Jesus in India ( Himalayas)

[oak]

18 minutes ago, old3bob said:

 

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater does matter...thus throwing out possible pointers to that which is beyond pointers is no better...

 

What matters is the teaching delivered with words and symbolic actions, most actions performed by "Jesus" were symbolic. To have a notion of their meaning one has to study the whole book. 

Anyway, the book of Revelation speaks of a book that is sealed with seven seals. Will an intellectual or skeptical approach break any of those seven seals? Don't think so.

 

Edited January 7 by oak

[Salvijus]

Some entertaining videos:

 

How to meditate like Christ. 

Jesus and the rainbow body/immortality 

 

Edited January 7 by Salvijus

[Maddie]

40 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

And his ministry on this planet created huge waves of revolution. He planted new seeds in the matrix of human consciousness that there is a better way to live life and inspired thousands of generations to follow in his footsteps and seek for something higher.

 

The behavior of the church throughout the centuries seems to invalidate this claim. The crusades and inquisitions, along with witch trials are just a few examples of many. 

[snowymountains]

18 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

The behavior of the church throughout the centuries seems to invalidate this claim. The crusades and inquisitions, along with witch trials are just a few examples of many. 

 

Of course these things were not in line with Jesus' teachings, as the sex and abuse scandals in Buddhist circles didn't align with Buddha's teachings.

 

I don't see how Jesus and his teachings or the Buddha and his teachings are responsible for these actions though.

 

Churches and other religious institutions often become all about power, ignoring the mandate they were founded upon.

 

If someone or something operates behind closed doors, has insufficient transparency or just gives an odd vide, stay away.

One thing that's important in all this is that nobody is licensed to represent God or bring us in touch with our innate state of mind or [fill your favorite spirituality premise].

 

Folks should choose their mentors carefully, work with them only for as long as the relationship is healthy, stay away from institutional imperatives etc.

 

It's important to take people for what they are, ...people, we should not put institutions or spiritual persons on a pedestal.

Edited January 7 by snowymountains

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, snowymountains said:

I don't see how Jesus and his teachings or the Buddha and his teachings are responsible for these actions though.

 

I mention this because the claim is that Jesus' teachings were so revolutionary that they changed the world for the better. 

 

It seems in reality they did not.

[snowymountains]

7 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

I mention this because the claim is that Jesus' teachings were so revolutionary that they changed the world for the better. 

 

It seems in reality they did not.

 

Depends on the time horizon you look at.

They did change the world for the better, the empire was forced to transform.

 

Later, after it consolidated power, the Church too acted exactly like a narc emperor would had acted, but that came later.

 

We need to separate the teachings from those who claim to be the representatives of the creator of the teachings.

The same applies to Buddhist teachings, they have helped so many people, but for sure they didn't act as intended for those who found themselves in some Guru's sex cult.

The same applies to all teachings and institutions that are meant to apply them.

Edited January 7 by snowymountains

[Maddie]

3 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

Depends on the time horizon you look at.

They did change the world for the better, the empire was forced to transform.

 

Later, after it consolidated power, the Church too acted exactly like a narc emperor would had acted, but that came later.

 

We need to separate the teachings from those who claim to be the representatives of the creator of the teachings.

The same applies to Buddhist teachings, they have helped so many people, but for sure they didn't act as intended for those who found themselves in some Guru's sex cult.

The same applies to all teachings and institutions that are meant to apply them.

 

I don't think the fact that there have been Buddhists that have done bad things negates the efficacy of Jesus' teachings.

 

I'm sure this can vary from place to place and person to person, but in my experience some of the worst and most uncompassionate people I have knows often tend to be the most enthusiastic for Jesus. I live in a very evangelical Christian area, and these people seem quite hate full, and on a mass scale. 

 

Jesus' teachings did nothing to end slavery, improve women's and human rights. All of these things were secular ideas. So my point is if his teachings were really so great, why have all the advances in human rights not come from Jesus' teachings? 

[snowymountains]

Just now, Maddie said:

 

I don't think the fact that there have been Buddhists that have done bad things negates the efficacy of Jesus' teachings.

 

I'm sure this can vary from place to place and person to person, but in my experience some of the worst and most uncompassionate people I have knows often tend to be the most enthusiastic for Jesus. I live in a very evangelical Christian area, and these people seem quite hate full, and on a mass scale. 

 

Jesus' teachings did nothing to end slavery, improve women's and human rights. All of these things were secular ideas. So my point is if his teachings were really so great, why have all the advances in human rights not come from Jesus' teachings? 

 

Bear in mind that spiritual practices more often than not are inherited through family customs, not because of embracing the ideals of a spiritual practice. So no surprises there, people who are full of hate happened to have a Christian upbringing, which they've kept in terms of facade without really applying any spiritual teachings to their daily lives.

 

In my view at least, a person's spiritual orientation don't mean jack about what type of person they are.

 

The institutions that did something concrete to end slavery globally were UK courts and the US senate, under the right presidency. These were not religious institutions.

 

Human rights is a post WWII concept, before that you need to look at concepts like "natural law", again e.g. in Britain, before the abolition throughout the empire, in the British Isles courts deemed there would be no slaves. I do believe that a Christian background is not unrelated to this, though obviously it's not something provable.

 

That said, of course countries that were/are predominantly Christian have also been involved in horrible things, like having slavery and doing slave trade in the first place, before abolishing it.

 

But for real changes you have to look at politics, spirituality can only loosely create a cultural background which may make some options loosely more likely. But give any religious institution just a little bit of executive power and I'll bet my money it's going to be abused.

[Apech]

46 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

The behavior of the church throughout the centuries seems to invalidate this claim. The crusades and inquisitions, along with witch trials are just a few examples of many. 

 

Does the slaughter of the Tamil Tigers by the Buddhist government of Sri Lanka or the treatment of the Rohinga in Burma invalidate the Buddha's teachings on compassion?

 

 

[snowymountains]

1 minute ago, Apech said:

 

Does the slaughter of the Tamil Tigers by the Buddhist government of Sri Lanka or the treatment of the Rohinga in Burma invalidate the Buddha's teachings on compassion?

 

 

 

There's way more than that and the sex cults by Gurus actually  No religious institution has a "clean" history, they often deviate from the principles they were founded on. This is not the principle's fault though.

[Salvijus]

54 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

The behavior of the church throughout the centuries seems to invalidate this claim. The crusades and inquisitions, along with witch trials are just a few examples of many. 

 

You won't be able to see the whole picture if you're only fixated on the negative. 

 

And besides what I feel from you is a strong resistance just to the idea that Jesus was a light bringer and a great benediction upon the earth. That is what is fueling all your responses and perception of the Story. You're not genuine in your pursuit to see the whole picture. 

Edited January 7 by Salvijus

[Maddie]

6 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Does the slaughter of the Tamil Tigers by the Buddhist government of Sri Lanka or the treatment of the Rohinga in Burma invalidate the Buddha's teachings on compassion?

 

 

 

This is "whataboutism". The topic was about Jesus' teachings being world changing, not about Buddhism. I have not found Jesus' teachings to be world changing. 

[Maddie]

2 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

 

You won't be able to see the whole picture if you're only fixated on the negative. 

 

And besides what I feel from you is a strong resistance to the idea that Jesus was a light bringer and a great benediction upon the earth. That is what is fueling all your responses and perception of the Story. You're not genuine in your pursuit to see the whole picture. 

 

If by healthy skepticism to a claim by looking at the evidence to those claims you mean "strong resistance" then sure, but then by that definition I have "strong resistance" to belief and Sant Clause, the Easter bunny, and the tooth fairy.    

[Salvijus]

9 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

If by healthy skepticism to a claim by looking at the evidence to those claims you mean "strong resistance" then sure, but then by that definition I have "strong resistance" to belief and Sant Clause, the Easter bunny, and the tooth fairy.    

It's not skeptism, you're afraid of something. And you need to trivialize the profound and mystical all the time because it somehow threatens your ego. This need to reduce everything to mundane of yours is coming from some kind of loyalty to the ego. It's not coming from a genuine search of truth. 

Edited January 7 by Salvijus

[Maddie]

2 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

It's not skeptism, you're afraid of something. And you need to trivialize the profound and mystical all the time because it somehow threatens your ego. This need to reduce everything to mundane of yours is coming from some kind of loyalty to the ego. 

 

It sounds like you are projecting motive on to me. 

[Salvijus]

8 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

It sounds like you are projecting motive on to me. 

 

It sounds to me you don't even realize yet what I'm pointing at inside you. 

Edited January 7 by Salvijus

[Cobie]

.

Edited January 7 by Cobie

[old3bob]

it's should be very obvious to most anyone that has reflected on spiritual maters and also  worldly matters that inner and outer forms of evil is always ready to co-opt, corrupt, pervert, invert and thus destroy spiritual teachings, its teachers, practices and people in general,  for those that don't understand that by now will they ever?

[Apech]

54 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

This is "whataboutism". The topic was about Jesus' teachings being world changing, not about Buddhism. I have not found Jesus' teachings to be world changing. 

you brought up the Crusades etc! 

[Master Logray]

43 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

This is "whataboutism". The topic was about Jesus' teachings being world changing, not about Buddhism. I have not found Jesus' teachings to be world changing. 

 

There is a general presumption that once Buddha/Jesus/Prophet came, then the world changes, the goods prevail from then on.   This is only a presumption.   Looking at history and see the human nature, all of them had not been always successful then and now.  Their legacies are not failure, but certainly not success everywhere every time, and sometimes their followers do more evil than good.  Just like some of your needles don't work.

 

To properly gauge their effectiveness, we may have to imagine a world where they never came.  What could have happened?  Would human race be better or worse?

 

 

[old3bob]

43 minutes ago, Master Logray said:

 

There is a general presumption that once Buddha/Jesus/Prophet came, then the world changes, the goods prevail from then on.   This is only a presumption.   Looking at history and see the human nature, all of them had not been always successful then and now.  Their legacies are not failure, but certainly not success everywhere every time, and sometimes their followers do more evil than good.  Just like some of your needles don't work.

 

To properly gauge their effectiveness, we may have to imagine a world where they never came.  What could have happened?  Would human race be better or worse?

 

 

 

and there is also the fact that earth is a battleground, and some need a battleground to prove out who and what they are, including falling and getting back up again, whereas the higher realms of heaven are not battlegrounds since the beings there have already proven themselves out.  And some of them  out inherent compassion come to earth to help out humans knowing that the battleground here will largely remain but that some of us can move on to better realms or even total freedom of "enlightenment".  (although someday the whole earth besides just pockets of it  will also evolve enough to become a heaven like state, and the beings that refuse that will have to wait for only god knows how long for chances to further evolve where ever it may be)  

Edited January 7 by old3bob

[Maddie]

1 hour ago, Cobie said:

 

 

 

Exactly.

 

E.g. see this post, in reply to dan tien practice for dealing with emotions:

 

 

It’s called ‘deflecting’ in psychology. 
 

 

 

You don't seem to like me very much. 

[Maddie]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

you brought up the Crusades etc! 

 

because the topic was on the effect of Jesus' teaching

[Apech]

2 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

because the topic was on the effect of Jesus' teaching

Deus vult 

[Apech]

21 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

You don't seem to like me very much. 

I like you.