflicting suffering on others, and avoid restricting others. Which would also include the norm of seek peace, and the norm of in conflict use minimal restriction, force or harm necessary to achieve a justified goal.

Further norms here would be to as much as practically possible help others against harms, suffering and and restrictions, be compassionate, and positively help promote their well-being and pursuit of happiness, be generous, helpful. And also an obvious part of treating other how they want to be treated would be to in general be kind to others.

We already noted the norm of universalizability /impartiality norm of rationality. Applying this straightforwardly to our behavior gives us a moral norm of fairness /impartiality. So we get moral norms of striving to be impartial, no double standards, unfairness, etc.

Another basic norm of rationality is valuing of truth. Applying this to behavior this gives us a basic moral norm of valuing honesty and truth. So we get moral norms of be honest, keep your word, dont lie, value truth and facts, etc.

In investigating causality and how things happen, we can also get to the norm of not blaming or punishing people for things they are not responsible for. Expanding that, we get general justice, in the sense of being responsive to merit, and the most general moral principle we would get there would be smth like people should get benefits based on meriting them. So we get moral norms of benefits should be distributed based on merit, there should be equality of opportunity, etc.

A corollary to this would be moral norms of reparation (reacting to past harms) and of gratitude (reacting to past benefits). So you get moral norms of if possible there should be reparation for harms done, and contrition and apologies for lesser wrongs.

A large implication of all of this would would be a moral norm to organize society according to these moral norms, have laws and rules arranged to reflect them.

A parallel to the reparation norms would also be a norm that seems more private, the norm of gratitude, which would be reacting to part benefits. So we get a norms of be grateful to benefactors, and if you can reciprocate.

And we can also add the existence of non-moral, personal norms, prudential norms, that are about pursuing happiness and morality in reasonable ways, and would include stuff like: be rational, be practical, dont be rash, dont take unnecessary large risks, be level-headed, be moderate, be sober, practice self-improvement, build resilience, perseverance, fortitude.

I think we get a lot of moral norms like this, and we can see where we got them from.

Isis is a Mother and magic-goddess Crone, also some of their main, primordial gods are horned, like Khnum and Amun, tho its ram horns..

Deism is a version of theism that isnt within any specific religion, believing in God without accepting any Scripture or specific religion.

Are there any polydeists? Meaning polytheists who dont follow any specific pantheon, but have a general pantheon of deities, like by types that are present in many specific pantheons.

For example that could be a pantheon consisting of Mother Goddess, Love /Beauty Goddess, Earth Goddess, Agriculture Goddess, Nature /Wildlife Goddess, Wisdom /Knowledge God, Craft God, Sun God, Moon Goddess, Sky God, Thunder /Storm God, War God, Trickster God, Death God, Disease Goddess, Healing Goddess. And one would revere these deities by those titles as their names (or maybe refer to them with a genderless "Deity").

Like pour it in a bowl, put a condiment, maybe a bit of veggies, eat with a spoon, with a slice or two of bread. Or some other options. Are there people who just eat the whole can in one meal?

BTW for USA people, Walmart, Great Value brand, a can of beans is 0.8$, lentils 1.1$. (And a can of mixed veggies is 0.8$.)

Like, people who are judged not worthy of Aaru are eaten by Ammit, ie they reincarnate in this cosmos?

Some Seidr practices are said to have been rhythmic and hypnotic, entering some kinds of states of trance. Does anyone use repetitions of mantras? And if yes, what kinds of mantras?

Could they be interpreted as representing some core metaphysical things about reality? For example

Ogdoad is eight things that exist primordially 1-2 Nu Naunet - two types of "water", of primordial matter (matter and energy, matter and fields, if its only about the physical, or maybe physical and spiritual substance), 3-4 Heh Heuhet - two types of infinities (time and space maybe), 5-6 Kek Kauket - two types of darkness (Isfet and Apep), and 7-8 Amun and Amunet - two types of deities, the god and goddess (Hathor and Ra, and maybe also Maat and Thoth).

Ennead could be nine things in the process of creation of the world - 1 first one is Atum (Ra, creator), 2-3-4-5 - he creates next four - Shu, Tefnut, Geb, Nut, the four elements of the physical cosmos, air, water, earth, and fire, and the cosmos itself, 6-7 - then he creates Osiris, life, and Isis, "magic", 8-9 - then he creates Nephtys, civilization, but through struggle against Apep who attacks creation also bad stuff is created - Set - deserts, storms, natural disasters, barrenness, death. Set killing Osiris is death ending life, but Osiris being god of afterlife means that the creator made Duat, a place untouched by Isfet and Apep where we can go, if we uphold the laws of Maat.

I know Christian Deists exists, are there any Buddhist Deists?