Christianity, Buddhsim, Religious Taoism

[steve]

Not everyone agrees with that view.

 

Sam Harris said, “Moderates do not want to kill anyone in the name of God, but they want us to keep using the word God as though we knew what we were talking about. They do not want anything too critical said about people who really believe in the god of their fathers because tolerance, perhaps above all else, is sacred. To speak plainly and truthfully about the state of our world—to say, for instance, that the Bible and the Koran both contain mountains of life-destroying gibberish—is antithetical to tolerance as moderates currently conceive it. However, we can no longer afford the luxury of such political correctness. We must finally recognize the price that we are paying to maintain the iconography of our ignorance.”

 

I came across a delicious article written by a woman atheist on Christianity called:

 

Do Moderate Christians Enable Fundamentalist Agendas?

http://atheistexperience.blogspot.com/2009/03/do-moderate-christians-enable.html

 

Too bad it's published just for Atheists,...it should be required reading for all Faith-based, Inter-Faith Groups.

 

V

My meaning was the following - if a person embarks on a genuine and sincere journey of self-discovery, I believe that the vehicle matters less than the inention. With the proper intention and diligence, all paths lead to the same place. There is no other way because there is no other place to be.

 

You are correct that not everyone agrees with that view (perhaps yourself included) and I'm fine with that.

 

I tend to agree with you entirely regarding the limited benefits and negative consequences of the Abrahamic religious traditions. I used to be fairly intense, bordering on militant, about it. I've had some epic debates and nearly destroyed a few relationships because of it. I've mellowed quite a bit in the past few years as I've come to feel that I do not have the authority to tell people that their beliefs are wrong. And even if I do so, it is rarely effective. Rather, I find it more rewarding and more effective (though less immediately or obviously so) to express my values and convictions through the example of my own behavior and choices. I can only change myself - not another.

 

On the other hand, there are many people who find solace and direction in religious observance and affiliation who do not participate in, support, contribute to, or condone negative behaviors. I thoroughly understand Sam Harris' points of view regarding passive facilitation and yet, who has the authority to tell someone what to believe? You can certainly produce illustrative cases where it is completely sensible to do so (suicide attacks on innocents, explotation of those lacking autonomy) but the majority of cases are much more ambiguous (worshiping a dualistic deity, observing rituals and superstitions, contributing to faith based charity, and so on...).

[steve]

Would you think that the Abrahamic belief systems are in any way nonattached, or seek unattachment?

 

Absolutely - read or listen to Demello (a Jesuit).

 

A very brief Christian example - "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." This means that one must let go of all attachments to know God.

 

Speak to experienced Kabbalists or Sufis.

 

I used to think that these traditions were ineffective and misguided.

Demello showed me otherwise as have my interactions with a few wise practitioners of the Jewish and Muslim mystical traditions. It's all a matter of interpretation.

[paulno]

Nonattachment to views is for those who are very advanced and have gone beyond views. They have eradicated the view of duality (split between mind and objects) and the view of inherent existence (that things including self and mind exist independently). It is impossible to eradicate these deep tendencies without deconstructing them through right view. Nonattachment to view comes naturally as a result of right view, but you can't start off with it. It is a result not a cause.

 

Humility and compassion, while very good virtues and very helpful, are not deconstructive. One can be very compassionate and humble but still cling to a self.

 

Detachment, also expressed as non-attachment, is a state in which a person overcomes his or her attachment to desire for things, people or concepts of the world and thus attains a heightened perspective.-Wikipedia

 

This is also how I see it. Letting go of the greed, jealousy, and egoism. I'm not sure you have to follow an 8 fold path, the 10 commandments, or any set of spiritual rules to get there. However, I'm also saying, if you do it doesn't automatically exclude you.

[Vmarco]

[Vmarco]

[Aetherous]

No,...that's merely your predisposition. I am simply shining light on a belief that steps between sentient beings and their direct experience.

 

As Chögyam Trungpa said, "Compassion is not so much feeling sorry for somebody, feeling that you are in a better place and somebody is in a worse place. Compassion is not having any hesitation to reflect your light on things. As light has no hesitation, no inhibition about reflecting on things, it does not discriminate whether to reflect on a pile of shit or on a pile of rock or on a pile of diamonds. It reflects on everything it faces."

 

V

 

Yeah, apparently it reflects on everything except your own blindness.

 

Your stance is even more fundamental than that one who made the Falun Dafa thread, except you think you are this shining beacon of light who indiscriminately beams in on people's lack of wisdom.

 

But if you were to observe carefully, every single post you make is just pure monotonous repetition glossed over with subtle hints of self-aggrandizement.

 

Completely agree.

 

I suppose everyone has a right to be completely blind, hypocritical and fundamentalist...and not even make a slight attempt to see their faults when pointed out to them...

 

Despite this, there are still things we can learn from eachother. If we ignore all of the extra bullshit.

[Vajrahridaya]

Would you think that the Abrahamic belief systems are in any way nonattached, or seek unattachment?

 

A mystic, one who dives into the mystery with full focus and attention to detail will extract water from stone.

[Vmarco]

My meaning was the following - if a person embarks on a genuine and sincere journey of self-discovery, I believe that the vehicle matters less than the inention. With the proper intention and diligence, all paths lead to the same place. There is no other way because there is no other place to be.

 

 

If one would break that down however,...an embarking on a "genuine and sincere journey of self-discovery."

 

Considering that, I disagree that all paths lead to the same place. The intention of "genuine and sincere journey of self-discovery" would quickly unfold a sense of honesty, and honesty would quickly reject all Long Paths due to their inherent dishonesty.

 

As Eckhart Tolle said "we need to draw our attention to what is false in us, for unless we learn to recognize the false as the false, there can be no lasting transformation, and you will always be drawn back into illusion, for that is how the false perpetuates itself"

 

Any "genuine and sincere journey of self-discovery" would abandon every falsity as a distraction of the "genuine and sincere journey of self-discovery."

 

[paulno]

[Vmarco]

[Vmarco]

[paulno]

To practice humility, is to practice pride.

 

To anticipate hope, is to empower fear.

 

To seek positives, is to attract negatives.

 

In Tibetan literature, the realization of truth and the process of spiritual development is reached at the level of Avadhuta, a state of enlightenment in which the distinctions between good and evil no longer exist.

 

That is a scary, frightening proposition for the morally minded.

 

Osho said, “Morality can only be imposed from without when we are asleep. It can only be pseudo, false, a façade, it cannot become your real being…morality is bound to be nothing but a deep suppression. You cannot do anything while asleep; you can only suppress. And through morality, you will become false. You will not be a person, but simply a “persona”—just a pseudo-entity. . . . Only a dishonest person can be moral.”

 

Kind of a challenging idea,...wouldn't you think?

 

V

 

I'm not sure we're on the same page. I don't ,for instance, see Osho as someone who can answer a question about humility. Not sure if its about striving either. I think its about wisdom, experience, and self reflection.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Dare I add a reply here and get sucked in to another disinfo battle with Vmarco? The last thing I said to him was that he just overlooks points that disqualify what he says, posts random quotes that could barely be stretched for any relevance while acting as if they've lended great authority to his position. The battle was useless and overly time consuming so I disengaged. Unfortunately he still continues with arguments such as:

 

"To practice humility, is to practice pride"

 

wtf. I can't be bothered. Right, of course, that makes perfect sense. I can see how you got there... whatever, lol.

[Sunya]

Detachment, also expressed as non-attachment, is a state in which a person overcomes his or her attachment to desire for things, people or concepts of the world and thus attains a heightened perspective.-Wikipedia

 

This is also how I see it. Letting go of the greed, jealousy, and egoism. I'm not sure you have to follow an 8 fold path, the 10 commandments, or any set of spiritual rules to get there. However, I'm also saying, if you do it doesn't automatically exclude you.

 

Of course, but what I'm expressing is that detachment in and of itself will not lead to enlightenment.

[Vajrahridaya]

Yes, I read Callum Coats 'Living Energies' back in the 90's,...and how to extract water from stones. However, any honest focus (attention and intention)of anyone, will quickly lead to an emancipation from beliefs, and mysticism.

 

I was speaking of it strictly as a metaphor, not as a literal power. As in one who's intention and attention is deep and fine, the outer world will reflect that inner depth.

 

"Dependent origination is the all"... "to see dependent origination is to see me." - the Buddha

[paulno]

Of course, but what I'm expressing is that detachment in and of itself will not lead to enlightenment.

 

Thank you for replying. No, I don't think this by itself will. I think compassion, humility, self-reflection etc are also important parts of getting there.

[Sunya]

And,..as I also mention to you before,...NO ONE, will ever understand WHO they are, until they can recognize WHEN they are,...and that's a fact or Dependent Origination.

 

So,...if you really want play to Buddha, let's pretend this is a sutra, and someone asks, World Renowned One, is it true that to understand WHO I am, that I must recognize WHEN I am?

 

What would the Tathagata say? LOL

 

 

The Tathagata would bash you on the head for giving him credit for such silly ideas as "you must understand WHEN you are." What does that even mean? Time is an illusion. There is only this moment which is ever-changing.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Of course, but what I'm expressing is that detachment in and of itself will not lead to enlightenment.

 

Though this wasn't directed to me, I'd ask that you read response #11 on page one of this topic, as I'm wondering how that, and Paulno's above response, sits with your position on this.

[C T]

Dare I add a reply here and get sucked in to another disinfo battle with Vmarco? The last thing I said to him was that he just overlooks points that disqualify what he says, posts random quotes that could barely be stretched for any relevance while acting as if they've lended great authority to his position. The battle was useless and overly time consuming so I disengaged. Unfortunately he still continues with arguments such as:

 

"To practice humility, is to practice pride"

 

wtf. I can't be bothered. Right, of course, that makes perfect sense. I can see how you got there... whatever, lol.

Yup - you hit it spot on!

 

Funny thing is we are the ones who are supposedly blind, and in our blindness, flailing about and lashing wildly at the messenger - albeit one with a repetitive placard of outdated and/or irrelevant postulations . The irony of it all....

 

 

[Vmarco]

[Vmarco]

Of course, but what I'm expressing is that detachment in and of itself will not lead to enlightenment.

 

 

I would say that the Absolute Bodhichitta might disagree with that,....for example,...the lojong says, find the consciousness you had before you were born. Can that be found without detachment to the conditions that were indoctrinated since birth?

 

Would seem to me, that detachment from all conditions would expose what is beyond conditions.

 

V

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

Every enlightened person that I'm aware of,....Shakyamuni, Saraha, Tilopa, Nagarjuna, Vajrayogini, etc., understood that to dissolve pride one must simultaneously dissolve humility

 

 

Can you bring in a specifically relevant quote that states this?

[Vmarco]

[Vajrahridaya]

I would say that the Absolute Bodhichitta might disagree with that,....for example,...the lojong says, find the consciousness you had before you were born. Can that be found without detachment to the conditions that were indoctrinated since birth?

 

Would seem to me, that detachment from all conditions would expose what is beyond conditions.

 

V

 

Beyond conditions is a condition as well.

 

[Vmarco]