so in conclusion buddhism can be summarised as

last SG · 2006-11-07T18:10:36+00:00

what thing isnt a way of life? duh

An Eternal Now SG

Now... how exactly does it mean by 'salvation'... and what is the meaning of 'kingdom of God'.. perhaps you would like to share with us on that.

Some more... i'm curious of your understanding of 'Born of Spirit', as Jesus himself said that one must be born of spirit to enter the kingdom of god.

solomon1983 SG

give me sometimes hor...need to find someone to answer yr questions

brb Embarassed

p/s: salvation plans=Buddha's wisdom...taoism's wisdom kinda ways for liberation

solomon1983 SG

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

what is the meaning of 'kingdom of God'

'Heavens in God's Heaven'...my interpetation in christian gnostic way.

1.Let not your heart be troubled:ye believe in God,believe also in me.

2.In my Father's house are many mansions:if it were not so,i would have told you.I go to prepare a place for you.(new creation)or(alrd existence)

3.And if i go and prepare a place for.I will come again,and receive you unto myself;that were I am,there ye may also.

4.And whither i go ye know,and the way ye know.(St. John 14:1.2.3.4)

edited: for better understanding Razz

An Eternal Now SG

Originally posted by solomon1983:

"kingdom of God" as Heavens of "Heaven" in christian gnostic way.

1.Let not your heart be troubled:ye believe in God,believe also in me.

2.In my Father's house are [b]many mansions:if it were not so,i would have told you.I go to prepare a place for you.(new creation)or(alrd existed)

3.And if i go and prepare a place for.I will come again,and receive you unto myself;that were I am,there ye may also.

4.And whither i go ye know,and the way ye know.(St. John 14:1.2.3.4)

[/b]

Ah yes... Jesus words are truly full of parables.

I found this based on an essay on christian mysticism:

In My Fathers house are many mansions. If it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you, that where I am, there you may be also. I will not leave you comfortless, but will come to you. -John 14

The Edgar Cayce discourses have some of the most insightful comments on this well-known quote from Jesus Last Supper teachings. As you read, In my Fathers house, know that it means in your Fathers house, in your own soul, in your own experience are the many mansions! And were it not so, I would have told you, means that if it were not so, you yourself would have known!

As with so much of the deep-trance material that came through Cayce, it takes us deep within our consciousness:

In my Fathers house are many mansions, means many consciousnesses, many stages of enfoldment, of unfoldment, of blessings, of sources. Thus as He declares, Behold I stand continuously before the door of your consciousness, of your own mansion. For your body is indeed the temple of the living God. And there He has promised to meet you.

This sounds so easy and yet is so difficult in the doing. The Cayce readings, which come from attunement to Gods universal consciousness, teach that often the problem is of our own making. We expect the Divine to be spectacular, but it is subtle, still, and gentle. We doubt, even when it is close at hand. The Divine Consciousness is so close and we are so much a portion of Its being that we are one. Not only God is God, but self is a part of that Oneness, says Cayce. So oft in seeking that some great thing may be done does the soul stumble over itself, but I go to prepare a place for you, that where I am there you may be also, and if I go I will come again and receive you unto myself, that where I am there you may be also. And, I will not leave you comfortless, but will come and enjoin you in your daily activities, your daily service. This is the promise to every soul. If you would make that promise your own, then seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you. Let there be definite periods when you look within self, cleansing the mind, the body, in such ways and manners and measures that you would offer as your offering unto the holy experiences that may be yours. For, he that expects nothing shall not be disappointed, but he that expects much -- if he lives and uses that in hand day by day -- shall be full to running over.

Lets be expectant, believing, and budgeting the time for deep inner at-onement with the Divine.

How? How, then, may you approach the throne? Turn yourself within. As you meditate, give forth in your own words these thoughts:

Father, God, maker of heaven and earth! I am yours -- you are mine! As I claim that kinship with that Holy Love, keep you me in that consciousness of your presence abiding with me; that I may be that channel of blessings to others, that I may know your grace, your mercy, your love -- even as I show such to my fellow man!

And you may be very sure the answer comes within. Thus, as you apply -- the answer comes. By applying -- we do not mean a separation from the world. For even as He, you are IN the world but not OF the world. But putting away the worldly things you take hold upon the spiritual things, knowing that the worldly are but the shadows of the real.

Try the deep meditative method on page four of this issue. It has helped me reach these levels of oneness with God, a universal, infinite God of many mansions, many dimensions yet knowable personally. As Cayce said, I am yours and you are mine! Claiming that kinship as we move out of ourselves and into the Presence is enlivening.

A place has been prepared for us, and we have help in getting there. Abiding in that heavenly place for just a few minutes each day can make a wondrous difference in our lives and the lives of those around us. Enjoy. Share.
-END

oops... i think.. discuss too much christian here Embarassed think better dont be so off topic Razz

solomon1983 SG

Wah lau..i haven answer yr 'born of spirit'...you so fast self-answering of ' consciousness' mansions...

Rolling Eyes

An Eternal Now SG

Ahahah... just found it interesting... sorry if you have anything to add on, please do Very Happy

Herzog_Zwei SG

Atheism means no God, but to me, it means no religion.

An Eternal Now SG

http://www.kenwilber.com/blog/show/191 (to understand certain terms written below, click on the url on the left because those 'chim' words contains links to the explanation)

The New Atheism is as Flat as a Pancake
November 13, 2006 21:00

(posted by ~C4Chaos)

I just finished reading the recent WIRED feature on The New Atheism. The trinity of active mainstream atheists (Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett) are at it again evangelizing the gospel of the God-less society.

For the most part, I agree with them. Belief in God is not required and it's the cause of so much suffering around the world via religious extremisms. However, their approach is too fundamentalistic for my taste. While I personally don't limit the idea of God to its Christian or Muslim or Jewish concept, I also don't think that logic and rationalism alone could ever take the place of faith and religion. It's like saying that integral calculus can be taught to students without them learning basic algebra.

The biggest flaw of the New Atheists is that, their ideas, no matter how rational, are FLAT. They are too focused attacking the the idea of God without defining which level of God they're attacking. I say that they're pretty much attacking the mythic God. However, they're making a lot of performative contradictions and thus elevate their own level of God in the process: the mental God (read: logic, rational).

But if there's one good thing that the New Atheists are doing, it's that they're elevating the psychological development of people who are ready to step out of mythic belief in God. I just hope that these people don't get stuck in rational level because there are other higher levels of God that can only be understood and appreciated once we take a skinny dip into the trans-rational.

Kudos to the WIRED article for not buying into the atheistic Kool Aid Smile

"The New Atheists have castigated fundamentalism and branded even the mildest religious liberals as enablers of a vengeful mob. Everybody who does not join them is an ally of the Taliban. But, so far, their provocation has failed to take hold. Given all the religious trauma in the world, I take this as good news. Even those of us who sympathize intellectually have good reasons to wish that the New Atheists continue to seem absurd. If we reject their polemics, if we continue to have respectful conversations even about things we find ridiculous, this doesn't necessarily mean we've lost our convictions or our sanity. It simply reflects our deepest, democratic values. Or, you might say, our bedrock faith: the faith that no matter how confident we are in our beliefs, there's always a chance we could turn out to be wrong."

(Note: For more details on levels of God and a more-embracing spirituality, check out the book Integral Spirituality, and the ISC portal).

--------------

P.S. Buddhism doesn't talk about transcendental experiences as 'God', we don't have 'God' in our dictionary, but this article should set one thinking about the limited mindsets of some Atheists Smile

Herzog_Zwei SG

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
http://www.kenwilber.com/blog/show/191 (to understand certain terms written below, click on the url on the left because those 'chim' words contains links to the explanation)

[b]The New Atheism is as Flat as a Pancake
November 13, 2006 21:00

(posted by ~C4Chaos)

I just finished reading the recent WIRED feature on The New Atheism. The trinity of active mainstream atheists (Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett) are at it again evangelizing the gospel of the God-less society.

For the most part, I agree with them. Belief in God is not required and it's the cause of so much suffering around the world via religious extremisms. However, their approach is too fundamentalistic for my taste. While I personally don't limit the idea of God to its Christian or Muslim or Jewish concept, I also don't think that logic and rationalism alone could ever take the place of faith and religion. It's like saying that integral calculus can be taught to students without them learning basic algebra.

The biggest flaw of the New Atheists is that, their ideas, no matter how rational, are FLAT. They are too focused attacking the the idea of God without defining which level of God they're attacking. I say that they're pretty much attacking the mythic God. However, they're making a lot of performative contradictions and thus elevate their own level of God in the process: the mental God (read: logic, rational).

But if there's one good thing that the New Atheists are doing, it's that they're elevating the psychological development of people who are ready to step out of mythic belief in God. I just hope that these people don't get stuck in rational level because there are other higher levels of God that can only be understood and appreciated once we take a skinny dip into the trans-rational.

Kudos to the WIRED article for not buying into the atheistic Kool Aid Smile

"The New Atheists have castigated fundamentalism and branded even the mildest religious liberals as enablers of a vengeful mob. Everybody who does not join them is an ally of the Taliban. But, so far, their provocation has failed to take hold. Given all the religious trauma in the world, I take this as good news. Even those of us who sympathize intellectually have good reasons to wish that the New Atheists continue to seem absurd. If we reject their polemics, if we continue to have respectful conversations even about things we find ridiculous, this doesn't necessarily mean we've lost our convictions or our sanity. It simply reflects our deepest, democratic values. Or, you might say, our bedrock faith: the faith that no matter how confident we are in our beliefs, there's always a chance we could turn out to be wrong."

(Note: For more details on levels of God and a more-embracing spirituality, check out the book Integral Spirituality, and the ISC portal).

--------------

P.S. Buddhism doesn't talk about transcendental experiences as 'God', we don't have 'God' in our dictionary, but this article should set one thinking about the limited mindsets of some Atheists Smile [/b]

Atheists talk about religion and anything that is considered a religion is anathema to them.

Cenarious SG

Atheists talk about God. You are the one who talks about religion.

Herzog_Zwei SG

Because there are many religions out there without a diety or dieties.

An Eternal Now SG

What he meant is, Atheists are not as accordance to your description.

An Eternal Now SG

For example?

Herzog_Zwei SG

Sorry, I had to include in Gautama Buddha as he was the first human buddhist to describe rebirth. How would he know unless he died and was reborn? Wouldn't that be some form of diety like powers?

An Eternal Now SG

So you're saying Buddhism is a religion with deities, and the Buddha is a deity? Then we should worship him? But, Buddha is not a deity, neither claimed to be one, and was never worshipped. Buddhists never worshipped Buddha, we only treat him as the greatest teacher, and pay him our respect. Ultimately his teaching is that we all have Buddha Nature, we all can attain Buddhahood ourselves.

Yes, it is true that he DID remember his past lives. But he was not the only one, because countless others, even today, do remember their past lives, although the number of past lives they remember is of course incomparibly less than that of Buddha, because Buddha himself had practised for many lifetimes before attaining Buddhahood. Also what is the meaning of the term 'deity like powers' which you coined? Due to our current inability to understand, the poverty of our classical science to comprehend how these "powers" came about, our mind infer/connect these powers with 'deities' because we cannot understand 'deities'. In Buddhism, which is a non-theistic teaching, we do not relate 'powers' with deities. Our inability to understand it through our current logical analysis or with classical science doesn't mean it has to do with higher powers of deities, we just have to practise and see for ourselves. It is not 'superstitious', because we can see for ourselves the nature of the mind, we do not merely blindly believe in what is said. Just like scientists will do the experiment themselves. I have posted before something by Ken Wilber, he said some people criticise others without first looking through Galileo's telescope.

As a matter of fact the Buddha taught how we can attain these powers ourselves, it is certainly not an unachievable feat that is only within reach of non-humans or some divine figures 'up there', and through the practise of Precepts, Samadhi, Wisdom (the Buddha however, did not recommend in general, particular yogic exercises as compared to some other religions to attain such powers). Therefore 'deity like' powers is certainly NOT the right way to describe these phenomena. You can say that Buddhism is a Science, that ultimately leads to liberation from all sufferings, vexations of the mind to realise the highest bliss of Nirvana. Supernatural powers are not the key issue in these, although it is true that through deep meditation we can ascertain for ourselves, see for ourselves that there really is such thing called rebirth.

In regards to powers that are gained through practises, you can refer to the topic: amazing abilities by concentration Also I would like to remind you what Ajahn Brahmavamso said, Even if a monk did perform a miracle, many people would say: "This is just a trick. It's done with special effects. They are not really levitating". If you don't want to believe it, you won't. This is the problem with dogmatism. What you don't want to see, you do not see. When you don't want to believe it, you go into denial. This is why I say that many scientists are in denial about the nature of the mind. - Buddhism and Science

So the point here is, there are so many evidences that such so called "supernatural phenomena" do occur, but instead of trying to find out the nature of such phenomena, some people simply deny it because they have no way of accepting it, or, they simply explain it off by pushing it to things like "God" or "deities" or "devil". Either way, they are both called 'Dogmatism'. Quantum physics and certain scientific models however, do offer some good explanations. If you are interested, I suggest you go Kinokuniya and get the book 'The Holographic Universe'. I myself have the book and it is certainly an interesting read.

And in regards to transcendental (not refering to so called "spiritual powers", even those are not considered transcendental), let me remind you of this part: But if there's one good thing that the New Atheists are doing, it's that they're elevating the psychological development of people who are ready to step out of mythic belief in God. I just hope that these people don't get stuck in rational level because there are other higher levels of God that can only be understood and appreciated once we take a skinny dip into the trans-rational. ~ http://www.kenwilber.com/blog/show/191

Herzog_Zwei SG

As I said, such memories buai zhun one.

An Eternal Now SG

Another thing I want to add, we have to accept that logical reasoning isn't the only mode of accessing, understanding and penetrating the nature of things.

Would also like to share something by the Dalai Lama:

....Nowadays physicists explain phenomena do not exist objectively in and of themselves but exists in the context of involvement with an observer. I feel that the relation between matter and consciousness is a place where eastern philosophy and western science could meet. I think this would be a happy marriage with no divorce. If we work along the lines of a joint effort by Buddhist scholars with experience in meditation and unbiased physicists to engage in a deeper research in the relation between matter and consciousness, we may find beautiful things which may be helpful. Also those scientists working on the human brain working on the field of neurology could benefit from the Buddhist explanations about consciousness. Some time ago, I asked a neurologist how memory functions. He reported they still have not found a concrete explanation. So in this field too we can work together. Some western medical professionals are also interested in curing certain illnesses through meditation. This is another interesting topic for joint project. Because of Buddhism's emphasis on self-creation, there is no Creator deity. Thus some consider it strictly speaking not a religion. A western scholar told me Buddhism is not a religion. It is a kind of science of mind. In this sense Buddhism does not belong to the category of religion. I consider this to be unfortunate. But in some sense Buddhism becomes closer to science. However from the scientists' viewpoint, Buddhism is a spiritual path. It is unfortunate that we do not seem to belong to science either. Buddhism thereby belongs to neither religion nor pure science. But this provides us an opportunity to make a bridge between faith and science. This is why I believe in the future we will work at bringing these two forces together. The majority of people ignore religion. But among those who do not, there is on one side of group who are experiencing the values of a spiritual path. On the other is a group who are denying any value to religion. As a result there is constant conflict between these factions. If one way or another we can help bring these two forces closer, it would be worthwhile....

- The Dalai Lama, Meaning of Life 3-4

An Eternal Now SG

As I said in What are your doubts on Buddhism

--------------------

Interesting article I posted in the forum before: Boy remembers Past Life Being Shot in WWII

His memory is an example of what I call, 'corresponding to facts'

Related topic: Reincarnation

Herzog_Zwei SG

Prove to me everyone has a past life.

An Eternal Now SG

That's like asking... prove to me that everyone has a brain.. so if current technology doesn't have some sort of high tech scanner, then what, dig out everyone's brains? Laughing

And it's not that cannot prove that everyone has past life. There are many researchers that have done research on past life and have evidence that past life do occur.. but as to "prove everyone", that's possible only if those people are willing to partake in the experiment themselves and try to recall their past lives through deep meditative absorption.

Everyone can do the experiment and find out themselves - meditation. Like I said, when dealing with different things, we must use different approach.

« Previous Page Next Page »