nac

Either that or I'm giving free reign to my ego. I don't know.

That's sort of what I thought Buddhists are! Not that Buddhism is nihilistic from the Buddhist POV, but it rejects both "eternalism" and "nihilism", doesn't it? I mostly agree with Marblehead, although I'm not sure what we agree on is Buddhism or Nihilistic Taoism! (the parts common to both, perhaps?) Why? Both fatalism and determinism are grave misunderstandings of Buddhism. Buddhism doesn't teach "everything is as it should be," it teaches "things are Just So and undergoing constant change." ...now move on and work for the benefit of all sentient beings. Instead of having grandoise dreams about how things Should be, think about how sentient beings Could suffer less, starting from the Just-So-ness of the present. To quote caritas from E-Sangha: "no, ripening (of karma) that is already ripening does not stop ripening just because some person's administrations help to alleviate suffering." Is Humanistic Buddhism the same as Taoism in your opinion? I recall a Taoist parable (maybe it's from a subschool like Chinese hedonism?) about a man being very happy because his wife had died and achieved reunion with the Tao. A corresponding Zen story says that a famous teacher of Buddhism became very unhappy when his wife died, but he eventually let it go once he got it off his chest. I hope this illustrates what I mean by rejection of idealism. Here are a couple of other misunderstandings you might have: * Emptiness is not the void. * There is no primary thing (dharma) or ultimate source in Buddhism. Neither the void nor emptiness is this "source" of all manifest phenomena. Eg. I personally don't believe in eternal return as an absolute truth. Maybe certain things "return", but others don't... Nothing has to. * Buddhism instructs: Let it go; develop it again. Over and over. So the "reality" aspect of your philosophy comes from Nietzsche? Do you believe in metaphysical evil? Anyway, as the great Taoist sage in this forum said, (I can't remember what he's called) you tend towards the "both" extreme view of Nagarjuna's tetralemma, while I tend towards the "neither" view. We're both working to overcome our respective blind spots.

I confess! It was just an excuse to share that enso. You could also call it the (dependently) "arising" or "becoming" if you like. Nothing wrong with a little constructive idealism IMO, especially when you're not meditating. That's also "just so", how could it be otherwise? (one way to look at it!) Talk with you later.

I agree that the realms one can visit through meditation are far more exotic than those experienced by the average modern citizen in his or her entire lifetime.

"Worlds", yeah. We sentient beings do that all the time without realizing it.

I'd take meditative insight with a grain of salt if I were you. After all, isn't that what the Buddha did?

Yes, evidence that such things are possible. If our universe was geocentric and bounded by a shell of fixed stars, it would've been considerably harder to entertain the idea that UFOs and aliens exist. Once again, I'm very sorry if that's what I did.

Marblehead: Zen teaches that the world we live in is not "imperfect", it's our views and ideals of perfection that are fundamentally flawed. How should I know that? I'm just warning you against trying to intellectualize insight. If you really want to know whether you've understood it correctly, you'd better ask in a Buddhist forum with good teachers.

What are you talking about?? Aliens? UFOs? These things are understood rather differently within the context of Buddhism in my personal opinion, as opposed to evidence-based claims by science.

SereneBlue: Read up on Dependent Origination and you'll realize that no additional "glue" is necessary so long as all phenomena are interdependent upon each other. However, I don't think Buddhist and Hindu doctrines like this should be understood intellectually. ("dissolving God", etc) IMO the more you learn intellectually, the more you'll have to unlearn once you truly grasp their meaning.

The gift of being able to take advantage of subtly presented oppurtunities is not given to everyone.

Great! We might have to find a way to do that, if necessary. Giant machines that tear the natural stuff to pieces! Cause and Effect are out there of course, just don't let them become an excuse.

BTW could you also clarify your conception of "nature"? (along with the metaphysical aspect which looks like a forced duality to me?) IMO the entity Taoists traditionally called "nature" is largely imaginary and has no true "existence", except in the shallowest sense. Where's that quote again? Here it is: More or less the same applies to the Self.

I'm glad you understand! I just can't bring myself to start preaching or sermonizing, sorry. Suffice it to say that I have no trust in nature, balance, harmony, Self or any of the other stuff you mentioned. PS. Hmm, perhaps that wasn't expressed very well. It's not like I don't believe in the existence of certain balances, etc, let's just say I have a somewhat post-structuralist attitude towards these concepts. Eg. I disagree with notions such as: everybody gets equal opportunity because the essence of life pervades all, etc. I think we must work hard and establish artificial, human organizations that provide conditions of equal opportunity to all. These things don't come for free through a laissez-faire attitude towards nature. If you agree with this, then we're in almost complete agreement: In fact, this sort of forms the crux of my disagreement with pure Daoist philosophy: it's creates too much of an artificial natural-artificial dichotomy, encourages laissez-faire and naturalistic non-interference way too much for me to swallow. See this thread for more info: http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic....=18&t=90280 If you don't have time to read it all, here's a randomly chosen post that's rather typical of it's tone: Keep clearing away accumulated opinions and rationalizations. Revisualize everything with each step. (Don't grasp that the wrong way!) Other than that, I'm all for the Dao! Told you it would result in excessive nitpicking...

This is a personal matter, but I disagree with the general direction this is going. It's not. Try it.

... as long as it's not delusion disguised as understanding. (I would have been banned from E-Sangha at this point for sect bashing )

I agree about the fewer empowerments/dharma talks and focusing mainly on practice thing, but these topics span several threads and don't get resolved so easily. I'm aiming for the middle path between exaggeration and understatement, you know? Even the biggest lies in the world are based on an iota of truth.

mikaelz: I was only bragging (perhaps somewhat irresponsibly) about how money-wise Buddhism is these days! On the other hand, this topic has come up on E-Sangha a lot of times and several people have complained about what a drain this was on their finances, although I agree that TB is probably one of the cheapest and most accessible tantric lineages around. They are often answered with things like: what you receive in exchange for the money is "priceless", etc. I swear it on whoever you believe in, but please don't start a fight about this.

Vajrahridaya: Of course I could be wrong. I have no personal experience with TB. (ignorance declared!) All my observations are based on years of trawling through E-Sangha topics. I clearly remember that some users were told you can offer to wash dishes and stuff like that to pay for empowerments. (not for Shingon though, which is even more expensive) Unfortunately, the average interested African American is unable to afford most dharma centers nowadays. Namdrol said it all comes down to one's karmic merit, be thankful Vajrayana exists at all, no one's turned away, etc. etc. I'm very sorry if I made the matter sound more extreme than it really is. That's breaking the precept of not exaggerating. Thankfully we have you to correct us when we step off the path of truth. PS. I don't want to fight. I know that all Tantric lineages charge money. It's built into their basic structure. (renunciation)

You don't know much about Vajrayana Buddhism, huh? I'm not rich enough to be an adherent. Seriously! More or less the same as organized religious Taoism, probably. I'm under the impression that you regularly need money to pay for empowerments, ceremonies, shamanic charms or things like that. Your master takes the money, buys similar stuff from his master, and so on... All the way to the pope/Dalai Lama/Head Honcho. It's scary, really, many adherents (even in America) leading practically impoverished lives, living on "priceless" "bliss" and having just "enough" to go on. Ah, this takes me back to the first time I was banned on E-Sangha... So you suggest that life is about restoring our favorite centers every time the balance is lost? Sorry, it's a worthy goal, but it's not enough for me. So true! PS. Here's one account of how things used to work in pre-modern China: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/cbu/cbu29.htm (the author is an overenthusiastic Christian preacher, so don't take his polemics too seriously, ok?) As for unorganized, folk Taoism: http://www.sacred-texts.com/asia/rsv/rsv05.htm (from an US army manual)

Don't worry, I'm not that naive... I've been trying to quit playing that game of "not playing games". Nowadays I focus on my awareness instead.

IT - if I'm not helped or I'm hurt by ending ignorance. What about it? I'm a layman, not a monk. We form one quarter of the Fourfold Sangha. (laymen, laywomen, monks and nuns) How can the pursuit of wisdom affect any of this? That IS the subject we were discussing, right? Ever heard of the Vimalakirti Sutra? (The Holy Teaching of Vimalakirti) It was preached by a layman. Besides, Taoists have monks too, you know. Always did as a matter of fact, Taoist recluses used to be well-known in countries neighboring China. It's the life I might choose at some point. This only proves my point. Ignorance causes suffering, true understanding ends it.

Buddhism has no quarrels with science. It takes a scientific approach to spirituality, but doesn't consider science in general to be an integral part of Buddhist spirituality itself. PS. Hmm, I wonder what happened to the automatic post concatenation feature? I'm sorry, lots of interruptions today.