On Skepticism and Exegesis:
"Even a hundred statements of sruti to the effect that fire is cold and non-luminous won't prove valid. If it does make such a statement, its import will have to be interpreted differently." -Adi Shankaracharya in his Bhagavad Gita Commentary, 18.66.
On the Purpose of Life :
"While life is yours live joyously;
No one can avoid Death's searching eye:
When this body of ours is burnt,
How can it ever return again?" -Carvaka beliefs as reported by Madhavacharya in the opening of his Sarva Darshana Samgraha.
On the Divine:
"Whatever It was
that made this earth
the base,
the world its life
the wind its pillar,
arranged the lotus and the moon
and covered it all with folds
of sky
with Itself inside,
to that Mystery
indifferent to all differences
to It I pray,
O Ramanatha."
-Devara Dasimaaya, translated by A. K. Ramanujan in Speaking of Shiva.
On the Greatest Dilemma:
"To which should we devote ourselves: the hermit's mountainside
Or else the rounded sensual forms of women built for love?
Just two things count in life: young heavy-breasted women
Who are made keen for sport by wine — or else the forest.
All nectar and all venom too are broad-hipped women's gifts
Ambrosia in love but poison-ivy out of it.
The righteous man may be the master of his senses till
A woman's arrow-glance wings from her eyes into his heart.
Settle down beside the Ganges which cleanses all your sins
Or between a pair of breasts which blank out all your thoughts.
Renouncing the world is fine as the subject of sermons
But who'll turn from the hips of fair women begirdled with rubies?"
-Bhartrihari, Translated by John Brough in Poems from the Sanskrit.
Videshi Sutra 
I have something to ask you if you don’t mind, since I assume you know quite a bit about Hinduism. Is my philosophy compatible with Hinduism.
You can find it here, http://mythoughtsbornfromfire.wordpress.com/personal-manifesto/
I use this link so that I do not pan the comment length.
Thanks for your question. I’ll do my best to answer it.
“Hinduism” is a broad enough label that almost any life philosophy can be encompassed by it. “Hinduism” basically means any school of theology or philosophy which is Indian in origin. I can find no other factor which unites Advaita Vedanta, Mimamsa, Nyaya, Tantra, Lokayata, Ajivika, Samkhya, Aghoris, Hare Krishnas, etc. So if you can find things which are “Hindu” which help you understand reality, or help you live the life you wish to pursue, then yes it is compatible with Hinduism.
For example, you say that you believe that chaos is a fundamental, if not the fundamental aspect of nature/reality. You might be interested in the deities Kali, and Rudra, and some of the philosophy of Tantra. They have a lot to do with primal, chaotic energy. Tantra, and the Kama Sutra and Kama Shastras are very concerned with sexuality as an expression of worship or spiritual practice. And of course, an affinity with nature, which you express, is crucial to the Vedas, and to many ascetic or contemplative schools of Hinduism.
You say that you never want to lose or surrender yourself, but to instead become stronger and attain a clearer understanding of what you are. Most schools of Hinduism are extremely concerned with realizing one’s true self (though they disagree about what exactly that is,) so this spiritual goal is perfectly amenable to Hinduism. You might find that much of modern devotionalist Hinduism is a bit too altruistic for you. Thats ok. Thats why I’m writing about the virtues of Duryodhana on this blog 😉 Trying to resurrect some of what the Bhakti yogis have buried.
The “mainstream” Hindu conception of the ultimate reality is a very orderly one however. And let me pose a counterargument to you based on rather mainstream premises: The binary of chaos vs order is a false one which dissolves at the highest point of abstraction. Mainstream Hinduism recognizes that the world is highly chaotic. There is too much going on to understand. Its a polyphony which overwhelms us. Yet, things are also abiding by certain consistent rules. Somehow– existence keeps existing. The chaos of our every day life is supported by an orderly substratum. But scientists tell us that this orderly set of physical rules emerged from a cosmic event (the big bang) which is incomprehensible, and happened for unknown reasons. But other scientists tell us that this universe might be in a state of constant explosion and collapse, and that other universes are doing the same thing. This puts even the chaos of the “big bang” into an orderly meta-context. So which is it, order or chaos? The two are inseparable. If this line of thought interests you, you might want to check out the Principa Discordia (if you haven’t already.) It is a book focused entirely on the chaotic end of the spectrum, as that end has been largely ignored by human theology and philosophy. But even the Principa recognizes that chaos cannot exist without order.
I wonder what about the rest of the stuff. Like my core values, and Chaos as a meta-ideal
[…] affaire de nuisette et sextoy ventouse aliénation de lingerie sexy et sextoys pas chers […]