Toni

Similarities among religions

Recommended Posts

@ rideforever

 

Just one more case of spiritual arrogance, nothing special... :lol:

 

Edited by wandelaar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, rideforever said:

 

It's clear to me that 95% of humans are not individuals, they just repeat the TV just like ants repeat the signals of the anthill.   So what is there in that person that can recycled or reincarnated or survive death ?  Nothing, because there is nobody really there, no individual.   What that person actually is, is a face on the termite mound, or it is a face on the collective.   The collective itself is continuing, and each geneation makes some new faces on the collective.   And that is obviously what most people are.   Doesn't mean they are not nice, but they all say the same thing.
Spirituality deals with people becoming something new, some strange faces on the termite mound get the strange idea that they might become themselves and with a big struggle tear themselves off and become actually individuated.   They when they die they are reborn as themselves.   They own themselves.
So what happens when a person dies ?
Well a collective person dies it is simply the eyes of one face of the termite nest closing, whilst 50 other eyes open, there was never anyone really there, it's just a mass organism.
But for an individuated being who has become something unique, something he made of himself, for him when he closes his eyes, he wakes up and they are still his eyes.   That is what spirituality is about.

I thank you for the cultivation of words that this post has provided me. I can't express in words the picture that you have provided.:)

I have just been calling it, becoming a singularity.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion: Same life, different, functionality, perspectives. In my experience: this stage like turtles struggling to get out of egg shells, next climbing up to get out of sand nest, next racing to the ocean, next swimming against waves toward smother water.:)

Edited by mrpasserby
Deleted a re-quoted comment that was not in line with my philosophy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, rideforever said:

 

It's clear to me that 95% of humans are not individuals, they just repeat the TV just like ants repeat the signals of the anthill.   So what is there in that person that can recycled or reincarnated or survive death ?  Nothing, because there is nobody really there, no individual.   What that person actually is, is a face on the termite mound, or it is a face on the collective.   The collective itself is continuing, and each geneation makes some new faces on the collective.   And that is obviously what most people are.   Doesn't mean they are not nice, but they all say the same thing.
Spirituality deals with people becoming something new, some strange faces on the termite mound get the strange idea that they might become themselves and with a big struggle tear themselves off and become actually individuated.   They when they die they are reborn as themselves.   They own themselves.
So what happens when a person dies ?
Well a collective person dies it is simply the eyes of one face of the termite nest closing, whilst 50 other eyes open, there was never anyone really there, it's just a mass organism.
But for an individuated being who has become something unique, something he made of himself, for him when he closes his eyes, he wakes up and they are still his eyes.   That is what spirituality is about.

I really like the sentence you made, wakes up and they are still his eyes.

If you meditate, before sleeping, you wake up, fully allowing the connection of your soul/spirit to flow.

 

So you come back into your body, and wake up, but you don't activate any thought, so your souls knowing becomes fully available for you, of infinite intelligence, clarity. "They are still his eyes." 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/02/2019 at 7:11 AM, wandelaar said:

Just one more case of spiritual arrogance, nothing special... :lol:

I am only repeating what I heard from the "great teachers".   But ultimately I felt for my own sake I had to try, to know.  I suggest you do the same.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/02/2019 at 7:59 AM, mrpasserby said:

Do you think there is such a thing as a future life, and that after death we are rewarded depending on our beahoviour?

 

The question is not exactly about "reward", that's more a metaphor.

 

The question is, what inside you can be re-incarnated.   Because if you are just repeating the tv habits and you are just basically the 5 elements, then there is nothing there to re-incarnate.   It's more like you were the left side of the soup.   Or as Jesus says, reed swayed by the wind.
So you have to "wake up" from that, to find your own self, to own your own self.   Then there is something that can come back.
You have to push for that to happen, otherwise you are just another face on the mankind-organism.
And that could be okay as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2019 at 12:58 PM, wandelaar said:

This doesn't prove anything: some forms of stupidity never die. See for instance:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

On 2/26/2019 at 1:11 AM, wandelaar said:

@ rideforever

 

Just one more case of spiritual arrogance, nothing special... :lol:

 

Whereas your favorite "Wikipedia" reference source is "very special" isn't it?

http://www.skepticalaboutskeptics.org/investigating-skeptics/wikipedia-captured-by-skeptics/rampant-harassment-on-wikipedia/

Quote

There is a disturbing pattern of behaviors evolving across Wikipedia – a number of skeptic activists on Wikipedia believe that only they are qualified to edit a large swath of topics and biographies on Wikipedia, and they seek to purge other editors from those articles or Wikipedia itself. Skeptic activists take this very seriously and treat Wikipedia like a battleground for their activism, where online harassment, slander, bullying, character assassination, and public shaming are all used as tactics to control editing permissions on the world’s largest repository of knowledge.

Academic Journal references censored by Wikipedia!

Quote

the American Psychological Association, the Journal of Clinical Psychology, the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, Primary Care and Community Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, the Review of General Psychology, and Traumatology.

and so one of the co-founders of Wikipedia has left in disgust:

 

Remarkably, Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia (some might argue the real founder) actually left the organization early on because things were already getting bad, saying,

Quote

“In some fields and some topics, there are groups who ‘squat’ on articles and insist on making them reflect their own specific biases. There is no credible mechanism to approve versions of articles. The people with the most influence in the community are the ones who have the most time on their hands — not necessarily the most knowledgeable — and who manipulate Wikipedia’s eminently gameable system.”

 

Edited by voidisyinyang
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if hell exists or what it would even be. Many people say it is very bad, but can they proof it? No. So we'll have to wait and see. 

 

Meanwhile, we live here on earth. Not in imaginary land. 

 

So use your imagination to your own personal benefit. Imagine things that bring you joy and life. Because here on earth, your imagination is your own! No one else owns your imagination. Only you own it. So own it. 

 

Instead of asking what is there in the afterlife. Ask yourSELF what do I want afterlife to be like? 

 

Asking what is afterlife like, puts you out of the picture.

Asking what you want the after life to be like, this question allows for your eternal growth, of you, as you, evermore. 

 

So don't denie yourself, and then complain about being denied your being. 

Accept your self, and enjoy your ever greater realisation of who it is you truely are, in your ever more becoming. 

 

For what is the point of eternal existance if you're not gonna allow yourself to be and become the evermore of who you truely are? 

Not what other people say you have to be. 

But who you have no choice but to be, because it simply feels to good to be who you truely are, ever so more fully, and it simply feels too painful to not allow yourself to be who you truely are.

 

And in every case, that painful resistance, dies with the body which chooses to hold on to it. So you don't need to die, in order to allow yourself to be more fully who you are, right now. And in so doing, feel good, natural, healthy, vital and alife. 

 

For if you truely did not deserve to exist, creation would not choose you to exist at all. Creation is infinitely efficient. It makes no mistakes. If it did, there would not be infinite variety. There would just be one thing, and that one thing, would have no way of becoming aware of itself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonderful thread.

 

I feel that the really important thing is that, regardless of where in the world we are born, man was born with this 'question' in his heart.  That is our commonality.  At the bottom of the question is "who am I?"  I'm of the opinion that the trick is to transcend any particular path we were born into.  Dogma is divisive and limiting.  Transcending the dogma is liberation.  And I believe they all go the same place.  Jesus obviously transcended his upbringing.  As did Siddartha.  They found their enlightenment by internal realization, not parroting someone else's words.

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, manitou said:

Wonderful thread.

 

I feel that the really important thing is that, regardless of where in the world we are born, man was born with this 'question' in his heart.  That is our commonality.  At the bottom of the question is "who am I?"  I'm of the opinion that the trick is to transcend any particular path we were born into.  Dogma is divisive and limiting.  Transcending the dogma is liberation.  And I believe they all go the same place.  Jesus obviously transcended his upbringing.  As did Siddartha.  They found their enlightenment by internal realization, not parroting someone else's words.

 

 

I am a dude who has a flue. I can't do anything to heal it, have to wait for my body to do it's magic. 

Maybe this time I'll get such a big fever, that I'll be transported directly to my lover in the high heavens.

And be free ever more to lover her.

Besides, my body is weak, so there is still hope.

I think I'm ready to go.

I'm gonna prepare my death bed, hold on one moment...

My room is a mess; mission accomplished.

Now I'll just have to make sure I lie on my back,

otherwise I wont choke on my own puke.

C yall on the flip side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

 

time out

 

Edited by qofq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 2/22/2019 at 10:58 AM, wandelaar said:

This doesn't prove anything: some forms of stupidity never die. See for instance:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

 

The illusions of heaven and hell and of the immortality of the soul are in all probability just make-believe. People find it particularly hard to accept that crime often pays and that death is the end. Many religions basically tell the people what they want to hear: that evil people will eventually have to pay for their crimes, and that all our toil on this earth will not come to nothing when we die because we will live on after death in some other form. There is no reason at all to think those religious dogmas are true.

 

Often out-of-body experiences and near-death-experiences are taken to prove the independence of the soul of the body, but when put to the test the amount of proof for the independence of the soul looks rather shallow.    

 

The nice thing about philosophical Taoism is that it doesn't need such religious dogmas.

 

 

 

If Wandelaar's statements were resounding capital ""T" Truth" they wouldn't need to have such a confrontational posture, it would just be obvious.  People like that feel entitled and cheated that others might have experience/perceptions that they don't.  It's a common mistake of the clever and a damn sticky trap if you're not careful.  

 

Why not put in the effort to ascend the celestial ladder and see for yourself what there is to see?

 

I say this out of compassion for the people who might be misled (as I once was) by posturing such as the Wandelaar's.  

 

The pesky thing about "philosophical Daoism" is it isn't actually Daoism.  

Edited by qofq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, qofq said:

If Wandelaar's statements were resounding capital ""T" Truth" they wouldn't need to have such a confrontational posture, it would just be obvious.  People like that feel entitled and cheated that others might have experience/perceptions that they don't.  It's a common mistake of the clever and a damn sticky trap if you're not careful.  

 

Why not put in the effort to ascend the celestial ladder and see for yourself what there is to see?

 

I say this out of compassion for the people who might be misled (as I once was) by posturing such as the Wandelaar's.  

 

The pesky thing about "philosophical Daoism" is it isn't actually Daoism.  

 

And as usual no decent arguments are given. Obvious things are not always true, and true things are not always obvious. The rest of your post isn't any better. These type of non-discussions are the reason why I have become highly sceptical about enlightenment. There obviously are mystical experiences, but what they mean is quite another cup of thee. What I said is only confrontational for those Bums who don't like to critically examine the meaning of their mystical experiences. They rather prefer to just accept the feeling of absolute certainty that often accompanies such experiences. And when somebody comes along who asks why their interpretation of their mystical experiences should be accepted as true, than the questioner is framed as obsessed, stupid, spiritually incompetent, etc. No decent discussion ever evolves. And thus I have no reason to believe in the interpretations of mystical experiences that are here propounded as absolute truths. They are no better than the dogma's of the church.

 

I will go my own way whether or not this is approved by those who consider themselves as (partially) Awakened or as the True Taoists. Further it is clear what the term "philosophical Taoism" means, and I will keep using it. You may now have the last word, as I am tired of discussing enlightenment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Everything said:

I am a dude who has a flue. I can't do anything to heal it, have to wait for my body to do it's magic. 

Maybe this time I'll get such a big fever, that I'll be transported directly to my lover in the high heavens.

And be free ever more to lover her.

Besides, my body is weak, so there is still hope.

I think I'm ready to go.

I'm gonna prepare my death bed, hold on one moment...

My room is a mess; mission accomplished.

Now I'll just have to make sure I lie on my back,

otherwise I wont choke on my own puke.

C yall on the flip side.

 

 

I guess this is one type of internal realization.   Please don't choke;  do turn your head to the side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, manitou said:

 

 

I guess this is one type of internal realization.   Please don't choke;  do turn your head to the side.

Hehe. Ty. You are too kind. :blush:

 

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

 

And as usual no decent arguments are given. Obvious things are not always true, and true things are not always obvious. The rest of your post isn't any better. These type of non-discussions are the reason why I have become highly sceptical about enlightenment. There obviously are mystical experiences, but what they mean is quite another cup of thee. What I said is only confrontational for those Bums who don't like to critically examine the meaning of their mystical experiences. They rather prefer to just accept the feeling of absolute certainty that often accompanies such experiences. And when somebody comes along who asks why their interpretation of their mystical experiences should be accepted as true, than the questioner is framed as obsessed, stupid, spiritually incompetent, etc. No decent discussion ever evolves. And thus I have no reason to believe in the interpretations of mystical experiences that are here propounded as absolute truths. They are no better than the dogma's of the church.

 

I will go my own way whether or not this is approved by those who consider themselves as (partially) Awakened or as the True Taoists. Further it is clear what the term "philosophical Taoism" means, and I will keep using it. You may now have the last word, as I am tired of discussing enlightenment.

You don't need to discuss anything ever. Other people never had and never will have a say in your experience. 

But when you realise, you might be confused, and prefer to have clarity. 

You simply turn your face towards clarity. And of you go. 

No need for anyone's permission or validation to allow yourself to be who you really are. 

So simply say, you are enlightened, period. 

And then when they ask you how you maintain your state of enlightenment, tell them, allot of hot coals, boiling water pressure, steam engine, electricity and allot of lamps. 

And they'll love you for who you are. Why? 

Because absolute truth is loved by everyone. 

That is why you will never get tired of absolute truth. 

For you can not recognize your true nature, and not let your rejuvenating vital life force flow at the same time.

You came here to be more fully you. 

The more real fuller truthier truth of who you are. 

But sometimes, you just wanna reset, take a deep breath, and say truth. 

Truth, Is simple at its core. Stable foundations, can build upon itself, endless beautiful complexity. 

Truth is simply what is. 

We are enlightened ever more. 

Sometimes, we experience pain, the answer is simple. 

The answer is pleasure. 

But if you do not allow the answer to be the answer. 

Then you exhaust yourself, resisting the flow of well-being, as eternal existance. 

This does not affect anyone except your self. 

You become more clarified in your preference this way. 

Thereby, you become more purified.

More sincere. 

More real.

And more true, to yourself. 

Thereby, you become more true, to all that exists. 

You become more true to everyone. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

decent?... I don't know. 

 

dissent perhaps?

 

descent?  Hopefully not =)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/03/2019 at 9:50 PM, wandelaar said:

What I said is only confrontational for those Bums who don't like to critically examine the meaning of their mystical experiences.

 

I think that’s a form of discernment - and an important one.

 

The reality of the matter is that these arts are full of delusion. And it’s delusional to think that everyone that claims awakening really has gone through the transformations that are explained in the classics.

 

The value of lineages is that it’s a line of peers who follow the same path - some further down than others - and they can recognise signs of progress and signs of delusion. It’s like a spiritual version of the peer approval process of scientific studies.

 

Like it or not but a person who has gone through the various processes along the path manifests specific physical, physiological and cognitive changes that can be clearly tested and verified - and they are within authentic lineages.

 

Unfortunately Wandelaar, you see this as spiritual arrogance. Much as a ‘flat earther’ would see scientific arrogance in the science world. That, unfortunately is your own delusion (and we all have these blind spots). And that’s where you’re falling short of your own call to discernment.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, freeform said:

I think that’s a form of discernment - and an important one.

 

The reality of the matter is that these arts are full of delusion. And it’s delusional to think that everyone that claims awakening really has gone through the transformations that are explained in the classics.

 

The value of lineages is that it’s a line of peers who follow the same path - some further down than others - and they can recognise signs of progress and signs of delusion. It’s like a spiritual version of the peer approval process of scientific studies.

 

Yes - that's the form of discussion I like. What you describe above could be the case.

 

39 minutes ago, freeform said:

Like it or not but a person who has gone through the various processes along the path manifests specific physical, physiological and cognitive changes that can be clearly tested and verified - and they are within authentic lineages.

 

Maybe. I would be pleased if this were so. 

 

39 minutes ago, freeform said:

Unfortunately Wandelaar, you see this as spiritual arrogance. Much as a ‘flat earther’ would see scientific arrogance in the science world. That, unfortunately is your own delusion (and we all have these blind spots). And that’s where you’re falling short of your own call to discernment.

 

You are wrong here. What I see as spiritual arrogance is when Bums claim superior knowledge or insight without them giving the slightest indication or proof that they really have it. A serious scientist would answer a critic by giving arguments and pointing out verifiable facts, not by framing the critic as a (spiritually immature) idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

What I see as spiritual arrogance is when Bums claim superior knowledge or insight without them giving the slightest indication or proof that they really have it.

 

Yes ok I see what you mean now.

 

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

A serious scientist would answer a critic by giving arguments and pointing out verifiable facts, not by framing the critic as a (spiritually immature) idiot.

 

Well that’s not always the case. In fact it’s often very much the opposite within academia (one of my closest friends is a reasonably prominent biologist and deals with this constantly).

 

The scientific ideal is of course great, but the reality is that dogmatism and money and ‘special interests’ are very prominent in science.

 

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

without them giving the slightest indication or proof that they really have it.

 

So regarding this bit. It’s tricky because the proof is within the context of a spiritual tradition. They’re not for the purposes of validating some materialistic truth, but for the purposes of furthering one’s progress along their spiritual path.

 

Many of these traditions will have specific physical signs that are readily testable.

 

For example Thelerner mentioned that his startle reflex is lessened considerably when he’s regular with his sitting practice. In my tradition when a specific energy channel is open, your startle reflex completely disappears.

 

It can actually be quite dangerous for students that have recently attained this. I know students that have been in traffic accidents, have burned themselves, got into unintended confrontations etc as a result.

 

But there are many stages where the signs aren’t physical. For example entering Jhanna or perceiving Shen Ming... which are internal experiences, but can be verified by teachers who have gone further along the path.

 

Without a teacher, without following a tradition, it becomes very difficult to know whether you’re deluding yourself or not. And sadly most people fall into this camp, because of how spirituality is marketed and understood in the West.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, freeform said:

Well that’s not always the case. In fact it’s often very much the opposite within academia (one of my closest friends is a reasonably prominent biologist and deals with this constantly).

 

The scientific ideal is of course great, but the reality is that dogmatism and money and ‘special interests’ are very prominent in science.

 

That's why I wrote "serious scientist" and not just "scientist". ^_^

 

However there is a problem even for the serious scientist in that some pseudoscientists such as the flat earth believers are incapable of rational argumentation and immune to inconvenient facts (which they simply discard as being lies or fake news fabricated by those in power). Many a scientist would have no time left if he were to answer to all the nonsense and stupidity that is posted on the internet or delivered to him by email (in case he is a publicly welknown figure).

 

As to the effects of meditation, they are indeed measurable. However one can meditate without having mystical experiences, and one can have mystical experiences without meditating. So the problem is: what do you consider to be awakening or enlightenment?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cool thing about TDB is I can feel relatively good about sharing my mystical experiences and people will be open to hearing them and accepting, more or less. 

 

As mystical stuff is not generally shared in everyday life, it’s good to have some spiritual friends who don’t judge or disbelieve, or call up for an eval. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely accept the existence of mystical experiences, and it would be foolish to deny that people can have those experiences. It would be ridiculous to suppose that people throughout the ages and in all places would have just made up similar stories about those experiences that often enough got them into trouble because they were considered as mad or heterodox as a result.

 

It's the interpretation of those experiences that I consider doubtful as it seems to be based on nothing more than the feeling of absolute certainty that often accompanies such experiences. And this I cannot accept: it's the same fallacy as of Christians who say that the Bible is the word of God because the book says so. In other words you just have to believe it. I rather honestly acknowledge that I don't know what I don't know.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with much of what you say wandelaar. But I find this troubling:

2 hours ago, wandelaar said:

mystical experiences

 

Thinking in this way, and using this term, I believe, limits your understanding of these arts. 

 

2 hours ago, wandelaar said:

what do you consider to be awakening or enlightenment?

 

I understand that these things are often talked of as something very subjective - something akin to ‘mystical experiences’. 

 

But actually there are traditions, institutions that for hundreds of generations made it their life’s work to understand this and to pass on the methods of achieving these states. 

 

These people aren't the ones going on book tours or holding YouTube talks. But they do exist. And for them ‘awakening’ and ‘enlightenment’ are very specific things.

 

What it is to me doesn’t matter, just as what light ‘is’ to you doesn’t matter - there are people that have gone before you and they’ve discovered the nature of light and you must go through a certain training to understand their reasoning and see the truth of their discovery.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The crucial point is that believers don't like to see mystical experiences as experiences, but wish to see them as special forms of perception. And here our ways part. Mystical experiences might be perceptions, or they might not me perceptions. But there is no a priori reason to consider them as more truthful than for instance optical illusions or common fallacies.

 

In my opinion the Taoism of Lao tzu and Chuang tzu is much more valuable then what later grew into the Taoist religion and esoteric traditions. That those later tradition themselves are also age-old doesn't prove anything: the large majority of people don't care about critically investigating their beliefs and superstitions. And within sectarian movements it's particularly difficult to keep up a critical spirit. Thus nonsensical traditions of all sorts easily survive the ages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wandelaar said:

critically investigating their beliefs and superstitions

 

Thats actually a good description of much of ‘the path’.

 

4 hours ago, wandelaar said:

no a priori reason to consider them as more truthful than for instance optical illusions

 

What if these modes of perception demonstrate an intimate knowledge and understanding of the universe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites