Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Dear Friends in Christ, fellow muslims, Buddhas of all realms, Jews, pagans and lamas of no fixed abode . . . :wave:
Personally I practice Buddhism of the worst, heretical kind. Recently I went to two churches. One to photograph a form of Isis aka Quan Yin aka the Black Maddona aka a piece of burnt wood. The other to contemplate the stations of the cross. Seem to be a lot of the cross here
We have the biggest mosque in Europe quite near to me. They are heretic Ahmadiyya. Look forward to my dzikr (chanting).
When I pass a local Hindu temple, Ganesh is getting coconuts and a milk bath. I make sure he is happy, new swami is very good and kindness personified.
Is there any reason why you are here and not at a movie ?
Let's not trivialize important matters. Please focus on the op, thanks.
It is you that described religion as a coping mechanism " like going to the movies" so who exactly is trivialising what ?
I agree, @Citta. I think @Music made a good point -- that when people "decide" on a religion, they have gravitated toward a belief system that already matches aspects of their already-formed beliefs. But then he went too far -- religion is not just to "makes us feel good" (in fact, it often does the opposite), is not "just a coping mechanism", and is far more complex than "going to a movie to distract oneself when one is upset". No matter how serious one takes his or her religion, following a religion is a life's project.
Are you denying that in many, many cases, it is true? People often go to church or temple to find new friends, it gives them a sense of belonging. Religion is mostly a social phenomenon rather than a strictly spiritual one.
Do I deny that sometimes aspects of religion makes us feel good? No, I don't deny that is true...sometimes. But I think far more often, at least for many of us, religion is something that makes us think and examine ourselves...and that may or may not feel good.
If I just want a distraction, I won't go to church. I will go to a movie or watch a DVD or listen to music.
Is religion a tool for coping with life. Sure, that's one little thing it's for. Although just as often we may examine our life through religion and find we are more distressed over our failures.
Is there a social aspect to religion? For some yes, sometimes. But praying before bed or meditating or just contemplating is more a solitary activity. And while I can't speak for everyone, when I do go to church, I don't socialize any more than is necessary. I spend most of my time there in contemplation.
Many people I know are very religious but don't attend church. Their religion is almost all within.
Does it matter if someone converts from Buddhism to Christianity or vice versa? Someone's meat is another person's poison, that's for sure. You can convert too if you want.
@Caz, if you think "all you need is faith in Christ" to be a "good" Christian, then I really don't think you get the principles of Christianity. Christianity is a very complex religion with a great deal of history and multiple interpretations various aspects of both the Old and New Testaments.
This is the basis of salvation in Christianity faith in Christ throughout all sects. You make it out to be more complex then it is I can see why now though.
@Caz, if you think "all you need is faith in Christ" to be a "good" Christian, then I really don't think you get the principles of Christianity. Christianity is a very complex religion with a great deal of history and multiple interpretations various aspects of both the Old and New Testaments.
This is the basis of salvation in Christianity faith in Christ throughout all sects. You make it out to be more complex then it is I can see why now though.
You are describing one aspect of some forms of Christianity and assuming that you have understood them all. Christianity like Buddhism is a spectrum. From the evangelical belief in a personal saviour right through to the contemplation of the Unknowable found both in the Medieval Christian mystics and in the Spirituality of Mount Athos.
Dear Friends in Christ, fellow muslims, Buddhas of all realms, Jews, pagans and lamas of no fixed abode . . . :wave:
Personally I practice Buddhism of the worst, heretical kind. Recently I went to two churches. One to photograph a form of Isis aka Quan Yin aka the Black Maddona aka a piece of burnt wood. The other to contemplate the stations of the cross. Seem to be a lot of the cross here
We have the biggest mosque in Europe quite near to me. They are heretic Ahmadiyya. Look forward to my dzikr (chanting).
When I pass a local Hindu temple, Ganesh is getting coconuts and a milk bath. I make sure he is happy, new swami is very good and kindness personified.
Thats not tolerance. Thats just a mess. That is taking all the vibrant colours of the great traditions and mixing them up until they become khaki. " Be careful of being so open minded that your brain falls out " Ajahn Sumedho. I await your usual response to your ideas being challenged, ....an lol smiley.
Would you care to name out some in particular? I always get in trouble for this. See I don't think people should leave vaguely veiled remarks. I find it better to just either keep it silent, deal in PMs, or man up and say what your grievance and with whom.
See, I disagree with that Jeffrey. There is on a forum at least one person who constantly hints at being an " arya" while exhibiting a number of qualities that are inconsistent with that claim. Personally I think that the arya/non arya references are later interpolations into the suttas, but lets assume they refer to objective states, that they are ontological statements...then there are objective qualities that are said in the mythos of those states to be found in those who have achieved them. Only the greenest of new Dharma students can fail to see the inconsistencies I have refered to. But there is no need to name and shame. " manning up " can be subtle as well as confrontational.
Just for the record, I go to a Methodist Church about once a month. I've yet to hear a single word about hell-fire and brimstone and no one telling women what to do with their bodies.
I go to Quaker meetings, and they seem very accepting of my agnosticism. It's basically silent meditation which is a very inclusive approach.
How come nobody has pointed out how terrible of a religion Christianity can be? I mean there's an entire website dedicated to all the messed up stuff in the Bible. It's a large part of the reason I'm no longer a Catholic. Site I'm referring to: http://www.evilbible.com/
There may also be some just as horrible things in Buddhism, but I'm not aware of such things.
There are some pretty terrible things in Buddhism Captain America, believe me. There are also some hugely compassionate and deeply spiritual people in Christianity. You cant judge a book by looking at the cover.
How come nobody has pointed out how terrible of a religion Christianity can be? I mean there's an entire website dedicated to all the messed up stuff in the Bible. It's a large part of the reason I'm no longer a Catholic. Site I'm referring to: http://www.evilbible.com/
There may also be some just as horrible things in Buddhism, but I'm not aware of such things.
If there's already a site denouncing Christianity then we don't have to do so. And that's not the aim of this site AFAIK. I'm not a Christian but I'll be stuffed if I come onto this site to slag it off.
It's a shame that more Christians don't read the Mystical Theology and the Nag Hammadi Library, study Valentinius etc., and all the rest of the 'heretical' stuff, then it would become difficult to distinguish the Buddhist universe from the Christian one. I'd suggest 'all roads lead to Rome' were it not that this is where everything seems to have gone awry for the transmission of Christianity.
I'm still trying to understand how there can be a difference between eastern and western Buddhism. I ought to know which one I'm subscribing to, after all, but so far cannot find a reason to think they are different things. It would be like having eastern and western physics.
Music - you do say some odd things. Why do you say 'it is impossible to know which religion is true (or whether there is a truth at all)'...? This is like saying that the Buddha talks nonsense. Of course it is possible to know whether a religious doctrine is true or false. To paraphrase Lao Tsu 'How do I know what is true? I look inside myself and see'. Buddhism would not exist if it were not possible to know what is true, since it is a method for finding out.
Because you believe that it is impossible to know the facts you say 'so all one can do is choose a religion that makes us feel good.' This is only true if your belief is true. But your belief is only an assumption. You are entitled to your pessimism, but according to the Upanishads 'The Unknown is not the Unknowable'. I'd suggest you go look for the facts and not hobble yourself with the assumption that success is impossible.
There is another Buddhist scholar who decided to exit Buddhism and became a Quaker. His name is Richard P. Hayes. His book (if any of you remember it) is Land of No Buddha: Reflections of a Sceptical Buddhist (1998).
@Caz, you said "This is the basis of salvation in Christianity faith in Christ throughout all sects. You make it out to be more complex then it is I can see why now though."
Yes, faith in Christ is the basis of salvation in Christianity. But let's say a father beats his wife and abuses his children every week, but goes to confession each Saturday. He believes in salvation through Christ, but doesn't walk the walk. Sorry, he's not going to make it.
It's similar to, "...I tell you, 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." There's a huge difference between believing something and putting it into action.
Too simple vinlyn..there are Christians like Merton and the monk Harry Williams for whom the historical Christ ceased to be of any great importance. They moved far beyond that into silence...They never considered themselves other than Christian however..but they interpreted that as a cultural term.
There is another Buddhist scholar who decided to exit Buddhism and became a Quaker. His name is Richard P. Hayes. His book (if any of you remember it) is Land of No Buddha: Reflections of a Sceptical Buddhist (1998).
I don't criticize Paul Williams for taking comfort in the religious tradition he was raised in. His reasons for doing so as related in the linked article are not compelling to me. Especially since I am not a Tibetan reincarnation believing Buddhist so a lot of what he says just makes me shrug my shoulders and say, "So what?"
But they are his reasons and we all have to eventually look at the huge black wall that is mortality and deal with it in our own way.
Christianity being presented simply as faith begins with the influence of the Protestant Reformation. However, the reformers would not recognize today the ideas they presented, because those ideas have been taken in such radical directions. As an aside, the dark ages and the Reformation are foreign to the Christian East.
Faith is still required, but there is obviously much more to what that entails, and it is not easy by any means. Self emptying (kenosis) and change of heart (Metanoia/Repentance) is the gateway towards silence and inner stillness and it is a narrow path. We all know how difficult change is because of the attachments we have to our habits and conditioning, but if our heart and soul isn't committed than it can be as easy as we want it to be.
Personally, I did not come to Orthodox Christianity looking for ease or comfort, but quite the opposite and I found it even for a layperson.
Some examples:
Regular Introspection and confession of one's sins with a priest as a witness - Not Easy
Strict fasting from certain foods and all sexual relations with your spouse for long extended period of times equating to about over half the year - Not Easy
Keeping a prayer rule - Not Easy
Prostrations, especially on Forgiveness Sunday marking the start of Great Lent - Not Easy
There is a saying we have in that if you are finding your ascetical practice easy you should be worried, and if so more thoughtfulness and effort is required.
The truth is we all have to be committed to our ascetical practices in order to reach the other shore, and this is no easy task whether Buddhist or Christian.
I have enjoyed going to Universalist churches in the past, but because my sangha meets weekly, I didn't have the time in my schedule to attend both so I chose, and everything i got out of going to the Uni. church, I get from my sangha meetings, and more.
@Maryanne Yes. Enough so that I don't care to visit the site much anymore.
The wily Hayes, as usual, is full of it. One can certainly admire the Quakers, the Amish and various other Christian traditions. I study the Gnostics and the Shakers but as a Buddhist. But Buddhism has no theology unlike the Quakers. On that note, it is difficult to be theologically Buddhist, in other words, and not invite a snicker or two. Theology according to the O.E.D. is:
The study or science which treats of God, His nature and attributes, and His relations with man and the universe; ‘the science of things divine’ (Hooker); divinity.
I think Hayes wants us to believe that he is still a Buddhist, but one who is very much open to letting God—if he exists—into his life. Only if we water-boarded Hayes would we find the real truth—and that ain't going to happen.
Confrontational is better than hiding in passive agressive behaviour. If you are ashamed to confront someone then you should not allude to someone in the negative. There is something wrong if a person will talk negatively about someone and they are too ashamed to confront this person.
As I said I think backbiting should not occur when you can take it to PMs. Confrontation I prefer to passive agressive. But that's just me.
If we boil it down to simple terms humans are looking for permanence and eternity. God gives you these things, Buddhism does not.
My take on it is that from a Buddhist perspective there's no harm in taking up Pascal on his wager. His work in Buddhism, and his deep research into faith and religion will surely help him out in his next life. From a Christian perspective, he only has one shot at this thing, and as long as he gets it right before death, then he'll be fine. If he has been holding on to the fear and assumptions of Christianity, and has a deep-seated need for a creator God to fill in the blanks for him, I understand his choice to go back to Catholicism.
I think his discussion in part two of the video is interesting. In Buddhism one does not necessarily have to believe in a creator God, and to some degree asking the question and getting an answer will not lead to enlightenment. He says that Buddhists don't question that they don't know the answer as to where and how the universe started. In Christianity, God is the creator, but he says that we can not ask what the creator is or where he/she came from.
From my personal experience, I've come across my western Christian mind many times in Buddhism, and I like the fact that I can challenge these assumptions that I grew up with. Even something as simple as where do I look for validation in my practice? A Christian looks to the Church, and others for validation, the Buddhist largely looks to the self for validation. Practice for me is a deep study of where I came from, as well as where I am going.
Comments
:wave:
Personally I practice Buddhism of the worst, heretical kind. Recently I went to two churches. One to photograph a form of Isis aka Quan Yin aka the Black Maddona aka a piece of burnt wood. The other to contemplate the stations of the cross.
Seem to be a lot of the cross here
We have the biggest mosque in Europe quite near to me. They are heretic Ahmadiyya. Look forward to my dzikr (chanting).
When I pass a local Hindu temple, Ganesh is getting coconuts and a milk bath. I make sure he is happy, new swami is very good and kindness personified.
Emptiness is form and form is emptiness - anyone?
http://yinyana.tumblr.com/post/29930155706/god-and-the-buddha
I agree, @Citta. I think @Music made a good point -- that when people "decide" on a religion, they have gravitated toward a belief system that already matches aspects of their already-formed beliefs. But then he went too far -- religion is not just to "makes us feel good" (in fact, it often does the opposite), is not "just a coping mechanism", and is far more complex than "going to a movie to distract oneself when one is upset". No matter how serious one takes his or her religion, following a religion is a life's project.
Are you denying that in many, many cases, it is true? People often go to church or temple to find new friends, it gives them a sense of belonging. Religion is mostly a social phenomenon rather than a strictly spiritual one.
If I just want a distraction, I won't go to church. I will go to a movie or watch a DVD or listen to music.
Is religion a tool for coping with life. Sure, that's one little thing it's for. Although just as often we may examine our life through religion and find we are more distressed over our failures.
Is there a social aspect to religion? For some yes, sometimes. But praying before bed or meditating or just contemplating is more a solitary activity. And while I can't speak for everyone, when I do go to church, I don't socialize any more than is necessary. I spend most of my time there in contemplation.
Many people I know are very religious but don't attend church. Their religion is almost all within.
Christianity like Buddhism is a spectrum. From the evangelical belief in a personal saviour right through to the contemplation of the Unknowable found both in the Medieval Christian mystics and in the Spirituality of Mount Athos.
" Be careful of being so open minded that your brain falls out "
Ajahn Sumedho.
I await your usual response to your ideas being challenged, ....an lol smiley.
Only the greenest of new Dharma students can fail to see the inconsistencies I have refered to.
But there is no need to name and shame. " manning up " can be subtle as well as confrontational.
There may also be some just as horrible things in Buddhism, but I'm not aware of such things.
There are also some hugely compassionate and deeply spiritual people in Christianity.
You cant judge a book by looking at the cover.
I'm still trying to understand how there can be a difference between eastern and western Buddhism. I ought to know which one I'm subscribing to, after all, but so far cannot find a reason to think they are different things. It would be like having eastern and western physics.
Music - you do say some odd things. Why do you say 'it is impossible to know which religion is true (or whether there is a truth at all)'...? This is like saying that the Buddha talks nonsense. Of course it is possible to know whether a religious doctrine is true or false. To paraphrase Lao Tsu 'How do I know what is true? I look inside myself and see'. Buddhism would not exist if it were not possible to know what is true, since it is a method for finding out.
Because you believe that it is impossible to know the facts you say 'so all one can do is choose a religion that makes us feel good.' This is only true if your belief is true. But your belief is only an assumption. You are entitled to your pessimism, but according to the Upanishads 'The Unknown is not the Unknowable'. I'd suggest you go look for the facts and not hobble yourself with the assumption that success is impossible.
Yes, faith in Christ is the basis of salvation in Christianity. But let's say a father beats his wife and abuses his children every week, but goes to confession each Saturday. He believes in salvation through Christ, but doesn't walk the walk. Sorry, he's not going to make it.
It's similar to, "...I tell you, 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." There's a huge difference between believing something and putting it into action.
http://dayamati.blogspot.co.uk/
But they are his reasons and we all have to eventually look at the huge black wall that is mortality and deal with it in our own way.
Faith is still required, but there is obviously much more to what that entails, and it is not easy by any means. Self emptying (kenosis) and change of heart (Metanoia/Repentance) is the gateway towards silence and inner stillness and it is a narrow path. We all know how difficult change is because of the attachments we have to our habits and conditioning, but if our heart and soul isn't committed than it can be as easy as we want it to be.
Personally, I did not come to Orthodox Christianity looking for ease or comfort, but quite the opposite and I found it even for a layperson.
Some examples:
Regular Introspection and confession of one's sins with a priest as a witness - Not Easy
Strict fasting from certain foods and all sexual relations with your spouse for long extended period of times equating to about over half the year - Not Easy
Keeping a prayer rule - Not Easy
Prostrations, especially on Forgiveness Sunday marking the start of Great Lent - Not Easy
There is a saying we have in that if you are finding your ascetical practice easy you should be worried, and if so more thoughtfulness and effort is required.
The truth is we all have to be committed to our ascetical practices in order to reach the other shore, and this is no easy task whether Buddhist or Christian.
@Maryanne Yes. Enough so that I don't care to visit the site much anymore.
The wily Hayes, as usual, is full of it. One can certainly admire the Quakers, the Amish and various other Christian traditions. I study the Gnostics and the Shakers but as a Buddhist. But Buddhism has no theology unlike the Quakers. On that note, it is difficult to be theologically Buddhist, in other words, and not invite a snicker or two. Theology according to the O.E.D. is: I think Hayes wants us to believe that he is still a Buddhist, but one who is very much open to letting God—if he exists—into his life. Only if we water-boarded Hayes would we find the real truth—and that ain't going to happen.
As I said I think backbiting should not occur when you can take it to PMs. Confrontation I prefer to passive agressive. But that's just me.
My take on it is that from a Buddhist perspective there's no harm in taking up Pascal on his wager. His work in Buddhism, and his deep research into faith and religion will surely help him out in his next life. From a Christian perspective, he only has one shot at this thing, and as long as he gets it right before death, then he'll be fine. If he has been holding on to the fear and assumptions of Christianity, and has a deep-seated need for a creator God to fill in the blanks for him, I understand his choice to go back to Catholicism.
I think his discussion in part two of the video is interesting. In Buddhism one does not necessarily have to believe in a creator God, and to some degree asking the question and getting an answer will not lead to enlightenment. He says that Buddhists don't question that they don't know the answer as to where and how the universe started. In Christianity, God is the creator, but he says that we can not ask what the creator is or where he/she came from.
From my personal experience, I've come across my western Christian mind many times in Buddhism, and I like the fact that I can challenge these assumptions that I grew up with. Even something as simple as where do I look for validation in my practice? A Christian looks to the Church, and others for validation, the Buddhist largely looks to the self for validation. Practice for me is a deep study of where I came from, as well as where I am going.
Wiley Coyote (Hayes nickname) makes it quite clear that he is a Buddhist
http://dayamati.blogspot.co.uk/2008/10/clearness-process.html
He attends the liberal Quaker group, which allows you to remain Buddhist.
No need. Then don't.
@music confused? Maybe Buddhism and sitting can help? as a rather fishy friend told me . . .