本书主要是透过经典中记载的佛陀的平等思想、教育方法，客观探讨佛教的女性观。 其重有四： 一、佛教兴起时代的印度社会和女性：主要以印度低落的女性地位和不平等的四姓差别制度为背景，一一说明佛陀的众生平等观，从而奠定佛教的男女平等思想。 二、原始佛教时代的女性观：由原始经典中一再出现的母亲、妻子、媳妇、女人四种形象，分别说明佛陀对女性的教化，以及佛教对在家女性理想典范的树立，而从生活伦理中显示男女的平等性。 三、小乘佛教时代的女性观：对女人五障说、佛的三十二相和女人不能成佛说等思想做一全面深的探讨，以澄清佛陀的平等真义。 四、大乘佛教时代的女性观：由诸多经典中示现的女性成佛观、师子吼乃至大乘菩萨与女性的关系，显现佛教对女权的倡导和发展，以及女性的智慧和慈悲的特质。

...amikor apaként elmegyek az óvodába, hogy elhozzam a kisfiamat, akkor milyen alapon választom ki, hogy kit viszek haza Talán megkérdezem az óvóntl, hogy melyik gyerek viselkedett a legjobban Vagy krülnézek, hogy melyik klyk a legszebb s ha az óvón azzal fogad, hogy az én gyerekem elpáholta t csoporttársát, és egy pohár kefirt nttt a takarító néni fejére, akkor ott hagyom, és választok egy normális gyereket Nem. Minden krülmények kzt a sajátomat viszem haza. Azért, mert az enyém! Ez a vele való kapcsolatom alapja. s ha ez az alap megvan, hazaviszem t, és otthon elbeszélgetek vele a pohár kefirrl, az ovistársakról, a takarító nénirl és a verekedésrl. Milyen egyszernek és természetesnek tnik mindez, ha a saját gyermekeinkrl van szó, de ha Jézus mondja ugyanezt az Atyáról, akkor zavarba jvünk, mert a szégyen és a félelem által belénk vésdtt kalmárszellem olyan mélyen járja át a lelkünket, hogy el sem tudjuk képzelni, hogy csak úgy, minden feltétel nélkül szeretni való emberek vagyunk...” BOLYKI LSZL 1973-ban született Budapesten. Zenész (Bolyki Brothers, Budapesti Fesztiválzenekar, Erkel Ferenc Kamarazenekar), spirituális szemlélet lelkigondozó, párkapcsolati és nismereti témákra szakosodott tréner, a Milyen zenét szeret Isten cím ktet szerzje. Bolyki László munkája azt tanítja nekünk, hogy a múlt si kultúrájának szimbolikus értékei a mai ember problémáiban is eleven lélektani, spirituális útmutatást tudnak nyújtani.” dr. SLE FERENC, a volt Országos Pszichiátriai és Neurológiai Intézet Valláslélektani Osztályának forvosa A Kegyelem és kalmárszellem nem csak egy knyv a sok kzül; fontos, hogy minél tbb olvasóhoz eljusson! Mindenkinek ajánlom szeretettel.” SZENCZY SNDOR a Baptista Szeretetszolgálat Alapítvány vezetje

More’s “Utopia” was written in Latin, and is in two parts, of which the second, describing the place ([Greek text]—or Nusquama, as he called it sometimes in his letters—“Nowhere”), was probably written towards the close of 1515; the first part, introductory, early in 1516. The book was first printed at Louvain, late in 1516, under the editorship of Erasmus, Peter Giles, and other of More’s friends in Flanders. It was then revised by More, and printed by Frobenius at Basle in November, 1518. It was reprinted at Paris and Vienna, but was not printed in England during More’s lifetime. Its first publication in this country was in the English translation, made in Edward’s VI.’s reign (1551) by Ralph Robinson. It was translated with more literary skill by Gilbert Burnet, in 1684, soon after he had conducted the defence of his friend Lord William Russell, attended his execution, vindicated his memory, and been spitefully deprived by James II. of his lectureship at St. Clement’s. Burnet was drawn to the translation of “Utopia” by the same sense of unreason in high places that caused More to write the book. Burnet’s is the translation given in this volume. The name of the book has given an adjective to our language—we call an impracticable scheme Utopian. Yet, under the veil of a playful fiction, the talk is intensely earnest, and abounds in practical suggestion. It is the work of a scholarly and witty Englishman, who attacks in his own way the chief political and social evils of his time. Beginning with fact, More tells how he was sent into Flanders with Cuthbert Tunstal, “whom the king’s majesty of late, to the great rejoicing of all men, did prefer to the office of Master of the Rolls;” how the commissioners of Charles met them at Bruges, and presently returned to Brussels for instructions; and how More then went to Antwerp, where he found a pleasure in the society of Peter Giles which soothed his desire to see again his wife and children, from whom he had been four months away. Then fact slides into fiction with the finding of Raphael Hythloday (whose name, made of two Greek words [Greek text] and [Greek text], means “knowing in trifles”), a man who had been with Amerigo Vespucci in the three last of the voyages to the new world lately discovered, of which the account had been first printed in 1507, only nine years before Utopia was written. Designedly fantastic in suggestion of details, “Utopia” is the work of a scholar who had read Plato’s “Republic,” and had his fancy quickened after reading Plutarch’s account of Spartan life under Lycurgus. Beneath the veil of an ideal communism, into which there has been worked some witty extravagance, there lies a noble English argument. Sometimes More puts the case as of France when he means England. Sometimes there is ironical praise of the good faith of Christian kings, saving the book from censure as a political attack on the policy of Henry VIII. Erasmus wrote to a friend in 1517 that he should send for More’s “Utopia,” if he had not read it, and “wished to see the true source of all political evils.” And to More Erasmus wrote of his book, “A burgomaster of Antwerp is so pleased with it that he knows it all by heart.” Sir Thomas More, son of Sir John More, a justice of the King’s Bench, was born in 1478, in Milk Street, in the city of London. After his earlier education at St. Anthony’s School, in Threadneedle Street, he was placed, as a boy, in the household of Cardinal John Morton, Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor. It was not unusual for persons of wealth or influence and sons of good families to be so established together in a relation of patron and client. The youth wore his patron’s livery, and added to his state. The patron used, afterwards, his wealth or influence in helping his young client forward in the world.

Among the notable books of later times-we may say, without exaggeration, of all time--must be reckoned The Confessions of Jean Jacques Rousseau. It deals with leading personages and transactions of a momentous epoch, when absolutism and feudalism were rallying for their last struggle against the modern spirit, chiefly represented by Voltaire, the Encyclopedists, and Rousseau himself--a struggle to which, after many fierce intestine quarrels and sanguinary wars throughout Europe and America, has succeeded the prevalence of those more tolerant and rational principles by which the statesmen of our own day are actuated. On these matters, however, it is not our province to enlarge; nor is it necessary to furnish any detailed account of our author's political, religious, and philosophic axioms and systems, his paradoxes and his errors in logic: these have been so long and so exhaustively disputed over by contending factions that little is left for even the most assiduous gleaner in the field. The inquirer will find, in Mr. John Money's excellent work, the opinions of Rousseau reviewed succinctly and impartially. The 'Contrat Social', the 'Lattres Ecrites de la Montagne', and other treatises that once aroused fierce controversy, may therefore be left in the repose to which they have long been consigned, so far as the mass of mankind is concerned, though they must always form part of the library of the politician and the historian. One prefers to turn to the man Rousseau as he paints himself in the remarkable work before us. That the task which he undertook in offering to show himself--as Persius puts it--'Intus et in cute', to posterity, exceeded his powers, is a trite criticism; like all human enterprises, his purpose was only imperfectly fulfilled; but this circumstance in no way lessens the attractive qualities of his book, not only for the student of history or psychology, but for the intelligent man of the world. Its startling frankness gives it a peculiar interest wanting in most other autobiographies. Many censors have elected to sit in judgment on the failings of this strangely constituted being, and some have pronounced upon him very severe sentences. Let it be said once for all that his faults and mistakes were generally due to causes over which he had but little control, such as a defective education, a too acute sensitiveness, which engendered suspicion of his fellows, irresolution, an overstrained sense of honour and independence, and an obstinate refusal to take advice from those who really wished to befriend him; nor should it be forgotten that he was afflicted during the greater part of his life with an incurable disease. Lord Byron had a soul near akin to Rousseau's, whose writings naturally made a deep impression on the poet's mind, and probably had an influence on his conduct and modes of thought: In some stanzas of 'Childe Harold' this sympathy is expressed with truth and power; especially is the weakness of the Swiss philosopher's character summed up in the following admirable lines: "Here the self-torturing sophist, wild Rousseau, The apostle of affliction, he who threw Enchantment over passion, and from woe Wrung overwhelming eloquence, first drew The breath which made him wretched; yet he knew How to make madness beautiful, and cast O'er erring deeds and thoughts a heavenly hue Of words, like sunbeams, dazzling as they passed The eyes, which o'er them shed tears feelingly and fast. "His life was one long war with self-sought foes, Or friends by him self-banished; for his mind Had grown Suspicion's sanctuary, and chose, For its own cruel sacrifice, the kind, 'Gainst whom he raged with fury strange and blind. But he was frenzied,-wherefore, who may know? Since cause might be which skill could never find; But he was frenzied by disease or woe To that worst pitch of all, which wears a reasoning show."

Valamikor a muzsika egyszer volt, szerény és tiszteletreméltó, ma cicomás lett és zrzavaros, méltóságát és értékét veszített, gyalázatos iparrá süllyedt.” Mikor volt a muzsika egyszer, szerény és tiszteletreméltó, és vajon milyen úton-módon veszítette el méltóságát és értékét Meg tudjuk határozni, hogy melyek a zene zrzavaros és cicomás stíluselemei Tudjuk-e, hogy hogyan és miért süllyedt a zene gyalázatos iparrá Végül, de nem utolsósorban fel tudjuk-e mérni annak jelentségét, hogy a fenti idézet a 6. századból származik, a nagy keresztény gondolkodó, Boethiusz tollából E knyv a zene és a kereszténység hagyományosan feszültségektl terhelt kapcsolatát vizsgálja, a valamikor” és a ma” szakrális zenéjének tükrében. A szerz szándéka, hogy a zene a dicséret és magasztalás eszkze, és ne a feszültségek állandó forrása legyen a keresztény egyházak és gyülekezetek életében. BOLYKI LSZL 1994-ben szerezte mvész-tanári diplomáját a budapesti Zeneakadémián. A Bolyki Brothers énekegyüttes, a Budapesti Fesztiválzenekar és az Erkel Ferenc Kamarazenekar tagjaként rendszeresen fllép Európa, Amerika és zsia legjelentsebb zenei kzpontjaiban. Spirituális szemlélet lelkigondozó, párkapcsolati és nismereti témákra szakosodott tréner, a Kegyelem és kalmárszellem cím ktet szerzje.

Sri Krsna számtalan univerzum vitathatatlan Ura, akit korlátlan er?, gazdagság, hírnév, tudás és lemondás jellemez, ám ezek az ?r?kké diadalmas energiák csupán részben  tárják fel ?t. Végtelen dics?ségét csak az ismerheti meg, aki elb?v?l? szépségénél keres menedéket, ?sszes t?bbi fenséges tulajdonsága forrásánál, melynek páratlan transzcendentális teste ad otthont. Szépségének legf?bb jellemz?je az a mindenek f?l?tt álló édes íz, ami t?mény kivonata mindennek, ami édes. Minden édes dolgot túlszárnyal, és nem más, mint az édes íz megízlelésének képessége. Sri Krsna édes természete finom arany sugárzásként ragyog át transzcendentális testén. Govinda páratlanul gy?ny?r? testének legszebb és legédesebb része ragyogó arca. ?des hold-arcán rejtélyes mosolya a legédesebb, az az arcáról ragyogó ezüst holdsugár, ami nektárral árasztja el a világot. Mosolyának sugárzása nélkül keser? lenne a cukor, savanyú a méz, és a nektárnak sem lenne íze. Amikor mosolyának holdsugara elvegyül teste ragyogásával, a kett? együtt a kámfor aromájára emlékeztet. Ez a kámfor aztán ajkán keresztül a fuvolába kerül, ahonnan megfoghatatlan hangvibrációként t?r el?, és er?nek erejével rabul ejti azoknak az elméjét, akik hallják. Ahogy a szavak gondolatok mondanivalóját hordozzák, ahogy a gondolatok a szemben tükr?z?dnek, ahogy egy mosoly a szív érzelmeir?l árulkodik, úgy a fuvola hangja Sri Krsna szépségét viszi a fül?n keresztül a szív templomának oltárára.

Euthyphro (Ancient Greek: Euthuphron) is one of Plato's early dialogues, dated to after 399 BC. Taking place during the weeks leading up to Socrates' trial, the dialogue features Socrates and Euthyphro, a religious expert also mentioned at Cratylus 396a and 396d, attempting to define piety or holiness. Background The dialogue is set near the king-archon's court, where the two men encounter each other. They are both there for preliminary hearings before possible trials (2a).Euthyphro has come to lay manslaughter charges against his father, as his father had allowed one of his workers to die exposed to the elements without proper care and attention (3e–4d). This worker had killed a slave belonging to the family estate on the island of Naxos; while Euthyphro's father waited to hear from the expounders of religious law (exegetes cf. Laws 759d) about how to proceed, the worker died bound and gagged in a ditch. Socrates expresses his astonishment at the confidence of a man able to take his own father to court on such a serious charge, even when Athenian Law allows only relatives of the deceased to sue for murder. Euthyphro misses the astonishment, and merely confirms his overconfidence in his own judgment of religious/ethical matters. In an example of "Socratic irony," Socrates states that Euthyphro obviously has a clear understanding of what is pious and impious. Since Socrates himself is facing a charge of impiety, he expresses the hope to learn from Euthyphro, all the better to defend himself in his own trial. Euthyphro claims that what lies behind the charge brought against Socrates by Meletus and the other accusers is Socrates' claim that he is subjected to a daimon or divine sign which warns him of various courses of action (3b). Even more suspicious from the viewpoint of many Athenians, Socrates expresses skeptical views on the main stories about the Greek gods, which the two men briefly discuss before plunging into the main argument. Socrates expresses reservations about such accounts which show up the gods' cruelty and inconsistency. He mentions the castration of the early sky god, Uranus, by his son Cronus, saying he finds such stories very difficult to accept (6a–6c). Euthyphro, after claiming to be able to tell even more amazing such stories, spends little time or effort defending the conventional view of the gods. Instead, he is led straight to the real task at hand, as Socrates forces him to confront his ignorance, ever pressing him for a definition of 'piety'. Yet, with every definition Euthyphro proposes, Socrates very quickly finds a fatal flaw (6d ff.). At the end of the dialogue, Euthyphro is forced to admit that each definition has been a failure, but rather than correct it, he makes the excuse that it is time for him to go, and Socrates ends the dialogue with a classic example of Socratic irony: since Euthyphro has been unable to come up with a definition that will stand on its own two feet, Euthyphro has failed to teach Socrates anything at all about piety, and so he has received no aid for his own defense at his own trial (15c ff.).

Within our Society (the International Society for Krishna Consciousness), guru has been taken to be synonymous with diksa-guru, but what about those great souls who have introduced us to Krsna consciousness? What relationship do we have with these Vaisnavas, and what are our obligations toward them, as well as toward parents, teachers, sannyasis, and other superiors who help guide us back to Godhead? Not much has been said by the Society on these topics, and hardly any appreciation is shown for those souls who labor to elevate us day by day.The scriptures, however, glorify as guru all Vaisnavas who guide a conditioned soul back to Godhead — be they instructors or initiators — advocating a culture of honor and respect. ISKCON needs to reflect upon these principles further, and the purpose of this book is to act as a catalyst toward such an end.

Dialoguri cu Vasile Dem. Zamfirescu consemnate de Leonid DragomirLa Facultatea de Filosofie din Bucure?ti unde eram studen?i exista pe atunci mult? libertate ?n alegerea cursurilor pe care doream s? le urm?m. Se afi?a la ?nceputul anului universitar o list? a cursurilor obligatorii ?i op?ionale, acestea din urm? fiind majoritare. A?a am descoperit cursul de Psihanaliz? filosofic? al profesorului Vasile Dem. Zamfirescu, despre care ?tiam vag c? fusese unul dintre discipolii lui Constantin Noica. Atmosfera de libertate ?n care ne mi?cam se reg?sea ?n totalitate aici. Cursul ne interesa at?t prin con?inutul lui — care adolescent n-a fost fascinat de psihanaliz?! — c?t ?i prin rigoarea ?i claritatea expunerii. De?i nu mai predase p?n? atunci, Vasile Dem. Zamfirescu era cu adev?rat profesor. Seminariile erau ?ns? ale noastre. Aici se iscau polemici, se propuneau interpret?ri insolite, se scriau ?i se citeau eseuri inspirate de noile probleme ?i lecturi. De obicei dep??eam limitele temei propuse, astfel ?nc?t totul ar fi putut degenera ?ntr-un dialog al surzilor sau ?n divaga?ii sterile dac? n-ar fi existat polul magnetic: profesorul. Nu numai c? el aducea, cu mult tact, discu?ia pe f?ga?ul normal, la obiect, dar opiniile noastre, oric?t de ?ndr?zne?e, vizau direct sau indirect aprobarea lui. Aceasta uneori venea, alteori nu, dar ceea ce conta pentru noi era faptul de a ne ?ti asculta?i. Sim?eam c? el poate s? vad? ?n spusele noastre sau dincolo de ele personalitatea noastr? ?ntreag?. De aceea voiam s? d?m totul ?n acele seminarii care treceau at?t de repede, de?i discu?iile se prelungeau ?n pauze ?i dup? ?ncheierea lor.

礼仪，是人类精神文明长期发展与演变的产物。它既是人们日常交流不可缺少的工具，也是村落、族群、团体、国家之间往来的规则与约定。佛教与儒家在我国长期的历史发展中，积累了丰富的礼仪规范，产生了广泛而深远的影响。本书收录的论文，既有对某种佛教礼仪的特别解读，也有对儒家礼乐的深探讨；既有推陈出新、关注现实之作，也有重在礼仪传承意义的论述。资料翔实，论证有据，适合对佛教、儒家及中国传统文化感兴趣的读者阅读。

导言说明了何谓黄老道家，黄老道家的演变历史，黄老道家的研究为何重要，黄老道家的主要特征，以及出土文献中有哪些文本值得作为黄老道家的文献来研究。*章集中阐述了黄老道家两大侧面——老子与黄帝各自的作用与功能，讨论了这两者为何能够构成互补的关系。后面四篇则分别是对马王堆帛书《黄帝四经》、上海博物馆藏竹简《恒先》、《凡物流形》、《三德》这四种出土文献的详细研究，涉及到黄老道家的宇宙论、人性论、气论以及特有的思维结构和语言表达方式。

新中国成立70年以来，马克思主义经典著作在中国的编译与传播，既是马克思主义中国化的首要前提，又是实现马克思主义中国化的基本途径。自新中国成立以来到1978年改革放时期，是中国历史发展的一个十分重要的特殊阶段，也构成了马克思主义经典著作编译传播史上的一个十分重要的特殊阶段。本书对这一时期马克思主义经典著作编译与传播的社会历史条件、编译与出版机构的建立与完善，以及编译与传播的重要阶段、主要类别、基本特征、传播途径及对马克思主义中国化的历史影响与现实启示等方面行深研究，梳理马克思主义经典著作版本演化的历史轨迹，总结经典文本编译与传播的经验教训，揭示其在推动马克思主义中国化过程中的历史作用和当代价值。

作者用优美、流畅的文笔，从鱼、动物、仿生、语言、生命、命运、梦、交往等八个维度，从内部解构庄子哲学，并通过与老子、列子哲学的比较，以及它在先秦、近代思想坐标中的相对“位置”，在外部的联系对比中揭示庄子哲学的特色，提出一系列富有启发性的观。比如，《庄子》中为什么鱼先出场，“物物者非物”这个判断如何体现庄子之道对老子之道的继承、发展，对齐物论和庄周梦蝶，为何要从庄子之道的高度出发才能有确解，以及庄子言意之辨对中国国民性格的深刻影响等，皆剖析理，颇具深度与新意。

以维也纳学派为代表的“逻辑经验主义”曾在二十世纪的世界思想界风行一时。殷海光即是深受这波学术思潮影响的学者之一，本书正是他长期钻研的心得之作，对一般初学者容易混淆的概念及不易理解的原理皆详加说明，引领读者逻辑研究的世界。 在清华大学跟随金岳霖先生读研究生期间，殷海光先生写出了《逻辑讲话》，此书别出心裁，采用独创的对话体，有如拉家常，试图将高深的逻辑学通俗化，上市后受到广泛认可。之后，殷海光先生在《逻辑讲话》及讲义版的基础之上，写成《逻辑新引》，依旧采用对话体，一位老师与两位学生聊天，老师谆谆善诱，学生倾耳聆听。 本书循序渐，深浅出，清晰易懂，注重严格的推论训练和逻辑的应用功能，使逻辑初学者在学习时可免于枯燥无味。

《当代外国伦理思想》对日本、印度、韩国、朝鲜、新加坡、英国、法国、美国、德国，以及从苏联到独联体的当代伦理思想分别作了比较系统的研究和阐述。本书是按东西方顺序分章的，各国按头字笔画排列先后。这样编章，按国家和地区分别阐述当代外国伦理思想，与按思潮和学派阐述外国伦理思想的著作不同，它可以使读者集中、完整地了解和认识有关国家和地区的当代伦理思想，为伦理学研究者进行东西方伦理思想的比较研究，提供难得的现成资料和研究成果。

本书以建构中国道德哲学的“伦理世界”为理论诉求，积极回应西方现代社会伦理发展困境，努力探索中国现代道德建设的实践路径。

拜物教批判理论作为马克思社会批判理论的*，内在地蕴含了马克思的哲学世界观和方法论，贯穿着马克思对资产阶级政治经济学的批判继承和发展。本书从马克思的文本出发，*次比较系统地梳理了马克思拜物教批判理论的历史与逻辑，阐发了马克思对于拜物教世界的超越途径，提炼出马克思拜物教批判的方法论，并且对于西方思想家对马克思拜物教批判理论的解读作出了评析，具有较高的学术价值。

　　理清中国哲学的脉络，从搞懂中国哲学三大流派始。 　　通过手绘漫画和段子，陈磊（笔名：混子哥）领衔的半小时漫画团队带我们真正读懂了中国哲学的三大流派——儒家、道家、墨家的诞生和发展。 　　孔子的“礼”其实就是生活指南，连每个人该听啥歌都安排得明明白白； 　　老子的《道德经》其实就是一份写给统治者看的述职报告； 　　墨子竟然是个嘻哈侠，他的核心思想“非攻，兼爱”用一句话来概括就是peace and love！ 　　从原始社会到百家争鸣，轻松搞懂儒家、道家、墨家的诞生和发展，让你在哈哈大笑中，不知不觉就理清了中国哲学的完整脉络！ 　　翻本书，分清中国哲学的三大流派，理清中国哲学的来龙去脉！

托尔斯泰50岁时，已创作出《战争与和平》《安娜·卡列尼娜》这样的世界名著，但面对自己的人生，他依旧困惑，甚至感到痛苦。他因痛苦而忏悔，因忏悔而追问，追问生命的本质，追问人生的意义，追问幸福是什么。在忏悔的*后，他终于找到答案……

本书是尼采的重要作品之一。《朝霞》1881年问世，1887年新版并附有一篇前言，它在著作史上位于《人性的，太人性的》第二部分（1880）与《快乐的科学》（1882）之间。《朝霞》分为五卷，每卷分为长短不同的节，少只有一两行，多则一两页，甚至偶尔长达三页以上。该书比较详细的部分，特别是前三卷，有像随笔式的短文，其思想素描与其说是巨细无遗的不如说是钩玄提要的。在下来的讨论中，特别是在第四卷中，每段要更短一些，带有圣经经文的思想风格。寥寥几个句子甚至单独一个句子构成浓缩的和凝练的格言，好像压缩甚至过度压缩的短文。

本书比较整全地呈现出船山体用思想结构及其相较于道学传统的差异性。船山体用之基本义是气作为宇宙全体的变合流行，其无方所无定体，无法被抽象为不变本体，人只能在聚散变化之用中见体。此义在性论层面即性日生日成，性体不是初生之际受命于天的某种不变本体，而是来自天之生生之德。继善成性，以后天之习使其不断充实生成，近精纯整全之天德，此为由用生体。民族文化历史可视为民族之性的生成丰富，其中*重要的资源，一则为先圣经典的传承与诠释，一则为国史对丰富境遇的描述与持守。通过经学去理解经典，通过读史来磨练扩充其伦理政治德性，这个过程既是其个体习与性成的体用相生，也是整个民族历史不断生成并持守自身一以贯之的过程。