"...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
bob
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 5:37 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by bob » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:15 am

Sherab wrote:I have difficulty with the sort of thesis below. It assumes there is a purpose in life. Why bother to create foolish "souls" and forced them to go through an education process to become wise, especially when the process can be very cruel and involve really extreme suffering? If these "souls" are not created, how did they come about it the first place?
You are trying to figure out that which transcends human knowledge by employing human knowledge. I am reminded of a quote from Catherine of Siena:


I talk about it sometimes with Him, all the suffering in the world.

"Dear God," I have prayed, "how is it possible all the horrors I have seen, all the atrocities you allow man to commit when you – God -- are ever standing so near and could help us? Could we not hear your voice say 'No' with such love and power never again would we harm?"

And my Lord replied, "Who would understand if I said that I cannot bear to confine a wing, and not let it learn from the course it chooses."

But what of a man walking lost in a forest weeping and calling your name for help, and unknown to him he is heading for a covered pit with sharp spears in it that will maim his flesh when he crashes through the trap?
"Yes, why don't I remove every object from this world that could cause someone to weep? Yes, why don't I speak in a way that could save a life?”

I opened up my mouth and the Infinite ran to the edges of space -- and all possibilities are contained therein, all possibilities, even sorrow.

”In the end, nothing that ever caused one pain will exist, No one will begrudge Me. The Absolute Innocence of all within my Creation takes a while to understand."


I prefer a more naturalistic solution where beings come into existence through a random process.
Of course, you are certainly entitled to your preferences, but the concept of “random” is nothing but a provisional human contrivance – something with which to amuse ourselves while asleep in the dream. There are endless theories, but they all dissolve when you drop the meat suit and really see how things are. I also realize that is not a very satisfactory answer, but we are not going to arrive at that answer through intellectual debate, which is ultimately pointless. One thing is certain – there is no religion or philosophy once we have left this rock behind in the rear view mirror. Such pastimes are only for those like us humans who can only guess and speculate about the nature of reality. Once awakened, we will no longer need to indulge in fantasy – it will all be startlingly clear.

dude
Posts: 618
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:38 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by dude » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:18 am

Malcolm wrote:
PadmaVonSamba wrote:
Malcolm wrote:In reality, Sukhavati is just a heaven -- no different than the heaven of Christians, Muslims, or Hindus.

In what way, exactly, is it "no different"?
.
.
.

They are places where the faithful imagine they will go when they die.
Are you SERIOUS?
Heaven in monotheism is eternal.
In Buddhism, it isn't even outside the realm of birth and death!

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4016
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by Wayfarer » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:34 am

pensum wrote:Just to be clear, it is Dzongsar Khyentse himself who states:
Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche wrote:Buddhism is really like science.
He doesn't say that it is a system of knowledge or a philosophy, but "really like science." Therefore, in his own opinion the criteria and methodologies of science should be applied to test the claims of Buddhism. This of course would include not only psychology, but also cosmology, anatomy, siddhis, rainbow bodies, etc.

So let's not move the goal posts, no matter how tempting that might be in order to avoid any personal discomfort if one discovers that one's own cherished beliefs and assumptions are under threat of being exposed as false.
In that interview he distinguishes Buddism from what he calls (a bit mischievously) "Tibetanism". And I don't think he says anywhere that he cherished beliefs of Tibetans ought to be protected from critical scrutiny just on that account.

There is definitely something in the idea of Buddhism as an inner science. It doesn't have to be associated with iconography or a particular cultural tradition. But the basic understanding given through Vipasyana and Abhidharma is much more stable and of much greater antiquity than for instance any school of Western psychology, which often can't even agree on wht consitutes 'mind'.

User avatar
pueraeternus
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by pueraeternus » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:50 am

Malcolm wrote:
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Whether he actually said the things he is purported to have said or not,
there are teachings you can actually practice and get the same results,
Have you met someone who has returned from Sukhavati and reported on it to you?
What are your views on practices such as Phowa?
(Not a loaded question, just curious based on your take on buddhaksetras).
"Men must want to do things out of their own innermost drives. People, not commercial organizations or chains of command, are what make great civilizations work. Every civilization depends upon the quality of the individuals it produces. If you over-organize humans, over-legalize them, suppress their urge to greatness - they cannot work and their civilization collapses."
- A letter to CHOAM, attributed to the Preacher

User avatar
gad rgyangs
Posts: 1141
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by gad rgyangs » Mon Dec 16, 2013 6:59 am

bob wrote:
Sherab wrote:I have difficulty with the sort of thesis below. It assumes there is a purpose in life. Why bother to create foolish "souls" and forced them to go through an education process to become wise, especially when the process can be very cruel and involve really extreme suffering? If these "souls" are not created, how did they come about it the first place?
You are trying to figure out that which transcends human knowledge by employing human knowledge. I am reminded of a quote from Catherine of Siena:


I talk about it sometimes with Him, all the suffering in the world.

"Dear God," I have prayed, "how is it possible all the horrors I have seen, all the atrocities you allow man to commit when you – God -- are ever standing so near and could help us? Could we not hear your voice say 'No' with such love and power never again would we harm?"

And my Lord replied, "Who would understand if I said that I cannot bear to confine a wing, and not let it learn from the course it chooses."

But what of a man walking lost in a forest weeping and calling your name for help, and unknown to him he is heading for a covered pit with sharp spears in it that will maim his flesh when he crashes through the trap?
"Yes, why don't I remove every object from this world that could cause someone to weep? Yes, why don't I speak in a way that could save a life?”

I opened up my mouth and the Infinite ran to the edges of space -- and all possibilities are contained therein, all possibilities, even sorrow.

”In the end, nothing that ever caused one pain will exist, No one will begrudge Me. The Absolute Innocence of all within my Creation takes a while to understand."


I prefer a more naturalistic solution where beings come into existence through a random process.
Of course, you are certainly entitled to your preferences, but the concept of “random” is nothing but a provisional human contrivance – something with which to amuse ourselves while asleep in the dream. There are endless theories, but they all dissolve when you drop the meat suit and really see how things are. I also realize that is not a very satisfactory answer, but we are not going to arrive at that answer through intellectual debate, which is ultimately pointless. One thing is certain – there is no religion or philosophy once we have left this rock behind in the rear view mirror. Such pastimes are only for those like us humans who can only guess and speculate about the nature of reality. Once awakened, we will no longer need to indulge in fantasy – it will all be startlingly clear.
cool Cathy story! reminds me of a divertimento I penned lo many a year ago:

A CHAT WITH THE SUPREME DEITY

The other day I showed God a newspaper clipping telling of the latest
massacre: "Ten Million Dead."

"What about this, God.?"

"Don't try to pin that on me, buddy. I gave you all free will , and if
that's what you want to do with it, don't blame me."

"But God, you made us a little too stupid to know what to do with free
will. You made us think (or allowed us to think) that we're separate egos
in competition and conflict with each other, then you give us free will.
Its like teaching a child that everyone is the enemy, then giving him a gun
for Christmas."

"I didn't teach you anything, I just created you and plopped you down, and
now I'm having a blast watching youall run around like chickens with your
heads cut off. Once in awhile, one of you paints a great painting, shows
kindness to another, or causes to be built amazing machines, and that's
cool. Sometimes one of you causes millions of human beings to be tortured
and killed. That's cool by me too. What's a movie without a little
violence? "

"But God, what about love?"

"What do you mean by that?"

"The perception/knowledge that we are not separate egos in conflict, but
rather we are each other, and we are You."

"Hey, now don't you go around agitating with inflammatory notions like
that. If everyone knew that, the whole charade would be over. Look: I'm
going to let you in on a little secret: I Am Infinite Manifestation.
Everything that could ever be, is, and must be, all at once. What you call
time is just a way of slicing the apple, there really is no sequence. Its
all manifesting simultaneously. You just happen to be part of the
manifestation that looks like this here universe, and it is what it is,
because somebody had to be this particular manifestation. Somebody,
somewhere gets to be a pleasure-and-happiness manifestation, and just as
surely, someone else, somewhere else, gets to be a pain-and-suffering
manifestation. You should realize that, to me, it's six of one and
half dozen of the other. Just accept your assignment and know that you are
contributing your bit towards Infinite Manifestation."

"Heartless God!"

"What are you talking about? I'm also infinite Love."

"But what about the suffering?"

"I told you, you bring that on yourselves."

"But you allow it to exist!"

"It's not that I allow it to exist, it *must* exist, as part of Infinite
Manifestation. There's another universe down the pike aways in which free
will is combined with love, but that's them, and you're you. In the
manifestation that you're a part of, free will is combined with fear and
belief in separation . In your particular universe, consciousness wants
happiness and instead creates suffering for itself. Just the luck of the
draw. Like I said, its a tough job, but somebody's got to do it."

"But why, God, why?"

"You're beginning to irritate me. What part of "Infinite Manifestation"
don't you understand?"

"I'm not interested in Infinite Manifestation", I only see human suffering."

"You're too provincial to have an intelligent conversation with. You've got
to see the big picture."

"But God, you made it so we cannot see the big picture."

"Oh yes, you can only see big pictures in that other universe I mentioned.
Sorry."

"Wait, God....I see. We need to experience suffering in order to learn."

"What is it you expect to learn?"

"That we all are, and everything is, at bottom, You."

"But that's always the case anyway. Why would you want to suffer to learn that?"

"We have forgotten, or we are just getting to the point where we can 'wake
up' enough to experience our identity with You."

"But since its just Me anyway, I can only pretend to forget, or pretend to
'wake up'. Where's the learning? Some manifestations will cognize Oneness,
and others won't, 'cause they'll be busy doing something else. You seem to
be overly enamored with ulterior motives and salvation. All manifestation
has no meaning beyond itself: there is no justification, no progression
except as viewed from time, nothing really "happens", everything just "is".

"You're getting too abstract for me."

"Hey, I'm God. If I can't get abstract, who can?"

"Well, I think I'd rather be a creativity-and-happiness manifestation"

"Fine, then that's just what you're meant to be. Go for it."

"But my life is full of suffering."

"Well, then, up to now you must have been choosing to be a
pain-and-suffering manifestation. Like I said, six of one, half dozen of
the other.... It's up to you."

"But God, its because of my relationship, and my family, and my job, and
where I live that I suffer. I don't want to suffer!"

"(sighs and rolls His eyes). Oh boy... (looks at His watch) Listen..., I
have to go get started on this new universe where everybody's gonna spend
all day having sex but secretly be thinking about sitting behind a desk.
See ya later......."
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.

"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1215
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by Sherab » Mon Dec 16, 2013 7:09 am

bob wrote:You are trying to figure out that which transcends human knowledge by employing human knowledge. I am reminded of a quote from Catherine of Siena:

I talk about it sometimes with Him, all the suffering in the world.

"Dear God," I have prayed, "how is it possible all the horrors I have seen, all the atrocities you allow man to commit when you – God -- are ever standing so near and could help us? Could we not hear your voice say 'No' with such love and power never again would we harm?"

And my Lord replied, "Who would understand if I said that I cannot bear to confine a wing, and not let it learn from the course it chooses."

But what of a man walking lost in a forest weeping and calling your name for help, and unknown to him he is heading for a covered pit with sharp spears in it that will maim his flesh when he crashes through the trap?
"Yes, why don't I remove every object from this world that could cause someone to weep? Yes, why don't I speak in a way that could save a life?”

I opened up my mouth and the Infinite ran to the edges of space -- and all possibilities are contained therein, all possibilities, even sorrow.

”In the end, nothing that ever caused one pain will exist, No one will begrudge Me. The Absolute Innocence of all within my Creation takes a while to understand."
Sorry, such evasive answers cut no ice with me. If God created me, he made an error.
bob wrote: but the concept of “random” is nothing but a provisional human contrivance – something with which to amuse ourselves while asleep in the dream.
Are you a scientist or mathematician?
bob wrote:There are endless theories, but they all dissolve when you drop the meat suit and really see how things are. ... Once awakened, we will no longer need to indulge in fantasy – it will all be startlingly clear.
Are you yourself awakened?

User avatar
futerko
Posts: 993
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:58 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by futerko » Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:32 pm

jeeprs wrote: Richard Dawkins - voted the World's Number One public intellectual in a magazine poll recently - is on the record as saying that human creative abilities such as art and culture - and really, science ought to be included in this - are really just the by-products of the fortuitous development of a large brain. He and his ilk have no real insight into the existential plight of the 'human condition'
I'm 100% with Dawkins on this matter (even though I think he's an idiot).
we cannot get rid of God because we still believe in grammar - Nietzsche

AlexanderS
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:58 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by AlexanderS » Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:42 pm

Malcolm wrote:
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Whether he actually said the things he is purported to have said or not,
there are teachings you can actually practice and get the same results,
Have you met someone who has returned from Sukhavati and reported on it to you?

While there are certainly some results we can confirm in this triple realm, rebirth in realms outside the three realms is not something we can ascertain personally. So we either take them on faith, actively disbelieve, or remain agnostic regarding them.
A teacher who was in a serious accident was "clinically dead" by western standards was rescurrected in hospital. He said that while he was "dead" he was experiencing amithabas pureland. He told us this a at a phowa retreat. Perhaps he was just being expedient, I don't know. I did not believe in "life after death" until I did the phowa retreat. The signs are so powerful that dewachen does not feel like a fantasy too me.

User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 2990
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by PadmaVonSamba » Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:44 pm

pueraeternus wrote:What are your views on practices such as Phowa?
(Not a loaded question, just curious based on your take on buddhaksetras).
I have a good friend who is a lama in Taiwan, and teaches this almost exclusively,
but I have never received any teachings about it. I have no understanding of it, just a very brief familiarity.
But from what i think I know about it, it is perfectly reasonable.
The discrepancies, I think, really come from misunderstandings about
terms such as "consciousness" and "transference' and so forth,
about what those terms are really referring to.
Consciousness isn't a single thing,
and transference , properly understood,
requires a somewhat different approach to time and space than is usually assumed.

To express the problem rather clumsily,
we usually have the telescope turned the wrong way around.
We think consciousness emerges from a self, when it is really the opposite.
We think awareness is a result of the mind, when it is really the opposite.
We look for the location of the mind in space, when thoughts only occur in time.
We forget that we have already tied a bunch of mental activity into a bundle,
imagining it to be a self,
and push it through the comings and goings of an ever changing hoard of body cells,
like dragging a large trunk through a crowded train station.
the physical brain and body, the sense organs, only act as the means. They aren't the cause.
The infinite nature of Buddhas and Buddha realms
can't really be defined.
The problem is always that you can't define infinity

As a famous zen poem says:

When you strive to gain quiescence by stopping motion,
The quiescence thus gained is ever in motion;
As long as you tarry in the dualism,
How can you realize oneness?

And when oneness is not thoroughly understood,
In two ways loss is sustained:
The denying of reality is the asserting of it,
And the asserting of emptiness is the denying of it.

Wordiness and intellection -
The more with them the further astray we go;
Away therefore with wordiness and intellection,
And there is no place where we cannot pass freely.


So, referring to phowa,
"...And there is no place where we cannot pass freely"
.
.
.
Profile Picture: "The Fo Ming (Buddha Bright) Monk"
People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.

pensum
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 9:12 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by pensum » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:11 pm

AlexanderS wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Whether he actually said the things he is purported to have said or not,
there are teachings you can actually practice and get the same results,
Have you met someone who has returned from Sukhavati and reported on it to you?

While there are certainly some results we can confirm in this triple realm, rebirth in realms outside the three realms is not something we can ascertain personally. So we either take them on faith, actively disbelieve, or remain agnostic regarding them.
A teacher who was in a serious accident was "clinically dead" by western standards was rescurrected in hospital. He said that while he was "dead" he was experiencing amithabas pureland. He told us this a at a phowa retreat. Perhaps he was just being expedient, I don't know. I did not believe in "life after death" until I did the phowa retreat. The signs are so powerful that dewachen does not feel like a fantasy too me.
For an understanding of the physical underpinnings of near death and other "spiritual" experiences, it is quite worthwhile to read The Spiritual Doorway in the Brain: A Neurologist’s Search for the God Experience http://www.amazon.com/The-Spiritual-Doo ... 005CDUAEQ/. There is an interview with the author here: http://www.salon.com/2011/01/13/near_de ... interview/.

User avatar
heart
Posts: 4417
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by heart » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:15 pm

Then it turns out the universe is a hologram of a reality that is two dimensional http://www.nature.com/news/simulations- ... am-1.14328

/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut

"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28254
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by Malcolm » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:40 pm

dude wrote: Heaven in monotheism is eternal.
In Buddhism, it isn't even outside the realm of birth and death!
Of course, I know this. But this is a mere sectarian definition. And this does not make the Buddhist definition true and the eternalist definition false.

In short, all of these beliefs are just mediated by some book someone chooses to believe as opposed to some other books they choose not to believe.

When I say that I "don't beleive" in Sukhavati, what I mean is that I am agnostic about it. I will admit though that there is certain a poetic quality to the mandalas through which the Sukhavati and so on are described. However, remove the Buddhist context and these paradises very are very similar.

And of course there are some unappealingly sexist aspects to the Sukhavati teachings as well as such as:

"[A]fter any woman hears my name, rouses full faith and generates the mind to awaken, she will condemn the female body, and after exchanging those at that time, should she take a female body twice, I shall not attain anuttarasamyaksambodhi."

Of course, we can understand such attitudes to be symptomatic of the age. But if we take that approach, what else should we not just regard as cultural relics?

The doctrine of buddhakṣetras is of course deeply embedded in Mahāyāna Buddhist teachings from a very early period and pervades every Mahāyāna teaching including Dzogchen.

I personally think the motivation for developing such teachings comes as an early response to the doctrine that full buddhahood requires three incalculable eons to attain, i.e. imagining a place in which an ordinary person can find bliss and ease to practice dharma without having to be an 8th stage bodhisattva (required for rebirth in Akaniṣtha Gaṇḍavyuha)
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28254
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by Malcolm » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:41 pm

heart wrote:Then it turns out the universe is a hologram of a reality that is two dimensional http://www.nature.com/news/simulations- ... am-1.14328

/magnus
Maybe, maybe not.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28254
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by Malcolm » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:42 pm

pueraeternus wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Whether he actually said the things he is purported to have said or not,
there are teachings you can actually practice and get the same results,
Have you met someone who has returned from Sukhavati and reported on it to you?
What are your views on practices such as Phowa?
(Not a loaded question, just curious based on your take on buddhaksetras).
I dont have much of a view about them. I have done a few phowa retreats, got signs and so forth.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by dzogchungpa » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:08 pm

bob wrote:
Catherine of Siena wrote:
God wrote:The Absolute Innocence of all within my Creation takes a while to understand.
Did he say how long?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28254
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by Malcolm » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:11 pm

dzogchungpa wrote:
bob wrote:
Catherine of Siena wrote:The Absolute Innocence of all within my Creation takes a while to understand.
Did he say how long?

I have seen Catherine's head in Sienna, where it is preserved.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

bob
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 5:37 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by bob » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:20 pm

gad rgyangs wrote: A CHAT WITH THE SUPREME DEITY

The other day I showed God a newspaper clipping telling of the latest
massacre: "Ten Million Dead."

"What about this, God.?"

"Don't try to pin that on me, buddy. I gave you all free will , and if
that's what you want to do with it, don't blame me."

"But God, you made us a little too stupid to know what to do with free
will. You made us think (or allowed us to think) that we're separate egos
in competition and conflict with each other, then you give us free will.
Its like teaching a child that everyone is the enemy, then giving him a gun
for Christmas."

"I didn't teach you anything, I just created you and plopped you down, and
now I'm having a blast watching youall run around like chickens with your
heads cut off. Once in awhile, one of you paints a great painting, shows
kindness to another, or causes to be built amazing machines, and that's
cool. Sometimes one of you causes millions of human beings to be tortured
and killed. That's cool by me too. What's a movie without a little
violence? "

"But God, what about love?"

"What do you mean by that?"

"The perception/knowledge that we are not separate egos in conflict, but
rather we are each other, and we are You."

"Hey, now don't you go around agitating with inflammatory notions like
that. If everyone knew that, the whole charade would be over. Look: I'm
going to let you in on a little secret: I Am Infinite Manifestation.
Everything that could ever be, is, and must be, all at once. What you call
time is just a way of slicing the apple, there really is no sequence. Its
all manifesting simultaneously. You just happen to be part of the
manifestation that looks like this here universe, and it is what it is,
because somebody had to be this particular manifestation. Somebody,
somewhere gets to be a pleasure-and-happiness manifestation, and just as
surely, someone else, somewhere else, gets to be a pain-and-suffering
manifestation. You should realize that, to me, it's six of one and
half dozen of the other. Just accept your assignment and know that you are
contributing your bit towards Infinite Manifestation."

"Heartless God!"

"What are you talking about? I'm also infinite Love."

"But what about the suffering?"

"I told you, you bring that on yourselves."

"But you allow it to exist!"

"It's not that I allow it to exist, it *must* exist, as part of Infinite
Manifestation. There's another universe down the pike aways in which free
will is combined with love, but that's them, and you're you. In the
manifestation that you're a part of, free will is combined with fear and
belief in separation . In your particular universe, consciousness wants
happiness and instead creates suffering for itself. Just the luck of the
draw. Like I said, its a tough job, but somebody's got to do it."

"But why, God, why?"

"You're beginning to irritate me. What part of "Infinite Manifestation"
don't you understand?"

"I'm not interested in Infinite Manifestation", I only see human suffering."

"You're too provincial to have an intelligent conversation with. You've got
to see the big picture."

"But God, you made it so we cannot see the big picture."

"Oh yes, you can only see big pictures in that other universe I mentioned.
Sorry."

"Wait, God....I see. We need to experience suffering in order to learn."

"What is it you expect to learn?"

"That we all are, and everything is, at bottom, You."

"But that's always the case anyway. Why would you want to suffer to learn that?"

"We have forgotten, or we are just getting to the point where we can 'wake
up' enough to experience our identity with You."

"But since its just Me anyway, I can only pretend to forget, or pretend to
'wake up'. Where's the learning? Some manifestations will cognize Oneness,
and others won't, 'cause they'll be busy doing something else. You seem to
be overly enamored with ulterior motives and salvation. All manifestation
has no meaning beyond itself: there is no justification, no progression
except as viewed from time, nothing really "happens", everything just "is".

"You're getting too abstract for me."

"Hey, I'm God. If I can't get abstract, who can?"

"Well, I think I'd rather be a creativity-and-happiness manifestation"

"Fine, then that's just what you're meant to be. Go for it."

"But my life is full of suffering."

"Well, then, up to now you must have been choosing to be a
pain-and-suffering manifestation. Like I said, six of one, half dozen of
the other.... It's up to you."

"But God, its because of my relationship, and my family, and my job, and
where I live that I suffer. I don't want to suffer!"

"(sighs and rolls His eyes). Oh boy... (looks at His watch) Listen..., I
have to go get started on this new universe where everybody's gonna spend
all day having sex but secretly be thinking about sitting behind a desk.
See ya later......."

Our religions (the ones we grew up on in the West) reflect the belief that God controls every action taken on earth when they talk about God "allowing" bad things to happen to good people for various reasons. Alternatively, religions ascribe horrible events to Satan or other demons. Both beliefs have the common core of deflecting blame away from the humans whose actions caused the harm. Why? Human animals (like other animals) have the built-in character trait of refusing to take responsibility for the consequences of their own actions. So that character trait is reflected in human-created belief systems. God/Source or the Devil is blamed for what humans do as though humans were puppets on strings.

The truth is: HUMANS are responsible for the evil acts in the world. Not God or Source. Not Satan or demons. Humans are violent animals. They use violence to protect themselves from real and imagined potential threats to their ability to get what they want, to amass wealth in its many forms, and to exercise dominance over others. Aside from natural disasters, humans are responsible for the horror we see in daily life. Humans wage war, engage in gang violence, rob homes and businesses, sell and use mind-altering drugs, abuse children, rape, and murder. And humans alone are responsible for these actions.

All of the evil acts in the world would stop today if we would collectively use the one tool that is available to each and every one of us--our spiritual ability to control our own human host's actions. We see this power in action every time someone exercises "self control."

Each of us can choose moment-to-moment whether to allow our host body to act out in typical selfish human fashion, or, to do what is best for all of us collectively. Each of us can decide whether to act out human knee-jerk reactions to people and events, or, to train our bodies to withhold reaction until we have time to think through a better course of action. Each of us can allow human emotions and instincts to run our life or strive to live a more spiritual way. As Light Beings inhabiting humans as their souls, we have the innate power to control our bodies' actions.

Good and evil are programs running on this computer simulation, and each of us has to decide which faction we will choose while here. For those keeping score, the ones choosing evil remain in the majority -- they have always been in the majority because evil is more alluring than the straight and narrow. What many forget is that evil has no power over us unless we allow ourselves to be seduced by it. It goes by several names, but some of the prominent ones are greed, envy, and hatred.

bob
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 5:37 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by bob » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:27 pm

Sherab wrote:Are you yourself awakened?
As I mentioned earlier, through no merit or special qualification on my part, I have been shown some stuff which I am to turn around and share, for those who have the memory trace buried in their depths. That is all. They will know it when the arrow hits the mark.

User avatar
Virgo
Global Moderator
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Location: Uni-verse

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by Virgo » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:33 pm

bob wrote: Human animals...
Bob, interesting statements. I just want to comment on you above use of terminology. Humans are higher than animals. We have a longer life-span (generally), thumbs so we can build things, and use tools effectively, higher intelligence, more sophisticated forms of speaking and communicating. Like animals, we have a coarse physical body, and rely on physical food, engage in sex, and so on.

The reasons humans do bad things isn't because we are or are not animals but because of the innate defilements. Animals share these as well, and so on.

The human realm is a decidedly higher realm than the animal realm. Animals, also, cannot become realized beings as animals.

Kevin
ངོ་རང་ཐོག་ཏུ་སྤྲད། །
ཐག་གཅིག་ཐོག་ཏུ་བཅད། །
གདེང་གྲོལ་ཐོག་ཏུ་བཅའ། །


http://caretoclick.com/clean-the-enviro ... -phone-use

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1215
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Post by Sherab » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:47 pm

bob wrote:
Sherab wrote:Are you yourself awakened?
As I mentioned earlier, through no merit or special qualification on my part, I have been shown some stuff which I am to turn around and share, for those who have the memory trace buried in their depths. That is all. They will know it when the arrow hits the mark.
Thank you for the discussion.

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: billy hudson, Bing [Bot], heart, Queequeg, Tanaduk, Tlalok, tranides and 87 guests