Progressive Liberalism is a Mental Dissorder (merged)

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by u crank

Have had a similar experience.

Congrats, if that is so, then you are a fully realised Buddha, the returning messiah in Chrsitian terminology, and you are far ahead of me - since I never had a Satori experience like this, I think. My mere doubt proves that I never had it for sure.

I would ask this question, Skybird, in regards to any so called enlightenment. Is it only enlightenment when it meets the criteria set by some people who claim to have achieved it or claim to know what it is?

You already went into the trap here. that is why Zen does not like written traditions and thweopreticl studies and clasiscal teaching, but focusses on the ordinary things to do. The relation between master and student, in Asia traditionally differently settled than in the West, is beyond words, and is utmost direct, and must be so. That is hard to explain and cannot even be "described" in words. There is nothing to be described in words, you see. Words just mislead, they call into life all the catogorial thinking and polariszatrion of the images in your minds. A rose is not a rose when you call it that. A rose is the immediate, direct sensation of seeing it, smelling it, hearing the wind in its leaves, seeing it bowing in the moving air - but you cannot pack that into words: youmust experience it.

that is what it is about: own, direct, immediate experience. Awareness in everything you do, every moment you realise, everything that happens to you. Another Zen story goes like this:"Wonder oh marvellous wonder! I chop wood and carry water!" I liked to lead students' focus either to their breathing - or to their hands. Watching it, looking at it, seeing it moving, turningk, the fingers, the figurs you can form with it, the things it can do: what a wonderful tool a human hand is! A true and rteal miracle by design.

You see, there is nothign that can be taught, and there is nothign that you miss. You just need to ralsie it by giving up illusions. Enlightenment is not about something to be gained, but about something to be let. There is nothing you can gain. You must not "do". Just let things, and lead your awareness to what is going on in the focus of your mind. Be aware. Witness, do not judge.

What right do they have to make such a claim? This smacks of the same kind of religious indoctrination and dogma that some here have railed against. I realize that meditation and Buddhism are Atheistic in belief but since atheists believe that God is an invention of man then in all cases we are left with the mere opinions of other humans regardless of how they arrived at them.

Sigh. Atheists do not believe something. Atheists say that if somebody claims God existsa, they want evidence, and until then they say it is unlikjely that he does excist, like it is un likely to thinkg that babies are brought by the stgork as long as you do not prove it. Relgious people claim to kjnow how things are and that God is. Atheists know that they do not know. in logics, you cannot prove the nonexiostence of something, it is impossible, like you cannot divide numbers by zero.

originally, Chan does not hold a dogma or law code that is being told. You seem to compare it to church business, or any of the great world religions' practices. It is not like that - though there were many sects in Buddhism that brought it down to the level of ordinary religion indeed, for reasons of political control and influence over the crowds - Asia was not immune to make the same mistakes like the europeans did with Jesus). People, crowds crave for being led, they want to be led, and thus they fall so easily for false prophets and illmeaning leaders.

There is no manual with categories for englightenment, and when the candidate scores enough points, tha n he is made a Buddha. Nonsense. Master and student have a most direct relation and - bull, I try the impossible although I should know it better. Forget what I said, its all bull. In reply to your question I give you to different alternatives instead to learn about it.

First a wonderful film with almost no words in it, from Korea, I think 1988. "Why has Bodhidharma left for the East?" The film is beautiful like a poem that has been transformed into pictures, it is very calm and uses almost no words. Watch it not with your eyes, but with your heart, and you will learn a lot about what you ask for here. You can find out about it here: LINK.

Second, the only book that I have kept from my former Buddhist library (that I collected in my foolish years is a book by my secind mentor, after I had left Berlin and my first one had died: Wolfgang Kopp: Free yourself of everything. Radical guidance in the spirit of Chan and Christian Mysticism. Cheap kindle version available. The book is not too long, is straight and has no time to waste with mild politeness and flattering. It is somewhat uncompromised and leaves the reader no space to evade in srearch of comfortable consolation and shortcuts. This book is a bazooka against candy-sweet esoteric fantasy-religion and rainbow-coloured naivety. It compares Christian and Chan texts, and teaches you why it is important to die the "mystical death". Period. I have recommended this book often - most people do not read beyond the first few pages - they do not like the uncompromised directness of the text. You want easy solutions and some more entertainment? Spiritual fireworks and happy group sit-ins? Then look elsewhere. what the book does not tell you is about the practice, you cannot teach that in words, you must DO it, and preferrably under supervision by a realised master. Adn these guys are rare, I tell you. I consider myself to be an extremnelyl blessed and gifted man that I were found by such rare persons not juzst once but even twice in my life. I'm a lucky dog. The author btw, was the one who kicked my a$$ and threw me out again vcery early, saying that he coulkd not teach me any more and that nmow I should teach meditation mywself to pepple, which I did for several years. Without his well-meant aggression i maybe would never have gotten that act of my life together - due to fear.
Its the only book I hand to people when they ask for a book about Buddhism. academical study is all nice and well when you want to write a paper, but for your own spiritual cause it helps not at all. It even is a hindering obstacle, and deafens your mind. Find a real master. Or better: let yourself get found. When you are ripe for it, you will be found.

Maybe so but Buddhism has some remarkable beliefs. One is rebirth, a process whereby beings go through a succession of lifetimes as one of many possible forms of sentient life, each running from conception to death. I wonder if you believe this.

I do not know whether it is like this, but I warn to take symbols too literal. I find it very unlikely that I get reborn as a worm when I behave too badly, however, I think nothing goes lost in this unioverse, and nothing gets added, and every cause is followed by a consequnce, no matter how subtle it may be, no matter how well it may be hidden in complexity. Buddha was asked oine day whether there is a surviving indiovidual soul, and he said a clear and sounding "No". However, the thing to be mentionjed here is the idera of atman and an-atman, ego and non-ego. For buddhism, our egolk our ordinary self-conceptions, are just an illusion thatz feeds itself and lets us beolieve in dualiostic terms basiong on the dseparation between "me" and "the world". This individual ego/atman runs by motoions of the mind, which are classified in five categories of decreaisng matetrial density, called skandhas. Buddha denied the lasting nature of such a sould or ego or atman, however he taught that the real self is beyond the individual level, is a non-self (anatman), and maybe it can be grabbed in that nordic and Indsian idea of the collective "world soul". However. That already is much os destracting theory again that helps you nothing in mastering this life that you must live right now, in this moment. I personally am very surfe that not the smallest individual qualkity of myself will survive beyoidn my death. But I do not rule out that there is something beyond death. Of course that makes it difficult for me to beleiie a too linear and simplified idea like causal, linear rebirthing or reincarnation. maybe Carl sagan pout it well when saying "We are all star stuff". When hearing that the first time, for a long time I saw no need to find words in reply to that.

I for one do not care what I come back as, as long as it is not a hamster.

This world is transoitory, and thus life is suffering - the most basic truth in buddhism. Maybe the trick is not to come back at all. And maybe it is altruism making you agreeing to come back nevertheless.

One can play the thinking game until all heaven falls down. Better focus on what you are doing right now. Send all that holiness to hell, and get your things done, and don't do one thing - with your mind being somewhere else. Thats more worth than a hundred temple visits , fifty clever books you learn to recite freely, or a spell given by the pastor.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Congrats, if that is so, then you are a fully realised Buddha, the returning messiah in Chrsitian terminology.....

The key word there was similar. I think you know what I meant, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

Originally Posted by Skybird

Sigh. Atheists do not believe something...

My original thought here had nothing to do with Atheism, but rather with Buddhism and meditation and Atheism's view of them. Buddhism is a religion, granted one without a deity. Meditation and Zen are directly related to this religion. For Atheists to criticize other religions and give Buddhism a pass is kinda funny.

Again I stress that Buddhism is not a theistic belief but many of the things criticized in Theistic religions are present in Buddhism. Some examples.

- The historical Buddha. Accounts of his life, discourses, and monastic rules are believed by Buddhists to have been summarized after his death and memorized by his followers. Various collections of teachings attributed to him were passed down by oral tradition, and first committed to writing about 400 years later. Gee that sounds familiar.

-Some of his teaching and beliefs.

Originally Posted by Skybird

Buddha was asked oine day whether there is a surviving indiovidual soul, and he said a clear and sounding "No".

Why should I believe this? Did he prove it or is it just his opinion? Billions of people would disagree.

-The Inequality of Women. Although in Western Buddhist practice this is not common in traditional practice and history, Buddhism is gender bias. Again this sounds familiar.

-Divisions within Buddhism. Buddhist traditions all claim that through a long and accurate teacher-student lineage, their practices were those ordained by the Buddha. Yet major divisions exist between the branches of Buddhism as to what practices are good, what are bad, and what the beliefs of the religion are.

There are many others but I think I've made my point. I realize that you are not a practising Buddhist but the relationship between Zen and meditation and Buddhism is quite plain. This has nothing to do with Atheism or belief in a deity. It is about practising something whose origins are just as questionable as any religion.

If Zen and meditation have made your life better this is good. I am happy for you but it is not for me. I do not wish to replace my present reality of mind with another. I am at peace and have no enemies. I am confident about the future. Am I delusional? Well that's possible but it's a chance we all take. It's a dangerous world.

P.S.

To any Buddhist who may read this, I hope I have not offended you. The points made were for the sake of the discussion.

To quote MH, May the Schwartz be with you.........

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by u crank

My original thought here had nothing to do with Atheism, but rather with Buddhism and meditation and Atheism's view of them. Buddhism is a religion, granted one without a deity. Meditation and Zen are directly related to this religion. For Atheists to criticize other religions and give Buddhism a pass is kinda funny.

Again I stress that Buddhism is not a theistic belief but many of the things criticized in Theistic religions are present in Buddhism. Some examples

Many Buddhist authors woudl disagree with you, and like me would point out that the essence of Buddhism does not matchz the purpose to serve as a funda,mewnt for rtelgion. However, I admitted that nevertheless it was picked up by politicians and preists and distrorted and complemented with rites and riotuals and hierarchies and all that institutional stuff that indeed turned them then into relgious business like any other. But to me that is not the real essence of it.

I find the parallels b etween essential Buddhism and essential Jesus'
message stunning. I am not the first comparing Zen and Christian Mysticism therefore. The book I recommended also bases on that. And indeed, I would claim that Christian Mysticism also is no relgion.

Why should I believe this? Did he prove it or is it just his opinion? Billions of people would disagree.

You should believe nothing, not him, not me, not anybody. You should care for yourself. From the Kalamas Sutra which is famous for its encouragement of freed inquiry, the one passage that to me is one of the most important revelations about Buddhism there is:

Rely not on the teacher/person, but on the teaching. Rely not on the words of the teaching, but on the spirit of the words. Rely not on theory, but on experience. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. Do not believe anything because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and the benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."

-The Inequality of Women. Although in Western Buddhist practice this is not common in traditional practice and history, Buddhism is gender bias. Again this sounds familiar.

That is a cultural thing going beyond Buddhism. Today there are Buddhist female abbots both in Asia and the West. However, as I admitted two times now, Buddhism was hijacked by politicians indeed to serve as a tool for controling the crowd, securing priviliges and gaining power and authority. But that is not what Buddha taught, and not what Jesus taught. Until today I cannot get the church and the story of the cleansing of the temple under one hood. And whgile I do not want to defend the Chineses' actions over Tibet, one thning theya claim in defence, is correct: the ruling of the Tibrtan schools of Buddhism has had a very supressive effect on the ordinary population, secured priviliges and control for kind of an elite caste. To me, Tibetan Buddhism is a Buddhist parallel to the Catholic church.

-Divisions within Buddhism. Buddhist traditions all claim that through a long and accurate teacher-student lineage, their practices were those ordained by the Buddha. Yet major divisions exist between the branches of Buddhism as to what practices are good, what are bad, and what the beliefs of the religion are.

Test and check yourself, with reason and logic. Yes, much there is distportion, is esoteric hamsterwheeling- but you are free to choose. As I see it, the basic teachings of Chan are what it is about, and these teachings are such that they do not support the founding of a relgious circus and all that. they are empirically founded, they base on your own experience of explorating your mind, and are open to validation andf falsification. that quotre from the Kalamas Sutra has much, very much to do with it. You should not believe - no them, not me, not in anything - how often must I repeat this before you hear it?

There are many others but I think I've made my point. I realize that you are not a practising Buddhist but the relationship between Zen and meditation and Buddhism is quite plain. This has nothing to do with Atheism or belief in a deity. It is about practising something whose origins are just as questionable as any religion.

I tested it, and since a long time. From my yoluth on I got trained privately by a colleague of my father, a Japanese who trained me together with his son, for over ten years, in Zen, Bushido, swords, meditation - daily. He was like a second father to me. I then left Berlin for studying at university, and there learned students practicing Tibetan Buddhism, Nyigma lineage and Kagyu lineage. I lived in a Buddhist center for several months, trying to combine psychology and therapy with Buddhist psychology and meditation. But I have strong reservations over Tibetan practicing, see above. It is indeed religion and cult and showbiz and money-making, and that is why I don'T like it. Then came the years when I started to travel, North africa and the Middle East, my exploration into Islam, if you want, and at that time I was introduced to Wolfgang Kopp whom I recommend to you by his book. He heads a Tao-Chan centre here in Germany and is so-called dharma-successor of a well-known French Zen-master. He became my second mentor, and although I only met him some times, these meetings were incredibly intense, personal, and mutually intimate. He then threw me out, saying that he could not offer me any more than what I already had, and that I should start teaching myself. Which I did. I ran meditation classes in a "culture-free" setting for several years, every morning.

So you see, there was a time when I was young and stupid, and when I took risks on trips that I should have not taken, and when I took pride in claiming myself to be "Buddhist" - while all I did by doing so was illustrating what a fool I was. Today, I do not care for such labels, and that is why your description of whether you think I am a practicing Buddhist or not, is competely pointless to me - think what you want, its your pictures in your brain, not mine. If people ask me for a self-description today, I leave it to saying that I consider myself to be a spiritual atheist. I enjoy to see eyebrows frowning then, but it is the most precise description for sure that I can give. Not that any of that matters, not for me, not for anyone else.

If Zen and meditation have made your life better this is good. I am happy for you but it is not for me. I do not wish to replace my present reality of mind with another.

As long as you accept responsibility for your choice and realise that your choice is an active act by you and nothing that happened to you, that's fine for you. I did not approach you, and I never meant to missionise you. I explained some things (more or less...) after you stated some things and asked me over some things. What you make of that does not affect me, as I see it. I just claim the right to take you by your words - that'S why there was some head-banging in the past between the two of us.

To any Buddhist who may read this, I hope I have not offended you. The points made were for the sake of the discussion.

Heck, have people become sensible these days. Some quotes by House on my mind, but okay...

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Skybird

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and the benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

This is wisdom and well worth considering.

I read with great interest you history with regards to your training and interest in Zen and meditation. This helps me greatly in understanding where you are coming from on this and other topics. Thank you for sharing.

Originally Posted by Skybird

If people ask me for a self-description today, I leave it to saying that I consider myself to be a spiritual atheist. I enjoy to see eyebrows frowning then, but it is the most precise description for sure that I can give. Not that any of that matters, not for me, not for anyone else.

I for one am not frowning. It matters a little.

Originally Posted by Skybird

... I did not approach you, and I never meant to missionise you. I explained some things (more or less...) after you stated some things and asked me over some things. What you make of that does not affect me, as I see it. I just claim the right to take you by your words - that'S why there was some head-banging in the past between the two of us.

A little head banging is good. Keeps us sharp. No doubt we will have the pleasure again.

A final thought. One thing I am convinced of as I get older is that the old saying it is better to laugh than to cry is sound advice. I do not consider that this life is a joke, but it is definitely a comedy of sorts. Absurdity is best handled with a grin.

Take care.

[Skybird]

"To fathom Zen means to fathom ourselves; to fathom ourselves means to forget ourselves; to forget ourselves means to find our original nature." (Dogen, 13th century).

Compare with Kant's philosophy on insight - and it's limits set by the material nature of our existence.

[yubba]

bringing it back from the depths..for no good reason

[soopaman2]

God still loves me no matter who I vote for.

You guys will too.

I am voting for.....

HR Puffinstuff.

Just kidding. I miss Bachman, why did you guys vote her out, do you understand how much comedy we missed out on? President Bachman and first lady Marcus, the gay whisperer

America truly needs a sense of humor.

Minnesota, re-elect her please, we lurve her like mudkipz.