themiddleway

https://theintercept.com/2016/08/25/why-did-the-saudi-regime-and-other-gulf-tyrannies-donate-millions-to-the-clinton-foundation/ "The reality is that there is ample evidence uncovered by journalists suggesting that regimes donating money to the Clinton Foundation recieved special access to and even highly favorable treatment from the Clinton State Department"... Im so happy I don't have to choose between Dumb and Dumber, all ready done enough of that in my home country. How people can even argue that there is a better choice in politics anymore is beyond me.. Good luck.

Amazing workmanship by any standards.

http://www.gizapower.com/pma/index.htm

Ok can we get some names of people who are now in hell please? I'll kick it off with two obvious candidates. Hitler comes to mind straight away and.. Jimmy Saivelle. The above belong together in the lowest of low hells. So based on our self regulating moral universe model the above candidates are currently being tortured in a very (hopefully) Yang Hell because the All, the Tao, the Primordial Unconditioned Awareness which is generally described by mystics as being very elusive, undefinable, love infused and beyond causality also happens to conveniently operate a very precise cosmic justice system which includes torture. Great! But how dose this work I hear you ask? Well what happens is that at death the the above candidates take rebirth in a hell that is directly proportionate to their crimes on Earth. Jimmy Saivelle ,who molested and ruined the lives of countless children, his evil mind stream, soul, heart shen, whatever. ?? you choose, is now as we speak having a hot iron rod inserted up his rectum and having his insides burnt out because the undefinable cosmic Insight actually cares about child molestation. I'm sorry if the above is a bit vulgar but I find people peddling their stupid theories about cosmic justice (with out even offering a tiny bit of critical balancing) even more offensive; especially given the complete lack of observational evidence for it.

Yin hells, Yang hells and the Mother or Great Spirit (depending on your gender) balancing everything out in a wonderful 'just so' story. Its edifying to know that all the victims of war, poverty, paedophilia and other miseries humans have seen fit to inflict on each other are nothing more than cosmic manifestation of a reality that is morally self regulating. Its that simple.

I struggle with the moral universe concept. The idea that the consequences of an action you committed in a previous life will come to fruition in a future life seems like bullshit to me; as dose the proposal that the universe some how rewards good actions and punishes bad actions. And what I struggle with even more than all of the above is when people talk about their private spiritual insights and use it as grounds for generalizing about ontological experience. Thats not to deny that there are other planes of existence but it is way beyond my knowledge bank to start generalizing and proposing simple linear models based on visions I have had through altered states. When you look at the descriptions of hell -particularly the part about a Hell Boss with a giant whip who's sole role is to torture beings- it makes me wonder at the critical thinking faculties of people suggestion that it is a valid insight; and that maybe they are addicted to a model of reality where the moral account book is evenly balance out because the alternative model, where chaos and impartiality reign, is actually more terrifying than any hell realm.

Let me know when any of you get this far please

Dzogchen is petrol IMO;) It can just as easy proliferate ignorance as extinguish it. If you have you have an natural affinity for the teachings under the namer "Dzogchen" seek out a teacher.

Do you have a teacher?

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA3B03Q20140412?irpc=932 Another Waco ?

that's brilliant ^^^ Something about cute girl talking about American politics, where can I find me one of these !

I've got nothing more to add, except whatever is your chosen form of Dharma I wish you all the best. Peace.

>>>>If someone cultivates enough or if the conditions are right, their various proclivities which feed their preconceived notions, will be smashed to pieces. Acclimating to secularized Western attitudes is one of the challenges Buddhism is facing as a presentation of a viable means for easing mental suffering. You know what I find as ironic about this thread? It's the surprising unacceptance, towards people who interpret Buddha's teachings through a physicalist lens, who sees Buddha's teachings on rebirth, karma, etc. as a form of dogmatism; you don't see any threads voicing dissent against people who interpret the Buddha's teachings in the contradictory fashion of eternalism.<<<< I've seen loads of threads lambasting eternalist interpretations of Buddhism. What irkes me the most is Batchelor et al are capatlizing on the simplistic anti religious arguments of Dawkins and Hitchens to promote their contribution to cultural hegemony. I read one of Stephen.Batchelors books, it had a quote by Hitchens on it, something like : " I endorse this secularised form of Buddhism because if our species is going to survive we must embrace rationalism bla, bla". I personally think Batchelor is a failed monastic, some people should not commit to that life. The impression I got from his books was...I've meditated for years, wore robes, enlightenment is basically medatative absorption, the Tibetans invented a lot of B.S., paths that 'point out' the nature of mind are quasi Buddhism, siddhi's are left over from primitive cultures etc This goes against my experience of being a student under a lineage Guru and my own practise/experience. Yet the rational model is fast becoming the normative Buddhism. I have particularly came up against this rational elitism in the lay Thervada / vipassana crowd, the look of disbelief that you don't psychologize every single bit of the Dharma. Or the classic," Thervada is the purest model -insert rationalist- form of Buddhism , we don't resort to self mythologizing" but forgetting that the Theravada insists that the Abhidhamma was taught by the Buddha in Tavatimsa heaven during his seventh rains retreat.

One of my favourite supports is Green Tara. I use it for all my big problems i.e. money and women

I know but if I limit myself to that I don't get to talk shit.

I am generalising about groups for the sake of argument. Looking back, Buddhism has been absorbed into different cultures with out the core of the teaching being altered. But even though the sciences are long way off mapping the brain, and with some scientists acknowledging that consciousness may be irreducible, rational Buddhists like Batchelor et al are adamant that notions like rebirth can now be thrown out. I perceive the rational Buddhist crowd as making the foregone conclusion that science has explained everything and we are not far off a grand unifying theory that will purify every last bit of magical thinking that is left. The momentum of Western academia is based on disenchantment that ignores indigenous traditions and historiography, the prime example of this is Buddhist Tantra. Even though scholars were aware of a Indian historiographical account of Tantra they ignored it because it did not fit their agenda of cultural rationalisation. We now have Westernised understanding of Tantra that is completely inconsistent with the actual tradition. I think the general trend of rationalisation and it's rhetoric of technological utopia is bleak and conceals cultural chauvinism.

The crux of the matter is the a priori assumption that consciousness can be reduced to brain function. Given the explanatory success of science you can't blame Bachelor et al in their critique of magical thinking in Buddhism. While the generalised emphasis in Buddhism is on dependent origination, the interpretations of it varies between schools and individuals. I've observed Buddhist conflate dependent origination and evolution, this lazy rhetoric is deployed when Buddhist are blatantly appealing to authority to buttress a general theory of conditionality. "Look we're super rational too." But conditionality in Buddhism should not be viewed as strictly linear, this is another reification error to make Buddhist teachings conform to the dogmatic linearity arguments of rational atheism. Dependent origination ultimately means phenomena are non-arisen, it's scope is intended to be confined to the dependent and pure nature of mind. I would argue that this a posteriori knowledge transcends the mechanism of brain function. The body of light being the most remarkable exemplar of this.

Dr.Sheldrake was foolish enough to do research on psychic phenomena. Has been branded a pseudo scientist ever since, not with standing his excellent credentials.

Agreed. He is trying to find proof in science for his faith but his ideas about habits vs laws are interesting. For example in Vajra.Buddhism ideas like : continuum of spiritual lineage, transmission between Guru and student, Tulkus, rebirth, continuum of karma, no self, siddhi's etc the discourse around these issues is often abstruse/ paradoxical because they are not consistent with the broader philosophy within which they are contained. "Spiritual" discource should endeavour to explore all explanatory options, even a as yet untested concept like morphic resonance. If the habits of nature can be shown to be dependent on 'non-local similarity reinforcement' that would have profound implications on religious discourse. I suspect that paradox can be a way of avoiding problematic and inconsistent epistemology. Or maybe I just hate haikus to much

All of this is still speculative and controversial but it makes for some interesting reading. http://www.entelechyjournal.com/rupertsheldrake.html The law metaphor is embarrassingly anthropomorphic. Habits are less human-centered. Many kinds of organisms have habits, but only humans have laws. The habits of nature depend on non-local similarity reinforcement. Through morphic resonance, the patterns of activity in self-organizing systems are influenced by similar patterns in the past, giving each species and each kind of self-organizing system a collective memory. http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.3707 ..dynamical laws for quantum systems can evolve as the universe evolves, because new precedents are generated by the formation of new entangled states. http://goertzel.org/dynapsyc/MorphicPilot.htm Conceptual bridge-building between quantum theory, morphic fields and psi phenomena. (Some of this is a weeee bit dense)

Atheism is a non prophet organisation. George.Carlin Rationalising Buddhism is a form of cultural imperialism. Buddhism is a religion. Buddhism without rebirth and the 31 planes of existence is not the teachings of an enlightened being. The sine qua non of Buddhism is enlightenment, which includes insight into rebirth and the 31 planes of existence, a characteristic of perfect knowledge.

Back in the day when my thirst for new spiritual experiences outweighed any common sense, I had a very weird experience with a magical ritual practice that I learnt off a hippy in London. The hippy claimed it was Central Asian in origin. To cut a long story short, after practising this ritual for a month I started seeing these different entities. Particularly at night when I was trying to sleep. I was the only one who could see them and it was like peering into another dimension. But the experience got too intense so I stopped practising the ritual. It took ages for the effects of the practise to stop but eventually it subsided. Kind of made me revise my attitude to the teaching of the 31 planes of existence and random hippy teachers. I don't know if what I experienced is strictly a tulpa but it felt like this practise was inducing hallucinations. Very powerful magic.

What beliefs or assumptions are synonymous with rational atheism? My rough sketch includes: 1.A first cause but no creator being,the universe and all life can be reduced to and explained through materialism, implicit in this view is realism. 2.No after life because consciousness is an epiphenomenon. 3.The superiority of humans to all other forms of life. 4.The apotheosis of human knowledge is derived from science. 5.The scientific revolution began in the West, implicit in this is the superiority of the Western culture. 6. Moral relativism . Buddhism can be simplified as a phenomenological inquiry into why humans suffer and the subsequent yogic discipline used to overcome suffering. 1. Buddhism dose not necessarily negate the exsistence of God but regards such speculation as outside the bounds of sense and of no use in alleviating ones suffering. No clear agreement or disagreement here. Buddhism teaches that the Universe and all emergent phenomena are begingless and are ultimately unborn purity. But a disagreement here. I´m gonna say a draw. 2. One of the foudations of Buddhism is the belief in rebirth or the continuum of consciousness after death. 2nd disagreement. 3. Tricky one...human birth is regarded as precious and particulary conducive to realization but my understanding is that human beings are not the only beings capable of achieving buddhahood and nor is Earth the only dimension where a wheel turning Buddha can take birth. Buddhism also teaches that there are other life forms who are, relatively speaking, more powerful than human beings. I´m going to say 3rd disagreement. 4. Science is regarded ( like all objects of knowledge) as empty and is not considered essential to extinguishing the habitual grasping and reification of expereinces that perpetuate suffering. 4th disagreement. 5. No culture on Earth (or off it for that matter) is giving superiority, Buddhism has found relevance by pointing out the universal impermanence of all forms. 5th disagreement 6.The basic precept of Buddhism is not to harm any living thing but ´idiot´ compassion is not advocated either. The Jatakas tales briefly discuss the dilemma of knowing that a great evil can be avoided by killing someone but fall short in addressing the true complexity of the world. In Buddhism ´evil` is ultimatly regarded as a form of ignorance, I find this reasoning horribly inadeqate. Karma is translated as intent but is often taught as a cosmic justice system that brings no explanatory power to events. On the other side rational athesism birthed the most bloodiest century in human history. I believe that Buddhist and secular morality both posit that right and wrong are not absolute values but ignore the paradoxes and dangers implicit there in. I´m gonna say draw on morality. Buddhism disagrees with 4 out of the 6 assumptions of athiesm. Buddhism is not rational athiesm. Obviously the above is simplistic and subjective but Its my 2 cents. Peace.

Every religious group has it's shadow side and some are worse than others. I find none of the above surprising, my greatest disgust and anger is reserved for child abuse, which has been prevalent across all religions. The assimilitation of Eastern spirituality has been something of a mix blessing. The naïveté that any of these traditions are the panacea for the every ill of society is bullshit but some teachers are still trading an absolutist salve.

For a speculative insight into what might have been Irish myth is interesting, the Tuatha Dé Danann were one of the early ruling tribes of Irleand: King Nuada lost his arm in battle so his brother Dian Cecht and the wright Creidhne crafted a beautiful silver arm for him.. Or the four magical items which the mythological Tuatha Dé Danann are supposed to have brought with them from the four island cities Murias, Falias, Gorias and Findias, when they arrived in Ireland : Four presents (were fetched) with them hither, By the nobles of the Tuatha De Danann: A sword, a stone, a caldron of worth, (And) a spear for the death of great champions. From Failias (came) hither the Lia Fail, Which shouted under the kings of Ireland. The sword in the hand of the nimble Lug From Gorias (it was procured), - a choice of vast riches. From far-away Findias over the sea Was brought the deadly spear of Nuada. From Murias (was conveyed) a huge and mighty treasure, The caldron of the Dagda of lofty deeds.