Christianity

[Nungali]

6 hours ago, Sahaja said:

Perhaps there are redeeming characteristics of religions when practiced at the  individual level  but unfortunately when people collectively create religious organizational beliefs and structure  it at some point brings out the worst in us collectively. I used to think the Eastern religions were better than the Abrahamic religions in this regard but recent history in Asia has shown me that there may be something more systematic at work intrinsic to organized religion in general. Perhaps it’s nationalism disguised as religion(or vice versa), or maybe it’s more a fundamental flaw in us that gets magnified when we act collectively rationalizing self serving behaviors on beliefs beyond ourselves. 

 

'Acting collectively'  is dangerous , as the ' collective human being'  has shown itself to be a  violent psychopath .

 

sorry if I sound a bit negative but just read an article about the popes executioner that didn’t sit well with me.  

 

Then dont read 'Vicars of Christ'  - a history of the papacy.   

 

[Nungali]

5 hours ago, Maddie said:

 

Christ is the English translation of the Greek word Christos which is a translation from the Aramaic word for Messiah which means "anointed one" 

 

Ohhh ....... you and your facts  !  

 

You are spoiling a New Age Christian make it up as you go along  thingo here .

 

 

[Salvijus]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Ohhh ....... you and your facts  !  

 

You are spoiling a New Age Christian make it up as you go along  thingo here .

 

 

 

Bro. These facts did nothing... Yet you're so desperate to give it credit. Just so you could ride the energy of someone's discontent to express your own personal discontent and add power to it. How lame. 

 

If you don't like what I'm saying, you can do that by engaging in an open discussion with me directly where we can exchange ideas like normal humans do. Not with these snarky comments in your private circle of people. That's very disingenuous behavior. 

 

Consider yourself schooled

Edited June 1 by Salvijus

[Mark Foote]

23 hours ago, Salvijus said:

 

Your identity can either go to zero, or it can go to infinity.
 

 

 

I'll guess that by "identity can go to zero", you mean something like:

 

And again … a good [person], by passing quite beyond the plane of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, enters on and abides in the stopping of perception and feeling; and when [such a person] has seen by means of wisdom [their] cankers are caused to be destroyed. And… this [person] does not imagine [his or her self] to be aught or anywhere or in anything.

 

(Pali Text Society MN III 42-45, Vol III pg 92-94; emphasis added)
 

 

And that by "(your identity) can go to infinity", you mean something like:

 

(77) Jesus said:  I am the Light that is above them all, I am the All, the All came forth from Me and the All attained to Me. Cleave a (piece of) wood, I am there; lift up the stone and you will find Me there.

 

(The Gospel According to Thomas, coptic text established and translated by A. Guillaumont, H.-CH. Puech, G. Quispel, W. Till and Yassah ‘Abd Al Masih, p 43 log. 77, ©1959 E. J. Brill)
 

 

That identity "gone to infinity" should be there, when wood is cleaved or a stone lifted, right?

 

 

Quote

 

If your identity goes to zero, you take absolutely zero responsibility for anything (detachment) .
 

 

 

I can see where you might think that.  In Gautama's way of living, detachment appears in a particular context--here are four thoughts initial and sustained that Gautama claimed were the arising of mindfulness with regard to the mind in his way of living:

 

Aware of mind I shall breathe in. Aware of mind I shall breathe out.

 

(One) makes up one’s mind:

 

Gladdening my mind I shall breathe in. Gladdening my mind I shall breathe out.

 

Composing my mind I shall breathe in. Composing my mind I shall breathe out.

 

Detaching my mind I shall breathe in. Detaching my mind I shall breathe out.

 

 

(SN V 312, Pali Text Society Vol V p 275-276; tr. F. L. Woodward; masculine pronouns replaced, re-paragraphed)

 

You may have been thinking of "dispassion", that appears in the thoughts initial and sustained with regard to the state of mind:

 

(One) makes up one’s mind:

 

Contemplating impermanence I shall breathe in. Contemplating impermanence I shall breathe out.

 

Contemplating dispassion I shall breathe in. Contemplating dispassion I shall breathe out.

 

Contemplating cessation I shall breathe in. Contemplating cessation I shall breathe out.

 

Contemplating renunciation I shall breathe in. Contemplating renunciation I shall breathe out.

 

(ibid)

 

What's referred to by "dispassion" there is dispassion with regard to the painful, the pleasant, or the "neither-painful-nor-yet-pleasant".  "Cessation" is the cessation of "determinate thought" in action of speech, deed, or mind, not the cessation of action per se but the cessation of habit or volition in action.

 

 

Quote

 

If your identity goes to infinity, you take the responsibility for everything. (compassion and love) 

 

That will determine if you're a Buddha or a Christ. Both these energies have a role to play in creation. 
 

 

 

Something that might interest you--the practice that Gautama associated with some of the further states of concentration:

 

[One] dwells, having suffused the first quarter [of the world] with friendliness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; just so above, below, across; [one] dwells having suffused the whole world everywhere, in every way, with a mind of friendliness that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence. [One] dwells having suffused the first quarter with a mind of compassion… with a mind of sympathetic joy… with a mind of equanimity that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence.

 

(MN I 38, Pali Text Society Vol I p 48)

 

 

The first of the further states was “the infinity of ether”. Gautama identified the state with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of compassion”. The second of the further states (“the infinity of consciousness”) Gautama identified with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of sympathetic joy”, and the third (“the infinity of nothingness”) he identified with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of equanimity”.

 

 

 

Edited June 1 by Mark Foote

[Nungali]

18 hours ago, Salvijus said:

 

Bro. These facts did nothing...

 

Did nothing ?   They established the actual meaning of a word .  But hey ,  go for a free-form interpretation if thats what you want .

 

Yet you're so desperate to give it credit.

 

I am 'desperate' to give facts credit ?     Okay then .

 

Just so you could ride the energy of someone's discontent to express your own personal discontent and add power to it. How lame. 

 

Wait .... who was 'discontent '  ,  Maddie  ?   She wasn't being 'discontent '  .... a bit 'correcty'  perhaps .

 

If you don't like what I'm saying, you can do that by engaging in an open discussion with me directly where we can exchange ideas like normal humans do. Not with these snarky comments in your private circle of people.

 

Private circle of people  ?      Whatever , here is a question , are you , yourself a Christian ?

 

That's very disingenuous behavior. 

 

I am a what now ?  ... Hang on, I will look it up :

1. Not straightforward or candid; insincere or calculating.
2. Pretending to be unaware or unsophisticated; faux-naïf.
3. Unaware or uninformed; naive.

1 .... mmmmm , possibly .

2 ..... definitely !   I do that a lot here .

3 ......   what ?  ... I can be both  aware and  unaware at the same time 

 

'Faux naif '    ?  yeah ,  thats me 

 

Dis - en - genius , mate !

 

 

Consider yourself schooled

 

 

 

 

[old3bob]

"when ego goes to zero,  Spirit encounters no resistance".

[Salvijus]

6 hours ago, Nungali said:

Did nothing ?   They established the actual meaning of a word . 

 

Yes and that did nothing to discredit the interpretation I gave. And yet you swooped in with a "damn girl, show him the facts" as if it did anything. Like cmon.... 

 

6 hours ago, Nungali said:

Wait .... who was 'discontent ' Maddie ?

 

Let's just say "not happy about some things I sayed". Yea, both of you  which is fine if you express it and talk to people directly. And have a normal communication. It becomes lame when these people start to group up to make sarcastic jokes and ride each other's energy to gain support for their discontent. 

 

6 hours ago, Nungali said:

here is a question , are you , yourself a Christian ?

 

I don't fit into any category. At the same time I could fit into any catagory of religion.

 

I like Christianity tho, but I never read the Bible even. Little bits of new testimon only. 

 

Like I sayed before, according to me. Whoever follows their heart (love) instead of the impulse of ego (fear) is a Christian to me. 

 

If you must label me anything, you can call me Zarathustrian.

 

Edited June 2 by Salvijus

[Forestgreen]

31 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

 

I like Christianity tho, but I never read the Bible even. Little bits of new testimon only. 

 

Like I sayed before, according to me. Whoever follows their heart (love) instead of the impulse of ego (fear) is a Christian to me. 

Your image of christianity is nice, but it excludes a huge amount of people, past and present, that actually read that book and form(ed) their lifes after quotes from it. 

[Salvijus]

@Mark Foote

 

You have an interesting way of expressing yourself. But I wish you'd speak more from the heart tho not from scriptures. It would be easier for me to connect with what's going on in your head and reply. Because a lot of it flies over my head somehow  just my personal feedback. But here's my reply anyways. In a general direction about what you were talking about. 

 

Let's face it, if you achieve total dispassion, there will be no interest to ingage with the world. And that's the whole point of zen. To enter a complete dissociation with the world, to become primordial space that doesn't respond to anything. And if one succeeds in that. He will become absorbed in emptyness, motionless. Perhaps even breathless. You become zero. And that's fine. 

 

But there is another way also. A way of absolute passion. The way of allowing your energy of desire to run free at full force to discover that the energy which creates everything and makes everything move is actually Love. And it originates from The Source itself. And it's non dual. It's the same force of desire in every person's heart that makes their heart beat, that makes their muscles move. etc. It's the force that makes every atom move in existence and YOU ARE IT. 

 

By following the path of desire one begins to discover the difference between a pure desire from The Source. And a corrupted form it can take when ego usurps that pure energy for its own selfish reasons. When the we begin to say YES more and more to our true desire, to what we love rather than what we fear. We align ourselves with the will of God more and more. And when love becomes the only thing that ever moves you. You become one with God's will. You become one with God. You become infinite love. 

 

The level of your disspasion is the level of your Zen. The level of your passion is the level of your Christ. You can cultivate both. Actually only if you have both will you achieve full enlightenment. A bodisattva kind of thing. Enlightened masculine and enlightened feminine together. Becoming void is not the end of enlightenment like many buddhists believe. 

Edited June 2 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

35 minutes ago, Forestgreen said:

Your image of christianity is nice, but it excludes a huge amount of people, past and present, that actually read that book and form(ed) their lifes after quotes from it. 

There is another way to look at it.

 

My interpretations enrich the old teachings of Christianity without taking away or contradicting anything that was sayed about it in the classics. My explanations are simply deeper than the surface level of understanding that people have of Christianity. 

Edited June 2 by Salvijus

[Paradoxal]

I would argue (and anger a lot of people in doing so) that Christianity, and extending to all Abrahamic religion, is "weird" because it was not designed in its surviving form to be a belief system nor to be a spiritual path, though it does retain some use as both of those. Rather, these religions were tailor-made for taking over and destroying existing culture.

I argue this on three main points:

1. Monotheism itself is war-like in nature, because it inherently rejects all "outside" belief systems as they are not the "one true god." This means that for any monotheistic religion to work, it needs to subjugate and reject all competition, rather than coexist.
2. Abrahamic religions take stories and parables out of context and attempt to claim them as their own, and continue to do so even as new belief systems pop up. For some examples of this, the story of the Tower of Babel and the great flood were both historically sourced from polytheistic Mesopotamian belief systems, while more recently, you get people trying to claim that the Abrahamic god is the universe (or the astral) itself to appeal to the new age crowd and bring them into the fold. 
3. Historic evidence further proves the above two points, as the primary way Abrahamic religion has spread is through empire and war. Most recently, of course, there's ISIS and the middle east spreading Islam through force, but even the heavy South Korean Christian denominations were created after the US destroyed their local culture while "freeing" them from communism; we, the Americans, swooped in after destroying them to offer a "savior" in Christianity. Historically, this seems to have been the favored method of spreading Abrahamic religion (though, Judaism has not done this much in recent years due to Christian suppression, we can see it happening actively in Israel right now which weakens the argument that they are somehow different).

 

Now, this is not to say that there is not value in Abrahamic religion, as I personally know many people whose lives it has enriched. It certainly contains grains of spiritual truth, and many of the parables have profound lessons that still hold up today.

 

Crucially, however, empire and colonization also held benefits for some people; this did not make those systems a net gain for the world either. If Abrahamic religion were willing to acknowledge that there were other gods and belief systems out there that could stand on equal ground with it, it would be perfectly fine; again, however, it seems tailor-made to *not* do that, so I don't expect it to happen. 

 

[Salvijus]

@Paradoxal

 

There's no religion or spiritual tradition that hasn't been distorted and made use by ego for it's selfish purposes. 

 

In no way should that be a marker for the original value that is inside those teachings imo. 

Edited June 2 by Salvijus

[Paradoxal]

6 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

@Paradoxal

 

There's no religion or spiritual tradition that hasn't been distorted and made use by ego for it's selfish purposes. 

 

In no way should that be a marker for the original value that is inside those teachings imo. 

I am not claiming that's a marker for the original value, rather, to me it appears the entire religion is structured around control rather than spirituality. Just as a good lie always contains a little truth, so too does a good scam.   

 

 

[Salvijus]

12 minutes ago, Paradoxal said:

to me it appears the entire religion is structured around control rather than spirituality. 

 

Many people have that impression probably. But there are groups of people who practice that religion in its authentic form aswell. And go really really deep. They are not as mainstream unfortunately. (As they say, the most popular stuff is never the most profound stuff) . So I understand why you would have that impression that you currently have. But it's just a problem of lack of awareness here. Lack of proper research so to speak. 

Edited June 2 by Salvijus

[Paradoxal]

1 minute ago, Salvijus said:

Many people have that impression probably. But there are groups of people who practice that religion in its authentic form aswell. And go really really deep. They are not as mainstream unfortunately. So I understand why you would have that impression that you currently have. 

Even the idea that zen's goal is to "smother the passions" is mistaken; this is known as "dead tree zen" and is a mistake in practice, rather than a goal. Likewise, equating "Christ" to something a person can have a "level" of ignores the very definition of Christ. I mean no offense to you by this, but I would highly recommend at least reading the source material before presenting a logical argument on it; otherwise, it brings into question everything you say. I will not argue this further with someone who has not even read the book that he or she claims to have "deep understanding" of.

 

I will, however, agree with you that there do indeed exist sects within each religion that have valuable esoteric practices in place and that people do benefit from these practices.

[Salvijus]

@Paradoxal

 

I could have made arguments why disidentification leads to the end of activity. And How passion is the Source of all activity. And i could've had a discussion why love can come in degrees aswell. But if you want to stop talking, that's fine. Take care. 

Edited June 2 by Salvijus

[Forestgreen]

2 hours ago, Salvijus said:

 

My interpretations enrich the old teachings of Christianity without taking away or contradicting anything that was sayed about it in the classics.

Didn't you write that you hadn't actually read the Bible? 

If so, you have no ground for that statement.

Personally, I never read through it, managed the books of Moses and the four first books in the new teastament, but I would be surprised if they are not full of contradicting info. 

If I recall right, in the pre-jesus material, genocide and colonization was recommended. 

[Salvijus]

22 minutes ago, Forestgreen said:

Didn't you write that you hadn't actually read the Bible? 

I didn't read through it by I'm aware of its general content just by listening to different teachers and cultural upbringing etc. 

 

22 minutes ago, Forestgreen said:

I would be surprised if they are not full of contradicting info. 

If I recall right, in the pre-jesus material, genocide and colonization was recommended. 

 

That's a good point. There are many interpretations of the Bible and new testament. Everyone interprets the material according to their own intelligence and spiritual development and often it contradicts other people's interpretation. 

 

Maybe i should rephrase and correct my inital statement. I'm offering just one interpretation out of many. If it makes sense, enjoy it. If it doesn't make sense, then people can share their own views and present their own most logical interpretation that they have. That's what discussions are all about i think. 

Edited June 2 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

Edit. I realized i probably shouldn't have sayed that. 

Edited June 2 by Salvijus

[Nungali]

17 hours ago, Salvijus said:

 

Yes and that did nothing to discredit the interpretation I gave. And yet you swooped in with a "damn girl, show him the facts" as if it did anything. Like cmon.... 

 

Hey !   .... I never said that , but you put it in quotation marks .  

 

Let's just say "not happy about some things I sayed". Yea, both of you  which is fine if you express it and talk to people directly. And have a normal communication. It becomes lame when these people start to group up to make sarcastic jokes and ride each other's energy to gain support for their discontent. 

 

I don't fit into any category. At the same time I could fit into any catagory of religion.

 

Eh ?   You only fit into categories  regarding religion but not other things ?

 

I like Christianity tho, but I never read the Bible even. Little bits of new testimon only. 

 

Well, like I said , a New Age make it up as you go along Christian  ... that was fairly obvious from what you where saying . I dont see the problem you have with me observing that , and as you say above, you fit right into it .

 

Like I sayed before, according to me. Whoever follows their heart (love) instead of the impulse of ego (fear) is a Christian to me. 

 

Okay ... I must have missed the  'to me'  bit before ?

 

17 hours ago, Salvijus said:

If you must label me anything, you can call me Zarathustrian.

 

 

Cool . Could you explain to me the difference between being a Zarathustrian. and a Zoroastrian  ? 

 

What do you like about that religion ?

 

- actually, its one of my favorites , I could adopt it, with some modifications  ..... I guess that would make me a ' Neo - Zoroastrian '  .... not a  New Age  make it up as I go a along one , more of a ' searching for the original  form ' Zoroastrian  ... a type  of    'select parts of it , as I go a long '    type .  .

[Nungali]

16 hours ago, Paradoxal said:

I would argue (and anger a lot of people in doing so) that Christianity, and extending to all Abrahamic religion, is "weird" because it was not designed in its surviving form to be a belief system nor to be a spiritual path, though it does retain some use as both of those. Rather, these religions were tailor-made for taking over and destroying existing culture.

I argue this on three main points:

1. Monotheism itself is war-like in nature, because it inherently rejects all "outside" belief systems as they are not the "one true god." This means that for any monotheistic religion to work, it needs to subjugate and reject all competition, rather than coexist.
2. Abrahamic religions take stories and parables out of context and attempt to claim them as their own, and continue to do so even as new belief systems pop up. For some examples of this, the story of the Tower of Babel and the great flood were both historically sourced from polytheistic Mesopotamian belief systems, while more recently, you get people trying to claim that the Abrahamic god is the universe (or the astral) itself to appeal to the new age crowd and bring them into the fold. 
3. Historic evidence further proves the above two points, as the primary way Abrahamic religion has spread is through empire and war. Most recently, of course, there's ISIS and the middle east spreading Islam through force, but even the heavy South Korean Christian denominations were created after the US destroyed their local culture while "freeing" them from communism; we, the Americans, swooped in after destroying them to offer a "savior" in Christianity. Historically, this seems to have been the favored method of spreading Abrahamic religion (though, Judaism has not done this much in recent years due to Christian suppression, we can see it happening actively in Israel right now which weakens the argument that they are somehow different).

 

Now, this is not to say that there is not value in Abrahamic religion, as I personally know many people whose lives it has enriched. It certainly contains grains of spiritual truth, and many of the parables have profound lessons that still hold up today.

 

Crucially, however, empire and colonization also held benefits for some people; this did not make those systems a net gain for the world either. If Abrahamic religion were willing to acknowledge that there were other gods and belief systems out there that could stand on equal ground with it, it would be perfectly fine; again, however, it seems tailor-made to *not* do that, so I don't expect it to happen. 

 

 

Here is a dynamic hidden within your point 1 .

 

In  other cultures that admit  henotheism  ( unlike Judaism which struggled with it .... that is , the evidence is within the scripture but they dont like to admit it )  it would be 'Our God is more powerful and we will defeat you and your God .'  And then they loose .... <shrug> I guess your God was more powerful after all .

 

But if you are pushing only YOUR God as the supreme powerful all or only ruler , and you go into battle under his banner and protection ..... and you loose  ?

 

God must be punishing us for doing something wrong .  Its a set up for a big guilt trip .  Eventually people began to believe they where born into the world, already with this 'I done something wrong - guilt  trip  ' .   - not healthy .

[Nungali]

14 hours ago, Salvijus said:

I didn't read through it by I'm aware of its general content just by listening to different teachers and cultural upbringing etc. 

 

But earlier you said the 'general public' and some teachers twist the meaning , but now it appears it is that source you learnt about it from .... a little confusing .

 

That's a good point. There are many interpretations of the Bible and new testament. Everyone interprets the material according to their own intelligence and spiritual development and often it contradicts other people's interpretation. 

 

Maybe i should rephrase and correct my inital statement. I'm offering just one interpretation out of many. If it makes sense, enjoy it. If it doesn't make sense, then people can share their own views and present their own most logical interpretation that they have. That's what discussions are all about i think. 

 

And often it includes reasons why one interpretation may not be considered a valid opinion .

 

[Nungali]

14 hours ago, Salvijus said:

Edit. I realized i probably shouldn't have sayed that. 

 

   You probably should not have   said     sayed  either     . 

 

[Paradoxal]

37 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Here is a dynamic hidden within your point 1 .

 

In  other cultures that admit  henotheism  ( unlike Judaism which struggled with it .... that is , the evidence is within the scripture but they dont like to admit it )  it would be 'Our God is more powerful and we will defeat you and your God .'  And then they loose .... <shrug> I guess your God was more powerful after all .

 

But if you are pushing only YOUR God as the supreme powerful all or only ruler , and you go into battle under his banner and protection ..... and you loose  ?

 

God must be punishing us for doing something wrong .  Its a set up for a big guilt trip .  Eventually people began to believe they where born into the world, already with this 'I done something wrong - guilt  trip  ' .   - not healthy .

Exactly! Thank you for unpacking that haha! 

 

Part of the issue in the modern (popular) versions of these religions is also the demonization of other divinities, which causes undue social friction. They acknowledge other gods as mere 'demons,' which is a huge insult to anyone who worships those gods. Basically makes it impossible to retain cordial relations between cultures of different faiths.  

[Nungali]

38 minutes ago, Paradoxal said:

Exactly! Thank you for unpacking that haha! 

 

Part of the issue in the modern (popular) versions of these religions is also the demonization of other divinities, which causes undue social friction. They acknowledge other gods as mere 'demons,' which is a huge insult to anyone who worships those gods. Basically makes it impossible to retain cordial relations between cultures of different faiths.  

 

Yep, thats why I find Zoroastrianism different . Part of their philosophy seems to have been an experiment in not only allowing diversity but encouraging it ;   well, yes, we have taken over your country , but we can help you rebuild your temples and re install your Gods there .

IMO 'common' sense , although not too common an attitude at all . .

 

One company I worked for (film production) handed out warm woolies to keep, rain wear , and the nurse came around every morning with vit C , B and an herbal  pills  (all free )  'How come " I asked . Answer ; 'healthy happy workers are good workers '   Thats an intelligent approach .   friends son did the same , known him since he was a baby , now he has his own kids and a very successful plumbing business , at an early stage he confided in me ; If you work hard and honest and are truthful and nice to people , you get more work and they pay you better .'  ... smart kid !