Sanctimonious: Affecting piety; hypocritically devout. (Webster's Seventh New Collegiate)
I thought you were an atheist; how can an atheist be sanctimonious? I guess if one pretends to be religious.
Just an observation in general: A lot of mental aberration is directly caused by pharmaceuticals, both licit and illicit.
The Vedic view is that every conditioned soul (IOW not enlightened) is burdened or covered with these four defects, to varying degrees depending on amount of darkness:
1. Tendency to cheat or lie.
2. Tendency to be illusioned - to believe that which is not.
3. Proneness to make mistakes.
4. Imperfect senses.
These are actually a type of spiritual sickness, which can be cured if one is willing to pay the price. These defects vary according to the mixture of the three gunas (modes of nature) that each living being is bound up in. Like the three primary colors which, when mixed, create endless shades and tints, the three modes creat admixtures of personalities, desires, fears, convictions, and so on.
Everything is interesting.
I love it when the Hindus take on the Muzzies and dish it back ten times harder to them
That is the question I would ask him (if he had known I was an atheist or bothered to observe - - imperfect senses, as you say in #4).
The “sanctimonious” accusation he used keyed me in to his inept application of the Anton Szandor LaVey philosophy. I just threw it back at him: ‘There is no such thing as an ecumenical atheist.’
You are quite an astute fellow! LOL!
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
2. Tendency to be illusioned - to believe that which is not.
William Shakespeare's character Macbeth in the first soliloquy: “Nothing is but what is not.”
Again, your lucid Vedic commentary is a most welcomed input and as colorful as the Lord Vishnu desktop picture on my screen... (I love the art.)