3bob

well you want to talk about "free will" again ;-)... I think that is a highly debatable term... granted there is an ultimate end game and choices that are made - but so much is driven with limited and relative choices made from limited and relative states which are not exactly "free".

parents are responsible for their kids up to a certain point... and to follow suit the gods are also responsible for their kids (or humans) up to a certain point... thus I'd say it's not so simple as saying you create all of your own suffering since the whole ball of wax is very big.

Karl, Jesus is alive and well (x1000) for seeing is also of believing and such can be seen when one finds out for themselves instead of going by rumors....

turning the other cheek is an advanced form of response, something that great warriors can do and succeed at because of their inner power (for instance a master like Jesus who can not be defeated internally) but I'd say not something for a novice to try who should use self defense...

I'll second what Dwai said on that...btw in Hinduism itself there are several big branches and many sub-branches or schools and they don't all agree on all the meanings or summations along such lines, but they do respect the diversity of the umbrella called "Hinduism".

the Holy Spirit will work through any and all types of forms possible, just as it is working through the Earth - so does that make the Earth one giant idol...? I'd say that most of us do not understand the inner meaning and use of so called idols at all per certain misconstrued or twisted "Abrahamic" type religious teachings.

...and who would or could be an instrument of impartial karma or law acting without attachment anyway, (?) for karma may be impartial but it comes home personally. also a warriors quandary may arise not unlike that of Arjuna on the battlefield in the Bhagavad Gita...(although on different personal levels or scales)

I don't think a warning would be out of place along these lines such as: to exercise or be of unconditional love takes great wisdom and matching strength and unwavering power of being - without that one could be exercising idealistic projection which could bring complications...

what ray of light could succeed in attacking the sun - that the sun would have to forgive?

compassion derived from Self speaks and works 24/7 - such is its nature

I'd say without Grace as a key help and force at the threshold - Atman does not realize Atman...

Copied from the "Pocket Buddha Reader", edited by Anne Bancroft When the Buddha was dying, he said to his followers: Just as the earth has hills and grass, healing herbs and nourishing grains for all beings to use, the truth that I have taught is also so. It produces the flavor of wonder and is the healing medicine for the ailments of humankind. I have brought you to abide peacefully in this great treasure. But if you have any doubts, you must ask about them now. Whatever your doubts are, I will try to answer them. Honored One, we understand the ideas of no self, of no permanent state, and of the suffering caused to the person by the belief that he has a self and is permanent. He is like one who is drunk and sees the hills and rivers, moon and stars wheeling dizzily about him. Such a one will never understand selflessness and will wander on endlessly in a miserable state. It is because of such an undesirable state that we cultivate the idea of no self. Then the Buddha was roused from the calm of coming death and said, Listen closely! You have used the metaphor of a drunken person but you know only the words and not the meaning! The drunk believes the world is spinning when it is not. You still think the self is a something if you believe you should be selfless in order to save yourselves. You believe you should see the eternal as impermanent, the pure as impure, happiness as suffering. But these are concepts and you have not penetrated the meaning. The meaning is that the real self is truth. The eternal is existence. Happiness is nirvana, and the pure is things as they are. You should not practice ideas of impermanence, suffering, impurity, and selflessness as though they are real objects like stones or rocks but look instead for the meaning. You should use expedient means in every place and cultivate the ideas of permanence, happiness, and purity for the sake of all beings. If you do this, you will be like one who sees a gem in the muddied water among stones and rocks and waits for the water to settle before he skillfully plucks it out. It is the same with cultivating the idea of the self as with permanence, happiness, and purity. The monks were taken aback. They said, Honored One, according to all you have taught and spoken, we have been asked to cultivate selflessness, leading to the dropping of the idea of a self. But now you tell us we should cultivate the idea of a self what is the meaning of this? Good, replied the Buddha. You are now asking about meaning. You should know that, like a doctor, you should find the right medicine for an illness. It is as a doctor that I observed the aliments of the world. I saw that ordinary people believe they have a self and that whoever they meet has a self. They think of the self as within the body. But it is not like that. Because it is not like that, I have shown the fallacy of all ideas of self and shown that the self is not there in the way it is thought to be. In everything I have said I have shown that the self is not as people think of it, for this is expedient means, the right medicine. But that does mean that there is no self. What is the self? If something is true, is real, is constant, is a foundation of a nature that is unchanging, this can be called the self. For the sake of sentient beings, in all the truths I have taught, there is such a self. This, monks, is for you to cultivate. Mahaparinirvana Sutra (submitted as another interpretation to consider about Buddhism, which I consider is hitting the mark and others obviously will not...)

I think the following quote completely clears up all speculations along these lines: "there is a beginning. There is no beginning of that beginning. There is no beginning of that no beginning of beginning. There is something. There is nothing. There is something before the beginning of something and nothing, and something before that. Suddenly there is something and nothing. But between something and nothing, I still don't really know which is something and which is nothing. Now, I've just said something, but I don't really know whether I've said anything or not..." Chuang Tzu try reading it over again if it isn't clear at first :-)

clinging to ideas about "no self" is just a variation of clinging to ideas about "Self" - per my take of the meaning

Hi MH, Along the lines you mentioned in this string: I think a big problem with the word "nothing" is that it can mean no-thing depending on context, for instance no woven thing- yet I'd say there is a weavers way and that which is woven and they are not nothing per-se...

40. "THE movement of the Tao consists in Returning. The use of the Tao consists in softness. All things under heaven are born of the corporeal: The corporeal is born of the Incorporeal." Karl, this little quote above is partly along the lines of what I've been alluding to...if you don't relate to it then we are not even in the same ball-park which is also ok. You seem to make everything complicated when the purity of innateTruth is as simple as can be...

there is variable reality as a grand light show of colors and change going on among woven forms, then there is a vast Ocean of pure light and roaring silence as common denominator and source for those colors, then there is the source for that Ocean which is unreachable by mind - but not by itself.

a requote : By Yutang Lin "Teaching of "Non-form" indicates non-attachment to form. Misinterpreted, it is adopted as holding to absence of form. Abiding in no forms at all, one falls into the abyss of void. Only in no grasping to form or non-form lies true liberation". I'd add a spin off of this quote by saying - only in no grasping (which can be a form of fear) to life or death lies true liberation

depending on how perception is operational and conditioned - states of what are really changing realities can seem so solid... thus man may think and choose as conditioned man but the underling spiritual desire that mankind yearns to fulfill is to know and to be a reality beyond that of only a conditioned human along with having degrees of animal nature. (which is his innate and incorruptible purity of spirit that is Free and also of a Joy that is without the duality of sorrow or suffering states of dichotomy)

who or what is it that fears?

Not sure of all your meaning Karl but I'd say that "purity" is innate and deathless for such can not be made by mind or will, thus to me the work you speak of is uncovering and letting that manifest itself...

many may be godly like or possible but only one God drives all

being a "child of God" is a still duality which has a place and purpose for evolution... and I'd say the gap between semi-orthodox Christianity and non-dualistic Hinduism can't really be bridged even by the well meaning who would like to.

an aspect of God is light yet with light there is the first manifestation of duality along with created time and space for that light...as in "let there be light" so "God" beyond categories is also beyond light or being nailed down with light or in time and space.

even light is a thing... and a spiritual body woven of light is still a thing and although very refined it is not Brahman beyond all categories