Christianity, Buddhsim, Religious Taoism

[Vmarco]

Okay, but we're talking about the people who actually have the path in their heart/mind/spirit or wherever you want to locate it. For these people, the virtue is not a code of conduct but a spiritual reality that resides within and may even continue with them after they die. That is not the same as the mental construct of morality such as "do this, don't do that."

 

Again, we are talking about the people who actually embody the path, not just those hanging around the gift shop at the bottom of the mountain..

 

This is interesting,...but what is "Spiritual Reality?" People use the term Spirit like they understand what they're talking about.

 

John Davies, in 1989 said, "follow Spirit without hesitation,...If you don't follow your spirit without hesitation, then you'll end up following your hesitation without spirit."

 

I agree 100% Someone else could agree, 100%, but have a fully different notion of what Spirit is. Does that mean they follow Spirit any less,...absolutely! How do follow Spirit if you're not following Spirit? In reality, they're following Belief without hesitation.

 

To me, the term Spirit is the underlaying breath, within all Form and Emptiness,...as I mentioned in post #10 in the Fear of Death thread:

 

Spirit is the underlying dynamic that reflects back to us the suffering, fear, denial, and hope that obscure who we really are, which keep our true selves from being seen, so that we can let go of those garments and express ourselves at higher and higher, less filtered frequencies.

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/19891-the-problem-with-people-is-that-they-fear-death-and-loss/

 

So, when you say those "who actually embody the path",... begs the question what path, whose path, what view of Spirit. From my observations, someone on a true spiritual path, would be on a path of Spirit,...from Spirit's point of view,...not a belief engendered point of view of what Spirit is believed to be.

 

From my observations, beliefs obscure Spirit. So is, or can, a person of belief, even be on a Spiritual path, let alone embody it?

 

V

[Vmarco]

[dwai]

As I said, Although you shorten the context of my quote, "Every enlightened person that I'm aware of,....Shakyamuni, Saraha, Tilopa, Nagarjuna, Vajrayogini, etc., understood that to dissolve pride one must simultaneously dissolve humility,....to dissolve fear, one must simultaneously dissolve hope."

 

Of course, if want a quote from a sutra that says, "Harmonious Emptiness, who posts in the Tao Bum form, in the summer of the Christian year 2011, should understand that pride is the polar opposite of humility"....no,...I haven't seen it.

 

One does not necessarily prove how an Enlightened Being would have "understood" something, soley through a quote,....but understanding their overall sharings, one can come to a reasonable conclusion as to how they would have "understood" by way of consistencies throught their sharings. HUMILITY ARISES FROM THE SKANDHAS! All Skandhas are instructed to be at least tamed,...to dissolve or tame anything, is dependent on its relationship with its opposite. Any two opposites added together equals their dissolution. One cannot keep or holdon to a so-called positive, without also keeping or holding on to its negative.

 

Although I did attempt to share how the Humility/Pride polar skandha would apply, I see you need an exact, scholar authenticated quote,...even though Asian scholars would be inclined to share my view without hesitation. Nevertheless,...your "out" is perfectly acceptable,...no problem.

 

You purposefully combed through all I posted on this thread, looking for one thing, that if you worded to your satifaction, may not be available, and thus debunk all my posts,...posts #6 #7 #9 etc. You should be a lawyer.

 

Bye

 

V

 

I'm not a big fan of ttb-brand of buddhism, but i must admit that i see your point wrt dissolving not just one pole but the opposite as well...because one is but the infinite extrapolation of the other. Paradoxical though it may seem, the world of advaita is paradoxical. However, wouldn't it be better to balance te opposites rather than dissolve the opposites. When there be perfect balance, there would not be any extremes...I tjik that is also what is taught in buddhism 101? As it is in taoism, hinduism so on and so forth?

 

I cannot omment on christianity or islam since i haven't found the need to look teachings there...

[3bob]

Reality?

 

Life and death as commonly known are connected at the hip. Yet when death dies so do the limits of any life that is connected to it.

 

Thus true "life" does not die, that is the core reality and It is happy.

 

Om

Edited August 11, 2011 by 3bob

[Vmarco]

[Harmonious Emptiness]

This is interesting,...but what is "Spiritual Reality?" People use the term Spirit like they understand what they're talking about.

 

John Davies, in 1989 said, "follow Spirit without hesitation,...If you don't follow your spirit without hesitation, then you'll end up following your hesitation without spirit."

 

I agree 100% Someone else could agree, 100%, but have a fully different notion of what Spirit is. Does that mean they follow Spirit any less,...absolutely! How do follow Spirit if you're not following Spirit? In reality, they're following Belief without hesitation.

 

To me, the term Spirit is the underlaying breath, within all Form and Emptiness,...as I mentioned in post #10 in the Fear of Death thread:

 

Spirit is the underlying dynamic that reflects back to us the suffering, fear, denial, and hope that obscure who we really are, which keep our true selves from being seen, so that we can let go of those garments and express ourselves at higher and higher, less filtered frequencies.

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/19891-the-problem-with-people-is-that-they-fear-death-and-loss/

 

So, when you say those "who actually embody the path",... begs the question what path, whose path, what view of Spirit. From my observations, someone on a true spiritual path, would be on a path of Spirit,...from Spirit's point of view,...not a belief engendered point of view of what Spirit is believed to be.

 

From my observations, beliefs obscure Spirit. So is, or can, a person of belief, even be on a Spiritual path, let alone embody it?

 

V

 

Sorry to burst your bubble, but this definition of Spirit, being something that lies beyond all beliefs, codes, habits, etc., is not exclusive to you, nor Buddhism nor Taoism.

[templetao]

Ya know all i see on here is people commenting on topics. Throwing around opinions that only serve to make themselves have a greater appreciation of what they already know.

 

If you are really on the spiritual path. Then you should know the levels of internal power and the ascension they represent and your personal take on them. And then post your theory on it on here to help other seekers.

 

Nope you wont see that.

 

The covetousness and the ego defense mechanisms keeps the wall up.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

If you are really on the spiritual path. Then you should know the levels of internal power and the ascension they represent and your personal take on them. And then post your theory on it on here to help other seekers.

 

 

This is a good point within this topic as well, since Christianity doesn't speak to levels of power, though it does believe in the power of prayer which is a form of power to change things, though not directly by the person's own actions.

 

I suppose though, for this topic, the inquiry is more towards the heart-mind of the The Sage, The Enlightened, The Saint, as well as general practitioners who strive to embody this.

 

I didn't really have a definite yes or no conclusion when I started the topic, but one difference I would point to is that Christian saints are not necessarily as emotionally detached as other sages. However, not all Enlightened masters are totally without the occasional outbursts. Also saints would tend to have a more equaniminous view of things than most people since they would attribute everything to God in the same way a Buddhist would attribute everything to Emptiness, maybe the difference there being that the Saint would seek to change things by asking for Gods help, where the Enlightened might be more likely to just accept it, and the Taoist Sage might also seek to change it by supernatural means.

 

Really, I don't need to know or believe they either are or are not the same, but there have been some interesting discussions in the process.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Harmonious Emptiness

[templetao]

Well the core of what Christ taught was attaining everlasting life.

 

then you have occultist who wants nothing to do with Christ and then looks into spiritual alchemy on their own trying to attain immortality. And I can see that but Christ was the only man documented in history to coming back to life whose body was destroyed before hand.

 

Moses parted the red sea. I never heard of a taoist that powerful. I only say that to bring up a point and the point is this - in all reality what do we really understand about all of this?

 

Just a thought.

[Vmarco]

[dwai]

[Vmarco]

And I can see that but Christ was the only man documented in history to coming back to life whose body was destroyed before hand.

 

Moses parted the red sea. I never heard of a taoist that powerful. I only say that to bring up a point and the point is this - in all reality what do we really understand about all of this?

 

Just a thought.

 

 

Here's another thought,...there are hundreds of cases in history of resurrection, and virgin births.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZgT1SRcrKE

 

Moses? In my Country, the Father of the American Revolution, said, "Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses, who gave an order to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and then rape the daughters. One of the most horrible atrocities found in the literature of any nation. I would not dishonor my Creator's name by attaching it to this filthy book." Thomas Paine

 

Unfortunately, Christian's took control of America in the 1950's, changing its motto E Pluribus Unum to In God We Trust, theologizing it Pledge, and changing the Father of the American Revolution to Christ Sam adams.

 

But the is,..."Washington's sword would have been yielded in vain had it not been supported by the pen of Paine" James Monroe

 

V

[Vmarco]

I wonder whether balance really is in dissolution or is it rather in stasis...By wuhich i dont mean stagnation, but a delicate balance between yin and yang, ever-changing, compensating, adjusting.

 

Also, not very sure why you would say speed of light is greater than energy create when momentum of an object is multiplied by the speed of light. They are two different units of measurement afaik....

 

I see your point, but mine is regarding True Balance,...stasis is a state of stability, in which all forces are equal and opposing, therefore they cancel out each other.

 

Again,...every object perceived in the universe must be in motion to be an object,...no non-motion objects exist, anywhere. As for light, energy, etc,...that has been discussed in the 'What is Light' thread. However, to summarize,...there is no energy at the so-call speed of light. From Light's point of view, it travels no distance, in no time, and has no need for speed.

 

From Light's point of view, ANY subject that disregards light, is mental masterbation without possibility of orgasm.

 

V

[Harmonious Emptiness]

[Vmarco]

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Like I said, it's been a political resource and few can tell the difference between the politics and the practice.

 

Whatever these scholars decided, the message is there, and it is what it is rather than what most do with it.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Harmonious Emptiness

[Vmarco]

Edited August 12, 2011 by Vmarco

[Harmonious Emptiness]

If Buddhism was nothing but a bunch of empty sayings and uncomfortable rules for you I'd say it's probably not for you.

 

For me, on occassion I go to a non-denominational church. What I get from it actually makes me better understand and experience what I read about in Buddhist texts. Buddhist texts also help me to appreciate the message Christ better.

 

The experience you get from it is what counts. The church I go to is very different from most, but the source is the same.

 

What I have to learn from you, I really don't know. Your writing style reminds me of Nietzsche who I never read for more than a few pages of because I found him contentiously pretentious and I don't think that someone on that level has reached anywhere I desire to go. Thus, you have your position, I know what it is, I know why it is, and I'm not interested. Cheers.

[templetao]

Here's another thought,...there are hundreds of cases in history of resurrection, and virgin births.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZgT1SRcrKE

 

Moses? In my Country, the Father of the American Revolution, said, "Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses, who gave an order to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and then rape the daughters. One of the most horrible atrocities found in the literature of any nation. I would not dishonor my Creator's name by attaching it to this filthy book." Thomas Paine

 

Unfortunately, Christian's took control of America in the 1950's, changing its motto E Pluribus Unum to In God We Trust, theologizing it Pledge, and changing the Father of the American Revolution to Christ Sam adams.

 

But the is,..."Washington's sword would have been yielded in vain had it not been supported by the pen of Paine" James Monroe

 

V

 

 

Did you really just post a link to zeitgiest i mean really r u f'ing with me. Well hey its good you get your spiritual facts from youtube.

 

Im just going to say this because i think you need to hear it just because you practice a meditative art does not mean you have to be against god or Christians.

 

Personally i thank the lord that Christians took control of this country.

 

Oh btw the founding fathers were all masons and not christians im sure theres a zeitgist movie about that as well.

 

I am a hardcore taoist and I practice very hard for hours everyday and i firmly believe in god.

 

There is no ascension, alchemy or whatever if it doesnt bring you closer to the supreme ultimate.- Just think about it it makes sense.

 

Also you seem very anti christian may i ask why?

 

me personally I admire all spiritual paths that try to reconnect man with god.

Edited August 12, 2011 by templetao

[Vmarco]

Did you really just post a link to zeitgiest i mean really r u f'ing with me. Well hey its good you get your spiritual facts from youtube.

 

I am a hardcore taoist and I practice very hard for hours everyday and i firmly believe in god.

 

Also you seem very anti christian may i ask why?

 

me personally I admire all spiritual paths that try to reconnect man with god.

 

I reviewed the particular zeitgeist link posted (specifically on religion), and as a credentialed Religious Studies scholar, can attest to its accuracy. If you're total argument is in reference to the source,...that's your problem. It appeared to be the quickest way to show a point,...that there are hundreds of people said to have died a martyrs death and resurrected, usually after 3 days.

 

On the other hand, when you say you're a theist,...that is an alarming (really r u f'ing with me) statement. It is impossible for any theist to access Heart-Mind. No matter how much your ego wants to bring your conditions into the Uncoditional, it will never happen.

 

Am I anti-Christian,...absolutely not. However, I am quite intolerant of the Christian religion (meme or virus), in those instances where it steps between sentient beings and their direct experience,...ie., your experiences. Regardless of what people "think"...they are not their beliefs.

 

I too, very much "admire all spiritual paths",...the truth is however, no spiritual path can lead one to a god. But hey,...whatever floats your boat. Any authentic spiritual path is one of honesty.

http://www.buddhanet.net/ans73.htm

 

V

Edited August 12, 2011 by Vmarco

[paulno]

The truth of Christian is enough to render it null and void,...but "Most men would kill the truth if truth would kill their religion"

 

Christianity is a refashioning of Gnostic mythology into a religion that advocated slavery, dependency, ignorance, and submissive obedience. This new religion was never a threat to Rome, but rather, it was one through which its adherents, servants of Rome’s ruling class, were morally obligated to suffer meekly what Caesar wished or, as Titus 2:9 says, to please their masters in all things. Christianity is a pro-Roman religion. Did not Paul say that Roman magistrates were only a threat to evildoers or that the man who rebels against his master is opposing God’s will? What Roman would want to persecute the philosophy that said that tax collectors are God’s ministers (Romans 13:6)? It was the Jewish zealots and Gnostic Christians who threatened Rome, not the anti-Gnostic Paulines and neo-Christians.

 

Christianity is not a refashioning of Gnostic mythology. The Gnostics themselves were mostly Christian and at the very least practitioners of Abrahamic religion. Not the other way around. It didn't "advocate" slavery. Paul says slave traders will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Jesus tells slaves to be obedient to avoid further persecution.

 

It is not a pro Roman religion. Rather, the Romans refashioned it as such. I think about 90% of people who grew up in the Western Hemisphere know that Pontius Pilate ordered the death of Christ. Not to mention for a long time Christians were massacred by The Romans. He doesn't say tax collectors are his ministers. He says they are his servants and the chapter is very much about honesty not about the glorious Romans.

 

I could go on and on pointing out falsehoods in your post. Vmarcus, I too have a huge problem with a lot of what goes on in Christian communities. But, your complete hatred for all that is Christian is glaring. I mean how could you begin to deny it?

Edited August 12, 2011 by paulno

[templetao]

I reviewed the particular zeitgeist link posted (specifically on religion), and as a credentialed Religious Studies scholar, can attest to its accuracy. If you're total argument is in reference to the source,...that's your problem. It appeared to be the quickest way to show a point,...that there are hundreds of people said to have died a martyrs death and resurrected, usually after 3 days.

 

On the other hand, when you say you're a theist,...that is an alarming (really r u f'ing with me) statement. It is impossible for any theist to access Heart-Mind. No matter how much your ego wants to bring your conditions into the Uncoditional, it will never happen.

 

Am I anti-Christian,...absolutely not. However, I am quite intolerant of the Christian religion (meme or virus), in those instances where it steps between sentient beings and their direct experience,...ie., your experiences. Regardless of what people "think"...they are not their beliefs.

 

I too, very much "admire all spiritual paths",...the truth is however, no spiritual path can lead one to a god. But hey,...whatever floats your boat. Any authentic spiritual path is one of honesty.

http://www.buddhanet.net/ans73.htm

 

V

 

 

I must say I like the way you responded. I have a new respect for you.

 

Yes there are bad Christians out there i agree on that but i dont hold it against the religion itself.

 

Ill tell you this that real evil exist and i hope you never see it or experience it.

 

Until you experience it then you will truly understand just as i did.

 

I wish you the best.

[vsaluki]

Vmarco: "The truth of Christian is enough to render it null and void"

 

Guess that depends on which Christianity you are talking about. If you are talking about Christianity as interpreted and passed down to us by the church, I have to agree. If you are talking about what was taught by the mystic Jesus, I have to disagree. It's kind of pointless making generalizations about Christianity unless you specify which Christianity you are refering to.

 

But then the Hinduism, Buddhism, and Tao that is practiced by the masses in many countries is really little better than the Christianity that was passed down by the church. On this forum we tend to look at the intellectual, philosophical and esoteric aspects of those religions. But that is not what many - if not most - of the adherents practice in their home states. Superstition, ritual, dogmatism and bigotry are common all religions as they are practiced by the masses.

 

The question is - why should we care. The important thing for us is to go to the originators of these religions and try to extract the message and the meaning that they wished to pass on. Beyond that, value judgements are pointless.

[Vmarco]

Edited August 12, 2011 by Vmarco

[Vmarco]