pulling the religion out of religion?

[Vmarco]

Vmarco,

Is not the messenger part of the context in which the message is given?

 

 

No. Listing the messenger is a courtesy,...and has nothing to do with the context that the quote was used, except when the context is related to the messenger themselves.

 

Just because I agree with U.S. President Ulysses Grant for saying that church property should be supported entirely by private contributions to keep church and state forever separate, this does not mean going into a debate about the life of Mr. Grant. The quotations, as I use them, are about the message within the quotation, not the profile, or even intent of the messenger.

 

As for tolerance vs intolerance? What Bodhisattva is tolerant of anything that steps between people and their direct experience? None.

 

"If something is serious and it is necessary to take counter-measures, you have to take counter-measures....in fact, one of the precepts of the Bodhisattva vows is to take strong countermeasures when the situation calls for it. If a Bodhisattva doesn't take strong countermeasures when the situation requires, then that constitutes an infraction of one of the vows." HH Dalai Lama

 

Real Compassion is intolerant of all religions.

 

 

The existence of the Abrahamic religions is proof that there has been little true compassion in the world. However, an age of compassion and light may be near. Whether this means the legend of Shambhala and the holy war to move humanity beyond faith-based ideas of good and evil is true is not for me to say. But the holy war, a worldwide inner battle with the five skandhas, has already begun, and is not likely to be contained in this ever-advancing age of authentic spiritual consciousness. The days of the Abrahamic meme-plex are numbered. In our lifetime, it is likely that they will be consigned to the back walls of museums.

 

Tens of thousands have actually been instructed about the holy war through presentations of the Kalachakra initiation, a path to the birthing of spiritual beingness, which at its heart is an empowerment to elevate the precepts of love and compassion as per the teachings of the Vajradhara. The Kalachakra initiation is meant to plant a seed of a love that is not based on the insanity of fear and hope. It inspirits a fierce compassion that does not arise from the five skandhas.

 

The Kalachakra initiation is a rite of passage to embody a culture of light—the light of Vajra, a passage that exposes the recognition that each and every one has the same equal essence of Vajra. This initiation has been presented like someone giving another person a stereogram without any instruction on how to view the three-dimensional image within the two-dimensional abstract.

 

The authentic initiation is intended to be a confirmation ceremony of actual intrepidity or knighthood, not merely a title or a been-there, done-that, moment. The initiate is being called to Vajradharic and Buddhic consciousness—a knight-magickian of Vajra and a Shambhala warrior.

 

Vajradharic consciousness is not something for imagined mystics in a distant future that never quite arrives, like the tavern sign that says Free Drinks Tomorrow—every day there will be free drinks tomorrow, a tomorrow that never comes.

 

The Kalachakra initiation is a confirmation, an affirmation and a pledge to support the Shambhala War and to participate in the co-creation of peace on earth—a genuine peace that will reveal Shambhala. This is not a symbolic war, but an inner spiritual battle that will project to the outer. The inner always projects to the outer, and the outer is always a mirror image of the inner. The initiation is a commitment of true compassion that arises from the vow to free all sentient beings from suffering, not tolerating beliefs and continuing suffering.

 

Sam Harris said, “Moderates do not want to kill anyone in the name of God, but they want us to keep using the word God as though we knew what we were talking about. They do not want anything too critical said about people who really believe in the god of their fathers because tolerance, perhaps above all else, is sacred. To speak plainly and truthfully about the state of our world—to say, for instance, that the Bible and the Koran both contain mountains of life-destroying gibberish—is antithetical to tolerance as moderates currently conceive it. However, we can no longer afford the luxury of such political correctness. We must finally recognize the price that we are paying to maintain the iconography of our ignorance.” People who believe in theism cannot be compassionate, no matter how well-intentioned they perceive themselves to be, because the gateway to compassion is through the letting go of theism.

[Jetsun]

If there is a discrepancy between the message and the messenger then it usually means that the messenger isn't speaking from what they really know, they are just recycling another man's teaching from another situation and another time and claiming it for their own wisdom.

[Vmarco]

If there is a discrepancy between the message and the messenger then it usually means that the messenger isn't speaking from what they really know, they are just recycling another man's teaching from another situation and another time and claiming it for their own wisdom.

 

 

That makes no senses.

 

For example,...if there is a discussion on theism, and someone quote Osho,... “Start knowing what you really know, and stop believing what you really don’t know. Somebody asks you. “Is there a God?” and you say, “Yes, God is.” Remember: Do you really know? If you don’t know, please don’t say that you do. Say, “I don’t know.”. . . False knowing is the enemy of true knowledge. All beliefs are false knowledge.” Then the point is,...is the quote valid,...regardless of the groupthink about Osho?

 

Doesn't matter if Osho believed in a god or not,....is the message valid?

 

If you disagree that: “Start knowing what you really know, and stop believing what you really don’t know. Somebody asks you. “Is there a God?” and you say, “Yes, God is.” Remember: Do you really know? If you don’t know, please don’t say that you do. Say, “I don’t know.”. . . False knowing is the enemy of true knowledge. All beliefs are false knowledge.”....then you could say,...I disagree,...beliefs are true knowledge, and belief in what I do not know, like god, is the supreme truth.

[Marblehead]

... is the supreme truth.

I am the supreme truth and don't 'cha ever forget it!

 

Okay. So to not sound so arrogant I will rephrase that statement.

 

I am is the supreme truth.

Edited June 16, 2013 by Marblehead

[Vmarco]

I am is the supreme truth.

 

Sounds like a Guy Ballard mantra

[Marblehead]

Sounds like a Guy Ballard mantra

Hehehe. I had to look Guy up as I has no idea who he was.

 

No, I'm not that far out on the limb. It's just that I like my physical reality.

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

No. Listing the messenger is a courtesy,...and has nothing to do with the context that the quote was used, except when the context is related to the messenger themselves.

 

Just because I agree with U.S. President Ulysses Grant for saying that church property should be supported entirely by private contributions to keep church and state forever separate, this does not mean going into a debate about the life of Mr. Grant. The quotations, as I use them, are about the message within the quotation, not the profile, or even intent of the messenger.

 

As for tolerance vs intolerance? What Bodhisattva is tolerant of anything that steps between people and their direct experience? None.

 

"If something is serious and it is necessary to take counter-measures, you have to take counter-measures....in fact, one of the precepts of the Bodhisattva vows is to take strong countermeasures when the situation calls for it. If a Bodhisattva doesn't take strong countermeasures when the situation requires, then that constitutes an infraction of one of the vows." HH Dalai Lama

 

Real Compassion is intolerant of all religions.

 

 

The existence of the Abrahamic religions is proof that there has been little true compassion in the world. However, an age of compassion and light may be near. Whether this means the legend of Shambhala and the holy war to move humanity beyond faith-based ideas of good and evil is true is not for me to say. But the holy war, a worldwide inner battle with the five skandhas, has already begun, and is not likely to be contained in this ever-advancing age of authentic spiritual consciousness. The days of the Abrahamic meme-plex are numbered. In our lifetime, it is likely that they will be consigned to the back walls of museums.

 

Tens of thousands have actually been instructed about the holy war through presentations of the Kalachakra initiation, a path to the birthing of spiritual beingness, which at its heart is an empowerment to elevate the precepts of love and compassion as per the teachings of the Vajradhara. The Kalachakra initiation is meant to plant a seed of a love that is not based on the insanity of fear and hope. It inspirits a fierce compassion that does not arise from the five skandhas.

 

The Kalachakra initiation is a rite of passage to embody a culture of light—the light of Vajra, a passage that exposes the recognition that each and every one has the same equal essence of Vajra. This initiation has been presented like someone giving another person a stereogram without any instruction on how to view the three-dimensional image within the two-dimensional abstract.

 

The authentic initiation is intended to be a confirmation ceremony of actual intrepidity or knighthood, not merely a title or a been-there, done-that, moment. The initiate is being called to Vajradharic and Buddhic consciousness—a knight-magickian of Vajra and a Shambhala warrior.

 

Vajradharic consciousness is not something for imagined mystics in a distant future that never quite arrives, like the tavern sign that says Free Drinks Tomorrow—every day there will be free drinks tomorrow, a tomorrow that never comes.

 

The Kalachakra initiation is a confirmation, an affirmation and a pledge to support the Shambhala War and to participate in the co-creation of peace on earth—a genuine peace that will reveal Shambhala. This is not a symbolic war, but an inner spiritual battle that will project to the outer. The inner always projects to the outer, and the outer is always a mirror image of the inner. The initiation is a commitment of true compassion that arises from the vow to free all sentient beings from suffering, not tolerating beliefs and continuing suffering.

 

Sam Harris said, “Moderates do not want to kill anyone in the name of God, but they want us to keep using the word God as though we knew what we were talking about. They do not want anything too critical said about people who really believe in the god of their fathers because tolerance, perhaps above all else, is sacred. To speak plainly and truthfully about the state of our world—to say, for instance, that the Bible and the Koran both contain mountains of life-destroying gibberish—is antithetical to tolerance as moderates currently conceive it. However, we can no longer afford the luxury of such political correctness. We must finally recognize the price that we are paying to maintain the iconography of our ignorance.” People who believe in theism cannot be compassionate, no matter how well-intentioned they perceive themselves to be, because the gateway to compassion is through the letting go of theism.

 

VMarco,

 

What you are missing is this. When someone tells you something that you know the answer to, you can verify the truth in your own mind, so you do not bother to examine the messenger. Like when someone tells you that 1 + 1 = 2. In this case, there is no reason to examine the messenger.

 

However, as is the case with most spiritual teachings, many teachers will say things for which you have no previous experience in, hence, you cannot verify the veracity of those statements based on your own knowledge and experience. Or, there is no possible way to verify the truthfulness as in past-life-readings or what's going to happen to you after you die. Therefore, the common thing to do is to examine as much about the messenger as you can, the context in which the message is given and try to surmise whether or not there might be any truth in the statement, based on all of the factors.

 

For example: Take the statement "Women should meditate on their breasts". Is there any truth in that statement? Why should women not follow the conventional meditation techniques, rather than focus on their sexual body parts? Don't women have the same psychic structure (nadis, sushumna, chakras etc) as men? Is the path to enlightenment different for women? When examining the statement, it is very difficult to determine whether or not that statement might be true, especially since I am not a woman.

 

However, when I tell you that it was Osho who said that statement in his "Book of Secrets", then Osho was the messenger. Now you know for sure that it is a nonsensical statement, designed to coerce women into a typecast, which really has nothing to do with enlightenment. Just Osho playing his old tricks again.

 

If you are going to educate people and help them along the path, you have to present statements and information within the context of which they were given. You have to give them the same opportunites and facts so that they can determine the truth for themselves. Making someone feeling like an ignorant person is a tactic that some quasi spiritual people use in order to ensnare and control people (like Osho and Jed Mckenna).

 

Also, I'm kind of insulted here. Instead of addressing the topic that I was discussing, you went off and quoted a tyrade of non-related text from posts that you yourself posted on other web pages/forums years ago. And, you did not provide any link or indication that you were quoting from old sources.

 

http://www.eboards4all.com/717093/messages/49924.html

 

http://www.ajna.com/spirituality/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=3482

 

I see no point in talking to you. You make up your own rules and have your own ethics.

 

TI

[hydrogen]

I see no point in talking to you. You make up your own rules and have your own ethics.

 

It'll be interesting to see Vmarco and Sree (from the tao of dying thread) having a conversation.