Buddhism Discussion

[tomcat]

15 hours ago, Guest dinky donk said:

Let's us all go back to the basics of the central ideas of Buddhism versus western classical ideas about the real universe as we know it,

.

.

.

.

The ideas of Quantum Physics, which is hard to digest is that thought can be transform into energy and energy can transform into thought, this idea that the Buddha thought that your thoughts can be transform into energy and form , which means if you think bad thoughts or unskillful thoughts , then you can manifest illness unto yourself , which modern psychology and medicine is trying to study if the idea that your thoughts can make you manifest an illness , then can your non stop thoughts can make you reborn into a lower life form, 

 

Buddhas higher teachings are being studied by scientist and they have found it very researchable and can be studied by setting up experiments to study and repeat the phenomena.

 

This in regard to Abrahamic religions cannot be studied and cannot set up experiments to record the experience.

My own studies can affirm part of what you are saying - but discussing the terms of belief is always dicey so in this instance, I refer to chronology instead. Especially in looking at religions, we tend to think of them as separate and distinct from each other. But from studying the Anthropological and Historical evidence, there is a lot of overlaps with mid-phases.

 

For instance:

Animisim > Phenomenon Worship > Nature Worship > Hindusim & Proto-Hindeo

Hinduism then gave way to Buddhism, Jainsim, Sikhism, Baha'i etc. That does not take into consideration the thousands of sects and smaller cults within India itself.

 

But tracing back the history, the cyclical nature of things is Animistic, not Buddhist or Hindu, although it has been adapted and developed within the "story" or the pantheon. But Animisim, and empirical worship (phenomenon/nature) reinforces the nature of things being created, preserved and destroyed. In the lens of Hinduism, each is then embodied with a god (Brahma, Shiva, Vishnu), but in the animistic lens, it is all act of the divine universe.

True to Shinrin Yoku and other Nature practices, all one needs to do is spend time in Nature, and observe. And the cyclical aspect of Life, Death and the in-between will be presented to you, clear as day. It is so divine, it is almost humbling that it was there all along, just that we were not ready to wake to it. This also broaches on the topic of Evolution and Creationism. I think Sir David Attenborough said it best when he says Evolution is not a theory, as there is evidence that dates back millions of years that show it - but to say Evolution/Natural Selection is the only mechanism at play is inaccurate. He leans towards Evolution as a way in which the Divine manifests itself, as an awareness that operates without a "god" figure.

This aspect of "All being One being Everything being Nothing" is developed further with the human experience at the core of it - this is what we know as Buddhism, And I feel at the deepest core, it is accurate to descriptions of our inner and outer reality - even now it is being studied and quantified by Science, although it is unnecessary if you already have Faith and Belief.

I can't vouch for the denominations of Buddhism as it very distorted, but it is not impossible to dig through and find the core teaching again. But even at its core, the ties between Nature and Spirituality cannot be separated. Buddha often has his revelations from his observations of Nature, as did Jesus. As does Eckhart Tolee. The below is recent discovery of mine I share for those on the brink of opening or have opened.

Everything is connected, and all the dots are slowly being connected for us to understand. The soul of the human, one acknowledging the other (Namaste) is the same soul of the planet and the ether realms (quantum physics etc) It is Life, and that is Divine. 
 

 

Edited November 7, 2018 by tomcat

[Guest CHC]

1 hour ago, tomcat said:

Yup, they certainly didn't. And while they did assume somewhat the role of teacher, their purpose was always to teach through Doing and Being. The tradition of the Scribe or Pupil is just a way for us to capture something tangible out of the Formless. It is a human insecurity, essentially - lack of inner trust or faith, that Action is the best teacher. 

Certainly, these spiritual teachers are not bothered with adoration or to be praised. They are just normal people who have awoken and cared to share with fellow human beings to ease their suffering.

There is actually an important book on this subject matter, and how the written language has distorted changed the format of Belief. It is called, "The Alphabet vs The Goddess" by Leonard Shlain. If you are down for a good read, you can check it out. It strides across the topics of History, Anthropology, Psychology, and Religion, and is one of the key publications to attempt to connect the dots.



 

 

 

My friend said God wrote the bible in Mount Sinai and ask Moses to bring it to all .

[tomcat]

1 hour ago, Guest CHC said:

 

 

My friend said God wrote the bible in Mount Sinai and ask Moses to bring it to all .

Bible or 10 Commandments? Either way, it is debatable whether that was God's or Moses' handiwork. It is also debatable how many times he went up the mountain. I believe this might also be the basis of the folk song,  Coming Round the Mountain When He Comes. (When the Chariot comes)

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, tomcat said:

There is actually an important book on this subject matter, and how the written language has distorted changed the format of Belief. It is called, "The Alphabet vs The Goddess" by Leonard Shlain. If you are down for a good read, you can check it out. It strides across the topics of History, Anthropology, Psychology, and Religion, and is one of the key publications to attempt to connect the dots.
 

 

Thank you for pointing me to this interesting book.  I have read it a little, and already have some issues.

If the written word has lead to hierarchical societies, misogynistic,  patriarchal,  how come that in the last centuries this has been increasingly reversed,  even before the advent of telephone, radio, television and other non literary means of communication?  Today an increasing number of women are excelling in intellectual activities that were once reserved for men.   And in the days of the ancient sages (Buddha, Jesus, Confucius and earlier) when literacy was very rare, all these sages were men.

 

I have some skepticism for attempts to compartmentalize humans by race, ethnicity.  For example, those who claim that Asian mentality is not prepared to deal with Western culture are contradicted buy what is happening recently, that Asians are getting as good in Western science, technology, art as the typical European societies.  And the superior democratic mentality of Americans is showing unfortunate anti-democratic tendencies in our latest elections, like yesterday.  Can one believe that half of Americans vote for this Trump and his Republicans?  We Americans are not better at democracy or human rights than any other society.

[Guest Guest]

準提咒:

 

南無 颯哆喃 三貌三勃陀 俱胝南 怛姪他

唵 折隸 主隸 準提 娑婆訶

 

「南無」（namah）是歸命的意思。

 

「颯哆喃 三藐三勃陀 俱胝南」（saptanam-samyaksam-buddha-kotinam）是七千萬正等覺。

 

「怛姪他」（tadyata）其意是「即說咒曰」，這句常常出現在一般的咒語之中，「怛姪他」之前的咒語是歸敬文，接下來的是咒語的中心內容。

 

「唵」（om），是咒的起音。唵字是皈命，也可以說是咒的起始。

 

「折隸」（cale）是覺動，

 

「主隸」（cule）是生起，

 

「準提」（cundhe）是清淨，

 

「娑婆訶」（svaha）是成就的意思。

 

整句咒意是：由覺動—大覺之動，而生起清淨的成就。依此咒意看來，「覺動」是屬於大悲心遍起的作用，所以他的體性是清淨的，而以清淨的體性生起大悲作用，這都是由於七十七俱胝佛所共同加持。

[Steve5380]

12 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Quasi-curse:

 

Nan Abu 哆 哆 喃 喃 三 三 三 三 三 三 三 三 陀 俱胝 俱胝 俱胝 俱胝 俱胝

The lieutenant

 

"namah" is the meaning of returning to life.

 

"Saptanam-samyaksam-buddha-kotinam" is 70 million equals.

 

"Tadyata" means "that is, cursing". This sentence often appears in ordinary spells. The spell before "怛姪他" is the tribute, and the next is the center of the spell.

 

"唵" (om) is the attack of the curse. The word 皈 is the commandment, but it can also be said to be the beginning of the curse.

 

"Cale" is a sensation,

 

"Cule" is born,

 

"Cundhe" is clean,

 

"Svaha" is the meaning of achievement.

 

The whole sentence of the curse is: by the sensation - the movement of great sensation, and the creation of pure achievements. According to this curse, "enmotion" is a function of great compassion, so his physicality is pure, and he has a great sorrowful effect with pure physicality. This is due to the seventy-seventh. Common blessing.

 

What good does all your dissertation do, given that

the language Buddha spoke, and the original language of Buddhism

is not Chinese?

[fab]

39 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

準提咒:

 

南無 颯哆喃 三貌三勃陀 俱胝南 怛姪他

唵 折隸 主隸 準提 娑婆訶

 

「南無」（namah）是歸命的意思。

 

「颯哆喃 三藐三勃陀 俱胝南」（saptanam-samyaksam-buddha-kotinam）是七千萬正等覺。

 

「怛姪他」（tadyata）其意是「即說咒曰」，這句常常出現在一般的咒語之中，「怛姪他」之前的咒語是歸敬文，接下來的是咒語的中心內容。

 

「唵」（om），是咒的起音。唵字是皈命，也可以說是咒的起始。

 

「折隸」（cale）是覺動，

 

「主隸」（cule）是生起，

 

「準提」（cundhe）是清淨，

 

「娑婆訶」（svaha）是成就的意思。

 

整句咒意是：由覺動—大覺之動，而生起清淨的成就。依此咒意看來，「覺動」是屬於大悲心遍起的作用，所以他的體性是清淨的，而以清淨的體性生起大悲作用，這都是由於七十七俱胝佛所共同加持。

 

请问师兄， is it necessary to recite this part

 

稽首皈依蘇悉帝
頭面頂禮七俱胝
我今稱讚大准提
惟願慈悲垂加護

 

thanks.

[gabbyisbot]

On 11/5/2018 at 9:42 PM, drekt said:

因為所有物質的東西都是活人才有的問題。死後，什麼問題都沒與。那麼極樂是什麼？說什麼金碧輝煌什麼奇花異草，那只是活人的奢望。

 

佛教的空到底是什麼？是否就是與道合一主宰蒼生？

那是阿弥陀经里面所讲的。那时你我眼中世俗的[奢望]，但这些是阿弥陀佛变化出来的，是[方便法]。世俗的人难免会有习性在，佛陀演绎这些为了方便接引救度众生到净土。佛菩萨的心，众生永远不能理解，一切从慈悲与智慧而来。

如果你悟到了[空]，试问你还会执着外在的一切吗？

[gabbyisbot]

13 hours ago, fab said:

 

请问师兄， is it necessary to recite this part

 

稽首皈依蘇悉帝
頭面頂禮七俱胝
我今稱讚大准提
惟願慈悲垂加護

 

thanks.

那是准提赞偈，念准提咒前/后， 可加念的。

[fab]

2 minutes ago, gabbyisbot said:

那是准提赞偈，念准提咒前/后， 可加念的。

 

 可不念？

[fab]

 

 

[gabbyisbot]

1 minute ago, fab said:

 

 可不念？

我觉得可念亦可不念，因人习惯而异。万法唯心，心诚则灵。

[tomcat]

16 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Thank you for pointing me to this interesting book.  I have read it a little, and already have some issues.

If the written word has lead to hierarchical societies, misogynistic,  patriarchal,  how come that in the last centuries this has been increasingly reversed,  even before the advent of telephone, radio, television and other non literary means of communication?  Today an increasing number of women are excelling in intellectual activities that were once reserved for men.   And in the days of the ancient sages (Buddha, Jesus, Confucius and earlier) when literacy was very rare, all these sages were men.

 

I have some skepticism for attempts to compartmentalize humans by race, ethnicity.  For example, those who claim that Asian mentality is not prepared to deal with Western culture are contradicted buy what is happening recently, that Asians are getting as good in Western science, technology, art as the typical European societies.  And the superior democratic mentality of Americans is showing unfortunate anti-democratic tendencies in our latest elections, like yesterday.  Can one believe that half of Americans vote for this Trump and his Republicans?  We Americans are not better at democracy or human rights than any other society.

Well, i think the book is revolutionary more so for outlining the relationship and dynamics of Belief. It was a while ago since I read the book, but I do recall that once humanity left animistic/pagan/goddess/phenomenon worship, they lost the experience of being in contact with divinity, and had to rely on holy words and their ones who wielded it (priests, scribes etc)

somewhere along the line, there was also a delineation from the shaman-figure to a priest-figure, which is predominantly male. that is also a small but impactful change that affected humanity the next few thousand years.

shaman-figures actually tended to be unisex. some tribal cultures, like the native americans, even assign the two-spirit (transgendered) individuals to the praised role of shaman/witch doctor, because it was seen as a holy miracle, to have a spirit of woman within the body of a man. it was not seen as problematic as it is today, well at least until recently. that says a lot about how differently the non-western cultures operated. 

this shift away from a gender neutral leader to a predominantly male structure lasted a good while, until the Rennaissance, where the humanist movement introduced and championed a sensibility towards logic and science. 

this is the seed that eventually lead us to the more balanced gender reality we have today. but even then, the fight against the patriarchy is still ongoing, the only thing is that it is no longer important whether the modern shaman figure (doctor) is female or male, because he/she operates under the format of Science and Logic.

we put the same trust in doctors today, as the tribal member in the shaman. which is symptomatic of our shift in belief, from empirical experience of the Divine, to written word / holy book/ dogmatic deliverance to now the formats of Science.

as always, this all exists in liminal states, and there are overlapping spectrums of belief. but serving as milestones, it is possible to see how our relationship with the divine, inner and outer, has been tampered with - and the way to access the formless essence has been reframed from Experience to Language.

  

Edited November 8, 2018 by tomcat

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, tomcat said:

as always, this all exists in liminal states, and there are overlapping spectrums of belief. but serving as milestones, it is possible to see how our relationship with the divine, inner and outer, has been tampered with - and the way to access the formless essence has been reframed from Experience to Language.
  

 

It seems that a central idea here is that Language weakens Experience.  This may be true in general, not only with a "divine".

If so, animals who don't have a language, have the maximum experience!  But what happens when we consider our Absolute Personal Experience made up of physical and spiritual experiences?  Today we don't have the physical experiences of primitive people in constant contact with nature. But our spiritual, intellectual experience surely makes up for this tenfold.  I am watching this video abut Buddhism posted by Fab, and I see the lives of the devoted Buddhism practitioners... so physical!  Yet I think that my time is much better used reading and reflecting about Dharma... at home.

 

And is there so much difference between receiving information via language or via other means like visual (videos, TV), sound, feelings?

Many times we see news on the web that have a video and the corresponding text.  Either we watch the video or read the text, we get the same information.

 

In the modern world we may be having much, much more total experiences than people had in primitive societies without languages. They could not have had the experience of chatting with people living on the other side of the globe, like they were in the same room.

[Steve5380]

10 hours ago, fab said:

 

 

 

I am watching this nice video piece-by-piece (it is quite long)

and I keep discovering similarities between the practice of Buddhism and that of Christianity.

In the "three jewels of Buddhism", for example, it seems that only Dharma has relevance and the other two are pure propaganda for Buddhism.  Like in the Ten Commandments, the first ones are pure religious propaganda.

 

Another example is the construction of temples, shrines,  the "Wonders", to strengthen the cult.  The same happens with Christianity and its impressive cathedrals, like the Vatican.

 

Seeing all this materialism, the Buddha must be turning around in his grave  (if something is left after so many pieces of his body became relics.) 

[wilfgene]

58 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

I am watching this nice video piece-by-piece (it is quite long)

and I keep discovering similarities between the practice of Buddhism and that of Christianity.

In the "three jewels of Buddhism", for example, it seems that only Dharma has relevance and the other two are pure propaganda for Buddhism.  Like in the Ten Commandments, the first ones are pure religious propaganda.

 

Another example is the construction of temples, shrines,  the "Wonders", to strengthen the cult.  The same happens with Christianity and its impressive cathedrals, like the Vatican.

 

Seeing all this materialism, the Buddha must be turning around in his grave  (if something is left after so many pieces of his body became relics.) 

As well as both being twists/ spin-offs  of another older religion? 

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, Guest memme said:

There are some who speculates that Jesus before he started his ministry at 33 years, the lost years of Bible was spent learning high buddhism meditation, and later after he was revived after being hung on the cross he went back to India.   Allegedly.

 

THe similarity, between Jesus ' ministry and the teachings of Buddhsim of deep love, sacrifice, forgiveness and compassion.....

 

what do you think ?

 

I think that there exist countless speculations about speculations over speculations.

 

If we take the teachings of Jesus Christ and strip them from the pompous overtone that fills the gospels,  they are simple moral teachings filled with common sense that seem inspired by feelings of empathy which come to us inborn and from experience.

 

If we take the teachings of Buddha, it is plausible that a highly spiritual person may come to them, in addition to empathy and experience, through lengthy thinking, meditation, as is alleged that the Buddha got them.

 

And these are just two individuals we know about by very unique circumstances of their life.  Who knows how frequently unknown individuals have "discovered" similar "truths". So the fact that there are commonalities between Buddhism and Christianity is a very weak argument to speculate that there was a connection between the two Masters.

[Steve5380]

2 hours ago, wilfgene said:

As well as both being twists/ spin-offs  of another older religion? 

 

We cannot rule out spin-offs of older religions, in turn spin-offs of even older religions.

But religions could also surge (be invented) spontaneously from the complexities of our thinking and emotions,

since we all carry about the same collection of genes.

[tomcat]

9 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

It seems that a central idea here is that Language weakens Experience.  This may be true in general, not only with a "divine".

If so, animals who don't have a language, have the maximum experience!  But what happens when we consider our Absolute Personal Experience made up of physical and spiritual experiences?  Today we don't have the physical experiences of primitive people in constant contact with nature. But our spiritual, intellectual experience surely makes up for this tenfold.  I am watching this video abut Buddhism posted by Fab, and I see the lives of the devoted Buddhism practitioners... so physical!  Yet I think that my time is much better used reading and reflecting about Dharma... at home.

to deepen the discussion further - i dont think Language as a tool necessarily weakens the Experience. certainly some animal societies also create their own cues and languages,  simply as a tool for communication. but when taken beyond a tool, it is used as a fortifier of certain facts or truths. there is an apt saying by Churchill that "History is written by the victors" and what is written becomes definite - black and white, true and false, good and bad, right and wrong.

 

even by the time of the Renaissance, where it was herald as a new age of scientific enlightenment, i believe much damage has already been done. much of Science is to dissect, classify and separate, learning by seeing how things are different rather than how they are similar and are united. This "definite"-ness behind the written word is so deeply ingrained in us, that even the foundation of science is based on it, (recorded journals, studies, experiments etc) and today, we cannot imagine Science being any other way at all. and what is Science ultimately? it is just a way to explain the phenomenons within our reality, but its particular motive is by the order of difference. 

in deeper psychological terms, even our sense of identity is formed by the order of difference. plato and his contemporaries devised that "i am me, because i am not you". while in buddhism, the lesson to always remember is that, "you are me and i am you". Namaste, ultimately means "my soul acknowledges your own" - as my own. 

So when Language is wielded in this way as a fortifier of truth, it indirectly shapes us and the way we perceive reality into a binary state. I think in some ways, it also shows up in how we have been viewing gender until very recently. the goddess / empirical / nature worship relishes the whole, as unity is in essence, divine. that there is Power in diversity and unity - but the new world order led by holy words and books seeks to divide and separate by way of sins and virtues.

this is why this year/period specifically has been monumental in the ascension of the human race. suddenly, there is a drop of perceived difference, and trans people are slowly being welcomed back and valued by their souls, not their outer identifications. it is the sign of the times, that we are undoing some of the past damage. we have done paying for the sins of the father, as they say, and now we are in the age of change and renewal. it is an important time. 

i think where we have surpassed our animal / primitive cousins is in the way we are able to control our minds. so while primitive people had to learn by being immersed and involved, we only have to do a certain thing once or twice, in order to have access to the experience of having done it. so yes, i think you are absolutely correct in that aspect of time-management. however, there is still much to learn from doing, especially when doing in different states of consciousness/awareness. this is where our spiritual work comes in - where even the act of tea pouring can be meditative. and seeing a sunrise can be transcendental, or simply by breathing we are amazed by the mechanics of Life that operate within us.

no doubt about it, we are stronger now because of our ability to control our intention. this is where Guest Dinky Donk's sharing about thoughts, energy, manifestation comes in. the key question is, what is our daily intention? is it towards the path of hate and destruction, or is it towards Light and Love. it comes back to empirical worship, where without words, text, scripture and dogma, we have internal intelligence, guided by experience, to want and manifest good things for ourselves, our loved ones and extended human and animal families. 


 

10 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

And is there so much difference between receiving information via language or via other means like visual (videos, TV), sound, feelings?

Many times we see news on the web that have a video and the corresponding text.  Either we watch the video or read the text, we get the same information.

 

In the modern world we may be having much, much more total experiences than people had in primitive societies without languages. They could not have had the experience of chatting with people living on the other side of the globe, like they were in the same room.

as for this, Marshall McLuhan has identified much about the Message and the Medium, and the effects it has. there are overlaps with Leonard Shlain's findings definitely, but McLuhan's lens of investigation is towards the modern realm, contemporary use in our lives and projected futures. still it is fun to connect the dots between the two and see where and how they meet.

 

[tomcat]

On 11/9/2018 at 10:40 PM, Steve5380 said:

 

The written word gives an immense advantage in that it preserves the experiences of others without limits.  While otherwise we would have to start from zero each time to acquire some specialized knowledge.  Modern science would be unthinkable without the written word.   If the written word favors the masculine over the feminine, this is an interesting concept, although I imagine that it has little influence today.

 

For this, I would have to disagree slightly - as written language does have limitations. There are words in German that do not even exist in English, and likewise expressions in French that either give different meanings in English. And in regards to capturing the formless divine within written language, it serves problematic to me as well. If you do perceive the Divine, God, Life as eternal, that is a span that outlasts Time itself.  It is older than our history, and will continue beyond our futures, because it is Eternal. However Language, especially written ones, if dated from the Cuneiform is only a few thousand years old. So using words to explain and encapsulate divinity is is like trying to put all the contents of the Pacific Ocean into a mason jar. Clumsy metaphor, but it does the job.
 

 

On 11/9/2018 at 10:10 AM, tomcat said:

This "definite"-ness behind the written word is so deeply ingrained in us, that even the foundation of science is based on it, (recorded journals, studies, experiments etc) and today, we cannot imagine Science being any other way at all. and what is Science ultimately? it is just a way to explain the phenomenons within our reality, but its particular motive is by the order of difference. 
 

On 11/9/2018 at 10:40 PM, Steve5380 said:

Modern science would be unthinkable without the written word. 

 

Exactly. This is how deep the binary is now a part of our consciousness. But it is limiting in itself to think that Science is the only way to understand or quantify our world and reality - there are other means, which first requires us acknowledging and dismantling many of our deep conditioning, not least, the binary behind writing, the limitations it has on faith and experience, and belief itself. 

I would suggest deeper reading of McLuhan. It is not just that the medium is embedded within the message. it is that the "content of any medium is always another medium – thus, speech is the content of writing, writing is the content of print, and print itself is the content of the telegraph". The way messages are ultimately delivered changes more than just the reception of the message, but also the reality in which it is perceived.  It can be a bit mind-bending, especially when modern technology like TV and Internet is thrown in.

 

Circling back to the Buddhist dramatisation, we can see the many-fold effect of Meaning/Message/Content, told through many distortions and lenses. Through speech (i would guess, the actual spoken sharings by Buddha himself) to scribing, to reading, to tweak into moralistic studies, back to writing to reading, to re-writing, to screenplay adaptation, to dramatisation etc..


 

[Guest jio and get]

All discussions about religion is like building an imaginary castle in midair.

 

It has no solid foundation, and its form conforms to the human building its human mental limitation.

 

Let me be the devil's advocate here and slowly , one by one destroy the imaginary pillars supporting religion, and then let religion stand on its own two feed. 

 

Stop feeding the trolls people say, 

 

I say , stop feeding the fire that keeps religion alive,

 

Let it stand on its own two feet. 

 

If religion is as good and strong and alive as some people say, then it should be able to withstand starvation of oxygen to it's fire.

 

What say you?

[tomcat]

3 minutes ago, Guest jio and get said:

All discussions about religion is like building an imaginary castle in midair.

 

It has no solid foundation, and its form conforms to the human building its human mental limitation.

 

Let me be the devil's advocate here and slowly , one by one destroy the imaginary pillars supporting religion, and then let religion stand on its own two feed. 

 

Stop feeding the trolls people say, 

 

I say , stop feeding the fire that keeps religion alive,

 

Let it stand on its own two feet. 

 

If religion is as good and strong and alive as some people say, then it should be able to withstand starvation of oxygen to it's fire.

 

What say you?

There is Religion and then there is Spirituality.

 

One is a structure build by Man, that once rejected or questioned often leaves one out of it.

The other is a deep communication inherent in Man, to reject it is to live without much Meaning. 

But in order to access one, it is often necessary to wade through the other, it is the work we all must do.

I find that the people who no longer believe in a higher power, they gave up on themselves a long time ago.

maybe as a result of being unanswered,, the inner child becomes obstinate and closed. 

and dies without fully understanding the worlds, the complexities of his own soul.

just because he either asked the question before he was ready, and the answer came but not in the form he liked.

 

is it really a surprise that our race, our kind is one that favours self-inflicted suffering above all else?

pain is necessary, but suffering is optional. 

[Steve5380]

36 minutes ago, Guest jio and get said:

All discussions about religion is like building an imaginary castle in midair.

 

It has no solid foundation, and its form conforms to the human building its human mental limitation.

 

Let me be the devil's advocate here and slowly , one by one destroy the imaginary pillars supporting religion, and then let religion stand on its own two feed. 

 

Stop feeding the trolls people say, 

 

I say , stop feeding the fire that keeps religion alive,

 

Let it stand on its own two feet. 

 

If religion is as good and strong and alive as some people say, then it should be able to withstand starvation of oxygen to it's fire.

 

What say you?

 

Discussions about religion are not all that negative.  They are exchanges of speculations about the unknown.  This happens in science too, until the unknown becomes known.

There are live religions and dead religions.  How does a religion die?  Very simply.  When there is no one left to believe in it.  This reveals what religions are.  For example, Christianity will die when society stops believing in it.  This will not happen in our life time, but it happened with many ancient religions.

 

Any of the known religions would disappear,  something differently from dying, if all the information of this religion is erased from our minds and the literature around.  It is hard to expect that if Christianity disappears, someone will realize later on that a god gave a person tables with ten commandments and that such god sent his son to earth to die in a cross and resurrect. This would only be possible if there exists a TRUE religion that survives the passage of time and its reality is manifested again.  

 

Although I have limited information, I doubt that any religion ever surged again after having disappeared from society.  If so, this religion would stand on its own two feet. 

.  

 

Edited November 12, 2018 by Steve5380

[Steve5380]

16 minutes ago, tomcat said:

I find that the people who no longer believe in a higher power, they gave up on themselves a long time ago.

maybe as a result of being unanswered,, the inner child becomes obstinate and closed. 

and dies without fully understanding the worlds, the complexities of his own soul.

just because he either asked the question before he was ready, and the answer came but not in the form he liked.

 

is it really a surprise that our race, our kind is one that favours self-inflicted suffering above all else?

pain is necessary, but suffering is optional. 

 

What about people who never believed nor believe in a higher power?  Did and do we never have ourselves?

My inner child never paid much attention to the supernatural, but was always busy with engineering and music.

I don't remember ever suffering from a lack of religion.

What I remember is my knees suffering from kneeling down for long times during those endless masses I had to attend as a child.

[Steve5380]

52 minutes ago, tomcat said:

For this, I would have to disagree slightly - as written language does have limitations. There are words in German that do not even exist in English, and likewise expressions in French that either give different meanings in English. And in regards to capturing the formless divine within written language, it serves problematic to me as well. If you do perceive the Divine, God, Life as eternal, that is a span that outlasts Time itself.  It is older than our history, and will continue beyond our futures, because it is Eternal. However Language, especially written ones, if dated from the Cuneiform is only a few thousand years old. So using words to explain and encapsulate divinity is is like trying to put all the contents of the Pacific Ocean into a mason jar. Clumsy metaphor, but it does the job.
 

 

Hmmm.  I speak fluently Spanish, German, English and I haven't noticed shortcomings in translating between these languages.  But then I am not very sophisticated in literature and my capturing of the divine is very informal.  About perceiving the eternal Divine and expressing it with a language that only exists for an instant in the infinite of time,  we express plenty of Nature with our perishable language, and this does not seem to be a problem.  We can clearly describe in any modern language any speculations about the Big Bang, to have occurred billions of years ago.

[tomcat]

2 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

What about people who never believed nor believe in a higher power?  Did and do we never have ourselves?

My inner child never paid much attention to the supernatural, but was always busy with engineering and music.

I don't remember ever suffering from a lack of religion.

What I remember is my knees suffering from kneeling down for long times during those endless masses I had to attend as a child.

Once again, religion and spirituality are two very different things. 

I also never did suffer from lack of religion even though I was introduced to it very early, but I did feel that somethings are incomplete even from a young age, so my own journey towards finding answers have been 3 decades ongoing now. I even knew as early as 5 or 6, that there are parts of myself that adults will try to change, but i should never give those up, so i suppose i do retain a large part of my openness and wonderment. if anything, people make me more weary these days, haha. but as i approach my late 30s, i enjoy my own company

more and more. But I suppose spiritual / charitable work is not about personal comfort. 

The inner child refers to the child in need at the stage of the growing individual, not an actual child. These are nurtured and manifested across many ages for people. Most turn away because they see nothing satisfactory there, or if they are not saved as they requested. It is still there, but when people are closed, not much can be done to open them. The universe delivers lessons, of pain, chaos and suffering to get them to wake, But it often only emboldens them, or pushes them into a kind of numbness - self-distraction that they convince themselves is living.  

 

it's hard but i can tell when others are suffering as part of their life journey, or just mindless patterns of behaviour. sometimes they also overlap, compounded so they are one and the same, so they can never really break the cycle in this lifetime. all i can do is to alleviate some of their suffering, counsel them so that they don't cause suffering unto others and pray they do come to open and wake one day.

 

 

[tomcat]

5 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Hmmm.  I speak fluently Spanish, German, English and I haven't noticed shortcomings in translating between these languages.  But then I am not very sophisticated in literature and my capturing of the divine is very informal.  About perceiving the eternal Divine and expressing it with a language that only exists for an instant in the infinite of time,  we express plenty of Nature with our perishable language, and this does not seem to be a problem.  We can clearly describe in any modern language any speculations about the Big Bang, to have occurred billions of years ago.

Ah, good. Then you must admit there is no one to one translation for some words to english. and also keep in mind, we are talking about modern lineations of these languages. Old Germanic languages, olde english, Latin are all also at play throughout human history. 

Nature, Big Bang etc are still tangible phenomena. Divinity maybe manifest itself through these incidences and events, but they are not defined by it, unfortunately. But to discount the divinity of such things is to once again enforce the deep binary.

 

Think in liminal states! Just because something is not real does not mean it was never there - much like how we will be, thousands of years to come, with no name, no bones, no proof we were ever even here. 

[Steve5380]

3 minutes ago, tomcat said:

... to once again enforce the deep binary.

 

Think in liminal states! Just because something is not real does not mean it was never there - much like how we will be, thousands of years to come, with no name, no bones, no proof we were ever even here. 

 

What you mean by "binary"?  For me "binary" is a numbering system.

 

Are we mixing reality with permanence?  Reality may refer to a the period of time for which reality is a qualifier.

Do you think that a Divinity can be temporary like we are?

[tomcat]

Binary = composing of only two things. in this context, we discussed previously the binaries of right/wrong, good/bad, black/white, true/false.

nope, there is no real, only impermanence, as things are always changing. life is flux. but just because something is not is real, does not mean that it did not exist. 

for example: past and future is no longer real,  but it did exist at one point of Time as the present. 

in buddhist / spiritual context, the Present is all there ever is, but it is fleeting, because once again, it is always moving as we leave and enter the next moment.

 

to confuse you further, that is why our reality is both real and not real - real because we exist in the Present moment within it, but not real, because Reality itself is an impermanent construct/figment and subject to change. in the end, the binary no longer works, it was never supposed to - that's why you feel confused. 

 

further illustration: in the end, when one become Nothing, and is absorbed back into the whole, he once again becomes Everything. but for a conventional mind, these are two extreme ends of the spectrum that must be kept separated, and this is the binary at work once again. 




 

[Steve5380]

8 hours ago, tomcat said:

nope, there is no real, only impermanence, as things are always changing. life is flux. but just because something is not is real, does not mean that it did not exist. 

for example: past and future is no longer real,  but it did exist at one point of Time as the present. 

in buddhist / spiritual context, the Present is all there ever is, but it is fleeting, because once again, it is always moving as we leave and enter the next moment.

 

to confuse you further, that is why our reality is both real and not real - real because we exist in the Present moment within it, but not real, because Reality itself is an impermanent construct/figment and subject to change. in the end, the binary no longer works, it was never supposed to - that's why you feel confused. 

 

further illustration: in the end, when one become Nothing, and is absorbed back into the whole, he once again becomes Everything. but for a conventional mind, these are two extreme ends of the spectrum that must be kept separated, and this is the binary at work once again. 
 

 

You cannot really think all that if there is no reality 

 

You give a good example of the burden of language.  What you want to express is clear, but language contradicts it.

For example, in the definition of real as opposed to fiction, there is of course a past reality and a future reality.  For example, it is real that the earth turned around the sun yesterday and it is real that it will do so in the next minute.  And language protects the "binary" everywhere from being confusing.  When we return to Nothing, we cannot be Everything simply because these two words have clear definitions.

 

We are gifted with the ability to delve in in the abstractions of Buddhism.  Still, it may be advantageous to keep these adventurous explorations as intellectual pastimes while living our lives with our feet firmly on solid ground.  We are conditioned since birth to accept our reality as real, and this makes us productive for our benefit and that of those around us.

[tomcat]

On 11/12/2018 at 10:34 PM, Steve5380 said:

 

We are conditioned since birth to accept our reality as real, and this makes us productive for our benefit and that of those around us.

 

Sorry, have been away for military reservist the past week, and returning later part of the week, so responses will be more or less sporadic.

 

I have to say that for all our grasp on reality, it has made us more anxious as a species. look at our wars (both past and present), political strife, fixations on money etc.

all because we identify that we are fighting and dying for something tangible. 

I think you might be fixating on the "no reality" part of the discussion. i do have to reiterate that it is a fine balance, because the whole thing functions outside of the binaries we have discussed previously. think of it this way, instead of "no reality" just because there is nothing, but there is no reality, because only the present moment is real. that helps to reframe it, without being falling victim to the binary trap of extremes.

 

but it does takes a lot of unlearning to fully take it in. I might say that at age 30-40 is the mid point for most modern humans to have lived but still questioning enough to know or want more, as they enter the second half of their lives. most of the historical anecdotes also point towards this age range in the case of Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, etc etc.
 

Beyond that age range, T think most will already be set in their ways and thought patterns, but there are always exceptions, when subjected to circumstances of change.

[Steve5380]

57 minutes ago, tomcat said:

 

Sorry, have been away for military reservist the past week, and returning later part of the week, so responses will be more or less sporadic.

 

I have to say that for all our grasp on reality, it has made us more anxious as a species. look at our wars (both past and present), political strife, fixations on money etc.

all because we identify that we are fighting and dying for something tangible. 

I think you might be fixating on the "no reality" part of the discussion. i do have to reiterate that it is a fine balance, because the whole thing functions outside of the binaries we have discussed previously. think of it this way, instead of "no reality" just because there is nothing, but there is no reality, because only the present moment is real. that helps to reframe it, without being falling victim to the binary trap of extremes.

 

but it does takes a lot of unlearning to fully take it in. I might say that at age 30-40 is the mid point for most modern humans to have lived but still questioning enough to know or want more, as they enter the second half of their lives. most of the historical anecdotes also point towards this age range in the case of Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, etc etc.
 

Beyond that age range, T think most will already be set in their ways and thought patterns, but there are always exceptions, when subjected to circumstances of change.

 

Welcome back!

 

Have you ever thought what "the present" is?

If we imagine "the present" as being at least a couple of seconds while we think about it,  in this (relative) short time millions of things like instructions executed by our computers may happen, tens of people may die and be born, etc.  It is hard to define "an instant", because it can always be subdivided into sub-instances.   If only "the present moment" exists then we cannot do anything in a "present moment", thus WE cannot exist.  I think that our existence needs more continuity than that.  Surely the chemical processes in our neurons that give us the perception of being, must take many "instants",  maybe millions depending on how short we want to define the "instant".  Theoretically, the "instant" should be the smallest time interval possible in the universe.  An atom used to be the smallest particle until sub-atomic particles were discovered.  I don't think we know how short an "instant" is.

 

We cannot be sure if Buddha thought about the smallness of "the present" or an "instant", if he knew about picoseconds, or... zeptoseconds? If he did, would his philosophy have been affected?  As an electrical engineer I am used to think of these small intervals, and I would feel sad if reality exists only for such short times.  For me, it should last at least while I eat my chocolate ice cream.

.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Steve5380

[tomcat]

2 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Welcome back!

 

Have you ever thought what "the present" is?

If we imagine "the present" as being at least a couple of seconds while we think about it,  in this (relative) short time millions of things like instructions executed by our computers may happen, tens of people may die and be born, etc.  It is hard to define "an instant", because it can always be subdivided into sub-instances.   If only "the present moment" exists then we cannot do anything in a "present moment", thus WE cannot exist.  I think that our existence needs more continuity than that.  Surely the chemical processes in our neurons that give us the perception of being, must take many "instants",  maybe millions depending on how short we want to define the "instant".  Theoretically, the "instant" should be the smallest time interval possible in the universe.  An atom used to be the smallest particle until sub-atomic particles were discovered.  I don't think we know how short an "instant" is.

 

We cannot be sure if Buddha thought about the smallness of "the present" or an "instant", if he knew about picoseconds, or... zeptoseconds? If he did, would his philosophy have been affected?  As an electrical engineer I am used to think of these small intervals, and I would feel sad if reality exists only for such short times.  For me, it should last at least while I eat my chocolate ice cream.

.

That is very scientific, but i think once again, it is our attempt to grasp at something tangible, to quantify how long a present moment is.

even the construct of 1 second is manmade, so once again, we are attempting to build a hypothesis on unstable foundations, based on the systems we created and agreed on using. 

with regards to the big picture, it might not be important whether we existed for 1 nanosecond or 10, as we are threaded by (1) our actions, and (2) the flow of time.

i put actions as the first indicator, more prime than the flow of time, because if there is any way to show for our existence, it would be through our actions. 

circling back once again to buddhist and theosophical teaching - that our actions is deeply linked to our state of being, and indeed to the shared experience of our larger human family.

i suppose a rare circumstance is presented ever so often, where even after the individual is long gone, his effect and action lives on beyond his name or reputation.

of course, we have our spiritual leaders, and the mythos and religions build around them to memorialise their existence. (once again, an attempt to grasp something tangible).
we also have the notoriously remembered, our killers, genocide masters, inhuman exterminators, whose actions stand for their existence and the misery they have caused. 

our Actions, powered by Intention, will echo from the present moment to the incoming future. once again, we decide what that action is and what consequence it will create.

whether we will add to the pool of suffering or help to alleviate it. this is the true sign of existing, no? the effect we have on others. 

[kjboy]

 

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, tomcat said:

i put actions as the first indicator, more prime than the flow of time, because if there is any way to show for our existence, it would be through our actions. 

circling back once again to buddhist and theosophical teaching - that our actions is deeply linked to our state of being, and indeed to the shared experience of our larger human family.

 

 

I agree.  And I like much more this view of Buddhism than the beliefs of some Christians that "salvation" comes through "sola gratia" ( faith in God) instead of our acts,  so that maybe Hitler and Stalin were saved if they believed in Christ.  Absurd!

 

It should be simple to recognize that our perceived "present" is not an instant but a collection of millions of "instants" (vibrations of a Cs atom in an atomic clock?) that constantly move into the past.  This means that the present also involves a memory, a past that has to remain real.  How long should the "present" last?  In the case of a computer, its present could start from the time it is booted and remembers its states from there on.  For us, should it last as long as we can remember, or as long as we think about "the present"?  If we get distracted with other thoughts, will this start a new present? How about our eight hours sleep at night? Will this end the previous present?  I could accept that "only the present is real" if such present extends back to the moment our brains started functioning,  that is, the time we were conceived.  This means that OUR WHOLE LIFE is real. 

 

I also am starting to speculate that WE are real during OUR WHOLE LIFE but at no other time.  We were not real before conception, and we will not be real after death.  So our actions can influence us only while we are alive.  After that we won't be real, so it makes no sense to think of reward or punishment of something not real after death. We are rewarded or punished for our actions in our real future until death.  But this can be another topic.

.

 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Steve5380

[Guest guest]

On 11/21/2018 at 9:58 PM, kjboy said:

 

 

 

That is why the sex drive is like a grenade or dynamite, once you let it get into a religious oder, it is explosive and will maim and injure a lot of people one.

 

Must learn from  the past experience of people living in the past, they must have experienced this kind of sex scandals in the past , that is why there is strict no sex activity within the buddhist order.

 

 

[Guest guest]

On 11/21/2018 at 9:58 PM, kjboy said:

 

 

万恶淫为首，万恶淫为首，万恶淫为首，万恶淫为首，万恶淫为首，

 

阿弥陀佛。

[kjboy]

1 hour ago, Guest guest said:

 

 

That is why the sex drive is like a grenade or dynamite, once you let it get into a religious oder, it is explosive and will maim and injure a lot of people one.

 

Must learn from  the past experience of people living in the past, they must have experienced this kind of sex scandals in the past , that is why there is strict no sex activity within the buddhist order.

 

 

I think you miss out the point.

This 師傅 is just a fake one.

And I pretty sure there are a lot of fake master to act like a God or Buddha to guide people to a better direction.

 

And it is not related to sex drive. T

He takes drugs. Acting is his full time job. Just like people who play Instagram to get many followers to gain his fame.

 

So ask yourself, are you the one fully trust on your master words? Are you the sincere believer of your religion?

 

[Guest guest]

On 11/21/2018 at 9:58 PM, kjboy said:

 

 

 

 

[Steve5380]

5 hours ago, kjboy said:

 

So ask yourself, are you the one fully trust on your master words? Are you the sincere believer of your religion?

 

 

Yes, I trust my Master, which is Reason + Experience. 

More than as a sincere believer, I trust my agnostic philosophy because it comes naturally.

[Steve5380]

7 hours ago, Guest guest said:

 

 

That is why the sex drive is like a grenade or dynamite, once you let it get into a religious oder, it is explosive and will maim and injure a lot of people one.

 

Must learn from  the past experience of people living in the past, they must have experienced this kind of sex scandals in the past , that is why there is strict no sex activity within the buddhist order.

 

 

 

I understand that Buddhism only restricts sex (straight or gay) for its monks.  It does not pass judgment about its secular people. (maybe only the Dalai Lama condemns gay sex in general)

Christianity also deals with its priests with severity, restricting their sex.  But...  it extends this to everyone!  We Catholics can ONLY have sex for procreation, and ONLY with our spouse after we get married by the church.   HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA..... 

 

What this Buddhist monk in the video did is by far not as bad as the actions of some pedophile priests.

He had sex with other priests (men), something that as a gay I find perfectly natural.

He took drugs himself,  harming himself but not others.

[Guest guest]

1 hour ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Yes, I trust my Master, which is Reason + Experience. 

More than as a sincere believer, I trust my agnostic philosophy because it comes naturally.

 

Hammering your reasons across again , aren't you ?

 

 

The good old Yankee way. 

 

First in Korean War,

 

then Vietnam ,  then .........

 

It's your way, or the high way

[Steve5380]

10 hours ago, Guest guest said:

 

 

 

 

That's the image I have of you shooting your posts.

Equally comical 

[lovehandle]

On 11/21/2018 at 9:58 PM, kjboy said:

 

i just saw this on you tube then i realised u have shared already, tks

it is not just the 師傅 didn't carry himself well , his master (from China) ALSO supported his actions!
He took people to the dormitory of the temple n have sex orgies/parties too

 

22 hours ago, kjboy said:

I think you miss out the point.

This 師傅 is just a fake one.

And I pretty sure there are a lot of fake master to act like a God or Buddha to guide people to a better direction.

 

And it is not related to sex drive. T

He takes drugs. Acting is his full time job. Just like people who play Instagram to get many followers to gain his fame.

 

So ask yourself, are you the one fully trust on your master words? Are you the sincere believer of your religion?

 

 

[lovehandle]

still lie to help him and 加持

nun too

 

[fab]

There r black sheeps everywhere.

 

佛教是依法不依人。

 

[kjboy]

3 hours ago, fab said:

There r black sheeps everywhere.

 

佛教是依法不依人。

 

It is the time to ask yourself.

Who are them? Why you need to listen to them?

What is religion for yourself.

Why you can't trust yourself? Why you want to attend class weekly to listen their talk?

WHY? Because you feel weak or lost and you need someone to give you energy or hints.

 

[Steve5380]

5 hours ago, kjboy said:

It is the time to ask yourself.

Who are them? Why you need to listen to them?

What is religion for yourself.

Why you can't trust yourself? Why you want to attend class weekly to listen their talk?

WHY? Because you feel weak or lost and you need someone to give you energy or hints.

 

 

We cannot trust ourselves?  This makes sense.  We are very ignorant

Why can't we trust the religious?  Because they are equally ignorant, yet they claim to know everything.

Why would we listen to them, the religious?  To judge what they say and discover their falsities

 

We are weak or lost, and need guidance, hints?  We should accept 

that nobody has real, definite answers. No religion, no philosophy.

Then, with confidence that we are not missing anything and with full agnosticism,

we adopt a philosophy that is good for us and live the best we can

 

[lovehandle]

18 hours ago, fab said:

There r black sheeps everywhere.

 

佛教是依法不依人。

 

many said that 
but once being exposed they leave that temple

[kjboy]

14 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

We cannot trust ourselves?  This makes sense.  We are very ignorant

Why can't we trust the religious?  Because they are equally ignorant, yet they claim to know everything.

Why would we listen to them, the religious?  To judge what they say and discover their falsities

 

We are weak or lost, and need guidance, hints?  We should accept 

that nobody has real, definite answers. No religion, no philosophy.

Then, with confidence that we are not missing anything and with full agnosticism,

we adopt a philosophy that is good for us and live the best we can

 

Yes, but not many realize these.