Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

First Qualification of Judge is Divine Knowle

dattaswami
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2012 1:14:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Veda says that the first qualification of the judge should be the divine knowledge (yea tatra brahmanaah…). Today, an advocate or the person having the legal knowledge is becoming judge. The advocate in his long practice argued for several unjust cases for the sake of payment and knows very well to support the injustice misinterpreting the law! Mere knowledge of the law cannot be the qualification of the judge. He should have the divine knowledge of the God and should fear to do injustice. The judge in any country having strong religion is not influenced by corruption due to fear of God.

In any country having very strong religion, the judge is never corrupt. Of course, the wrong side of the religion should be left on. At the same time, its right side should be taken for the benefit of social balance. The divine knowledge should become part and parcel of the total education system so that every human being fears to do sin and follows justice to get reward from God. If this one good advice is implemented, the entire society will run on perfect justice and the social balance so that there is no need of police or court.

The idea of establishing a new controlling system like Lokpal is not correct because, the members of such controlling department are again with the same psychology. If the base is cleaned, there is no need of control in system. If the base is unclean, the dirt will enter the controlling system also. The difference between the ancient world and the modern world is at this basic level. In the ancient world, the entire education system is only spiritual knowledge. The professional education was given very little importance since very little wealth is sufficient to serve the basic needs of the human beings.

In the present modern world, the spiritual knowledge disappeared and the entire education system is only at professional level. As the result, everybody concentrates on the professional knowledge to earn more and more even through sins forgetting the concept of God, who is the supreme controller. As a result, the social balance is lost and this results in the anger of God by which the natural environmental balance is also lost, which will lead to global destruction in a very short time. The urgent action needed is the revival of divine knowledge, which is the real remedy to stop the global destruction in future.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2012 1:23:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
First, please prove that God exists.

Second, you are from India, so I am assuming that you are referring to the "grand old Indian days" of child marriage, sati, killing one's wives in order to remarry and gain dowry, female infanticide (not abortion, but literally infanticide), abandoning one's family at an old age in order to disappear into the woods and pray, the caste system in which the indigent were outcasts and were oppressed, etc.

Plus, can you honestly say that the Brahmins, Rajas, and Mughals were any less oppressive than the Gandhi family?
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2012 1:31:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
You you know. I try.

I really do try.

It may not be apparent, it may be so fleeting as to require some sort of expensive scientific measuring device to detect, but I do try to give people the benefit of the doubt and take them seriously.

But, I guess it isn't really about taking them seriously, as many people are serious about what they say, but I try not to just outright dismiss them.

I give people a chance. I give people many chances. Sometimes I give them more chances than I should, though this dips into the area of indulgence.

But when I see a term like "global destruction" not couched as some sort of realistic astronomical/cosmological scenario, a switch in my head flips and I stop taking the person seriously.
TheOrator
Posts: 172
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2012 9:01:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'll leave out the part about how you can't prove God exists, as someone else pointed it out, and I'll also leave out the part about how this wavers on zealotry and is way too obsessive. Nobody pointed that out though, someone should...

Anywho, the problem with this used in a national setting is the right to freedom of religion. Even assuming that your religion is correct (even though you sound like the type of fanatic who'll state "It's right because the book says it's right, and the book doesn't lie to me becasue it tells me it doesn't lie to me"), the fact is that not every citizen of the country will follow it. Therefor, the tenents followed in whatever religion you follow might not apply to them. Once you state that all citizens will only follow the teachings of your religion, it strips them of their right to follow their own religions. That's why the US Constitution doesn't enforce the ten commandments, and instead enforces it's own set of laws (also why it outlawed slavery).

The second problem here is the problem of corruption. Yeah, sure, he might know your selective holy text inside and out, but who knows what he'll do with it. Seeing as your argument is that all Judges who know about their religion will never do anything wrong (You might want to look up Joseph Stalin, he went to seminary school and was planning on becoming a priest before he was exposed to Marxist Literature), chances are they won't be questioned when they do.
My legend begins in the 12th century
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2012 9:14:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/15/2012 9:01:34 PM, TheOrator wrote:
I'll leave out the part about how you can't prove God exists, as someone else pointed it out, and I'll also leave out the part about how this wavers on zealotry and is way too obsessive. Nobody pointed that out though, someone should...

Anywho, the problem with this used in a national setting is the right to freedom of religion. Even assuming that your religion is correct (even though you sound like the type of fanatic who'll state "It's right because the book says it's right, and the book doesn't lie to me becasue it tells me it doesn't lie to me"), the fact is that not every citizen of the country will follow it. Therefor, the tenents followed in whatever religion you follow might not apply to them. Once you state that all citizens will only follow the teachings of your religion, it strips them of their right to follow their own religions. That's why the US Constitution doesn't enforce the ten commandments, and instead enforces it's own set of laws (also why it outlawed slavery).

The second problem here is the problem of corruption. Yeah, sure, he might know your selective holy text inside and out, but who knows what he'll do with it. Seeing as your argument is that all Judges who know about their religion will never do anything wrong (You might want to look up Joseph Stalin, he went to seminary school and was planning on becoming a priest before he was exposed to Marxist Literature), chances are they won't be questioned when they do.

The Fool: The Problem is that a Religion always seems to manifest the oppresion of others who are not a part of Majority Religion. Mind you I would consider all forms of idealogy, religious. Anything that is for an 'idea in itself'. aka Fundementalism.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL