N'estas mi kaj ne mia,
nei la permanenta memo.
Konkeros la mem
Vi majstri mem.
Farante tiel, vi estas
Sur via vojo al libereco.
—English translation—
Not me nor mine,
deny the permanent self.
By conquering the self
You master yourself.
By doing so, you are
On your way to freedom.
Showing posts with label Hinduism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hinduism. Show all posts
20150107
The Many Faces of God (satire)
"God is like three-in-one oil." — Eldridge Cleaver
Unlike trinitarianism, modalism is a complex way of saying that the Godhead has three faces (guises?): God, the Christ and the Holy Spirit.
Consider God to be an actor.
As a deity, He is. As the Christ, he is Messiah and all that implies. Yet as the Holy Spirit, we get into the supernatural since he is also known as the Holy Ghost.
After much thought on this topic, I asked myself: "What is God when he's not acting as a deity or as the Christ or as the Holy Spirit, remote from humanity?" To me the answer is obviously: God is the Absolute.
It serves no purpose for God to exist as a physical being in the physical world when the supernatural world is his domain.
Yet God is on the minds of his believers since it is through belief of his existence that he exists. Outside of that context, and for most people who don't believe in him, he does not exist.
As for his pre-existence, that is a wholly monotheistic supposition and may lead to endless debate on his existence.
If God exists as a belief, then the Buddha exists as fact. For the Buddha's existence is verifiable while God's existence is based on faith in the Bible alone. In contrast, the Buddha's existence is not only based on the sutras but also on historical records.
Though, no one can compare a man known as the Buddha, formerly the prince Siddhartha Gotama, to God, a monotheistic deity, since the Buddha is not a deity.
Yet Amida Buddha is almost a deity, though he exists as a metaphor for the boundless life of compassion and the boundless light of wisdom. In this context "boundless" means "transcending human limitations" and especially, "beyond mere sentience."
Because of the limitations that monotheism places on such philosophy, the discussion of God becomes moot in light of Buddhism. In some ways it is like comparing apples to oranges. For the Buddha is not another face of God. Rather, Buddhism is outside the realm of monotheism.
Even so, there are elements of modalism in the many Buddhas and bodhisattvas in Buddhism. In the example of Amida Buddha, it is said there was a prince named Dharmakara who meditated for a long time and envisioned the Pure Land. After making a series of 48 vows, he fulfilled them all and was reborn in the Pure Land of Bliss as Amida Buddha.
In the case of Amida, the Absolute is the refined essence of Buddha Nature. Indeed, the Pure Land is a reflection of the Absolute. As well, Dharmakara might be considered the incarnate form of the Absolute as a human of high standing (a bodhisattva) who was reborn as Amida Buddha.
Such an interpretation regarding Amida Buddha stretches the truth that Buddhism cannot be seen through the filter of Christian philosophy because the divine is viewed differently within Buddhist philosophy. For the deities of the God Realm are limited beings who live long lives but eventually die.
Indeed, the God Realm is one of the Six Realms of Desire. Thus the gods of Buddhism suffer.
Hence the birth of Siddhartha was the birth of the future Buddha who even the Hindu gods and goddesses would adore because he transcended the cycle of rebirth and became the Buddha.
My interpretation of the Christ story is that the Absolute relieves the sufferings of a Hellenized Jewish people subject to the laws of Judaism by having the deity known as God reborn as a mortal named Jesus, son of Mary and Joseph. This is revealed to her in a vision in which an angel named Gabriel tells her she shall conceive the Messiah through action of the Holy Spirit. After Jesus is born, he exposes Jewish ritualism as a fraud, makes enemies among the Jewish leaders, and is betrayed by one of the twelve of his beloved disciples. Then he is crucified, only to "die" and awaken as the Christ. Later he show himself to his disciples, and ascends to Heaven.
Thus, the story of the Christ is of God begetting the Christ in human form who is born to an unmarried woman named Mary as Jesus with his mortal father Joseph marrying her to legitimize his birth as "Son of Man". After his Crucifixion he arises as the Christ and eventually rises to Heaven. Thus he fulfills prophecy about himself.
In contrast, the Buddha's story begins with the dream by his mother of an elephant entering her womb. She dies shortly after childbirth, and Siddhartha is raised by his aunt. He is born into royalty. His father the King consults soothsayers, one of whom predicts that Siddhartha will either be a great king or a great wise man. Although his father tries to raise him as a prince, he learns all about suffering, abandons his royal status, and becomes the Buddha.
After his Enlightenment, he teaches not only his fellow seekers about the Four Noble Truths of Suffering, but also forms a religious order that challenges the ritualism of early Hinduism. He helps change Indian life in the process, and lives a long life, only to die due to an unspecified illness. After his death, the blooming of flowers on a tree out of season in the midst of the winter monsoons leads to other stories of miracles. However, the evolution of the Buddhist society that follows helps transform Indian society in a positive way.
Thus the story of the Buddha only vaguely echoes the Christ story. The ritual of law in Hebrew society of Jesus' time contrasts with the ritualism in Hindu society where the priestly caste has become intercessor between the people and the Indian gods.
Additionally the Hindu gods and goddesses may be seen as a complex form of modalism. In the case of Hinduism, each and every god and goddess represents the different faces of God but are aspects of the Godhead so complex making a single deity the only god to worship seem restrictive and thus oppressive to freedom of worship. Thus, the gods and goddesses of Hinduism might be considered as a gem with many facets, each one representing the bright and shining qualities of their worshipers in their perfect form.
In this way are the many faces of God revealed as aspects of human qualities of good called virtues. When I compare this to the qualities often ascribed to God, it becomes apparent to me that it is the good of humanity that is reflected in God. Though, it could also be said that it is the good qualities of a patriarchal society is emphasized by God. This is also true of the Hinduism but Buddhism critiques this truth while acknowledging that for that period of time, speculation about God was moot.
Indeed, the legacy of monotheism is a history of warfare by his chosen ones. Great suffering came at the cost of plagues and other miseries, as depicted in the Bible. in contrast, the story of Hinduism is not all peace and love for one's fellow man either.
It is not until the Indian king Ashoka that we see Hinduism being given sway to Buddhism. Ashoka wins a great battle but sees the truth about suffering revealed to him after being advised by a Buddhist monk about his responsibility regarding the war in which he lost friends. In response, he becomes a Buddhist king who spreads the message of Buddhism far and wide. As a Buddhist, he spread peace throughout India.
It isn't until the modern era that organized religion caused Buddhism to affect Sri Lanka and Burma, although in different ways. This is due to organized religion not Buddhism and it is not restricted to Buddhism either. It is because of organized religion that warfare has been the legacy of monotheism, be it Christian, Judaism or Islam.
Perhaps few people are patient enough to reflect on the deep spiritual meaning of their faith due to their belief in a higher power than themselves. Such humility has lost the respect of many people in the face of the distractions of every day life in the postmodern world. So many people have no time to consider the many faces of God for many reasons, be it a matter of convenience or an overall disbelief in God.
I as a Buddhist know that the belief in God and the associated faith in his existence should be tempered by knowledge. However, the limited knowledge of Christians is focused on the Bible. Thus the faces of God are limited to God, the Son and the Holy Ghost. In a way, each part of the Trinity are merely the many faces of God, limited and simplified by Christian dogma.
It's simpler to consider three aspects of God than a handful of gods and goddesses of Hinduism, even though the Godhead of both Christianity and Hinduism are roughly the same.
Though the Christian will dispute this, the Hindu might agree.
As a Buddhist, I lean towards a nondual concept of God as the Absolute, the closest of which is the Pure Land of Bliss. In my eyes, Heaven and the Pure Land are similar in that they are ideals of their respective faiths. However, I prefer Buddhism over Christianity mainly because I prefer not to stay ignorant about other faiths.
For knowledge is only dangerous when the little that you know leads you to ignore the consequences of your ignorance.
YMMV
Originally posted on February 28, 2014 at 02:02 AM
References:
Modalism - Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modalism
The Absolute - Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_(philosophy)
Unlike trinitarianism, modalism is a complex way of saying that the Godhead has three faces (guises?): God, the Christ and the Holy Spirit.
Consider God to be an actor.
As a deity, He is. As the Christ, he is Messiah and all that implies. Yet as the Holy Spirit, we get into the supernatural since he is also known as the Holy Ghost.
After much thought on this topic, I asked myself: "What is God when he's not acting as a deity or as the Christ or as the Holy Spirit, remote from humanity?" To me the answer is obviously: God is the Absolute.
It serves no purpose for God to exist as a physical being in the physical world when the supernatural world is his domain.
Yet God is on the minds of his believers since it is through belief of his existence that he exists. Outside of that context, and for most people who don't believe in him, he does not exist.
As for his pre-existence, that is a wholly monotheistic supposition and may lead to endless debate on his existence.
If God exists as a belief, then the Buddha exists as fact. For the Buddha's existence is verifiable while God's existence is based on faith in the Bible alone. In contrast, the Buddha's existence is not only based on the sutras but also on historical records.
Though, no one can compare a man known as the Buddha, formerly the prince Siddhartha Gotama, to God, a monotheistic deity, since the Buddha is not a deity.
Yet Amida Buddha is almost a deity, though he exists as a metaphor for the boundless life of compassion and the boundless light of wisdom. In this context "boundless" means "transcending human limitations" and especially, "beyond mere sentience."
Because of the limitations that monotheism places on such philosophy, the discussion of God becomes moot in light of Buddhism. In some ways it is like comparing apples to oranges. For the Buddha is not another face of God. Rather, Buddhism is outside the realm of monotheism.
Even so, there are elements of modalism in the many Buddhas and bodhisattvas in Buddhism. In the example of Amida Buddha, it is said there was a prince named Dharmakara who meditated for a long time and envisioned the Pure Land. After making a series of 48 vows, he fulfilled them all and was reborn in the Pure Land of Bliss as Amida Buddha.
In the case of Amida, the Absolute is the refined essence of Buddha Nature. Indeed, the Pure Land is a reflection of the Absolute. As well, Dharmakara might be considered the incarnate form of the Absolute as a human of high standing (a bodhisattva) who was reborn as Amida Buddha.
Such an interpretation regarding Amida Buddha stretches the truth that Buddhism cannot be seen through the filter of Christian philosophy because the divine is viewed differently within Buddhist philosophy. For the deities of the God Realm are limited beings who live long lives but eventually die.
Indeed, the God Realm is one of the Six Realms of Desire. Thus the gods of Buddhism suffer.
Hence the birth of Siddhartha was the birth of the future Buddha who even the Hindu gods and goddesses would adore because he transcended the cycle of rebirth and became the Buddha.
My interpretation of the Christ story is that the Absolute relieves the sufferings of a Hellenized Jewish people subject to the laws of Judaism by having the deity known as God reborn as a mortal named Jesus, son of Mary and Joseph. This is revealed to her in a vision in which an angel named Gabriel tells her she shall conceive the Messiah through action of the Holy Spirit. After Jesus is born, he exposes Jewish ritualism as a fraud, makes enemies among the Jewish leaders, and is betrayed by one of the twelve of his beloved disciples. Then he is crucified, only to "die" and awaken as the Christ. Later he show himself to his disciples, and ascends to Heaven.
Thus, the story of the Christ is of God begetting the Christ in human form who is born to an unmarried woman named Mary as Jesus with his mortal father Joseph marrying her to legitimize his birth as "Son of Man". After his Crucifixion he arises as the Christ and eventually rises to Heaven. Thus he fulfills prophecy about himself.
In contrast, the Buddha's story begins with the dream by his mother of an elephant entering her womb. She dies shortly after childbirth, and Siddhartha is raised by his aunt. He is born into royalty. His father the King consults soothsayers, one of whom predicts that Siddhartha will either be a great king or a great wise man. Although his father tries to raise him as a prince, he learns all about suffering, abandons his royal status, and becomes the Buddha.
After his Enlightenment, he teaches not only his fellow seekers about the Four Noble Truths of Suffering, but also forms a religious order that challenges the ritualism of early Hinduism. He helps change Indian life in the process, and lives a long life, only to die due to an unspecified illness. After his death, the blooming of flowers on a tree out of season in the midst of the winter monsoons leads to other stories of miracles. However, the evolution of the Buddhist society that follows helps transform Indian society in a positive way.
Thus the story of the Buddha only vaguely echoes the Christ story. The ritual of law in Hebrew society of Jesus' time contrasts with the ritualism in Hindu society where the priestly caste has become intercessor between the people and the Indian gods.
Additionally the Hindu gods and goddesses may be seen as a complex form of modalism. In the case of Hinduism, each and every god and goddess represents the different faces of God but are aspects of the Godhead so complex making a single deity the only god to worship seem restrictive and thus oppressive to freedom of worship. Thus, the gods and goddesses of Hinduism might be considered as a gem with many facets, each one representing the bright and shining qualities of their worshipers in their perfect form.
In this way are the many faces of God revealed as aspects of human qualities of good called virtues. When I compare this to the qualities often ascribed to God, it becomes apparent to me that it is the good of humanity that is reflected in God. Though, it could also be said that it is the good qualities of a patriarchal society is emphasized by God. This is also true of the Hinduism but Buddhism critiques this truth while acknowledging that for that period of time, speculation about God was moot.
Indeed, the legacy of monotheism is a history of warfare by his chosen ones. Great suffering came at the cost of plagues and other miseries, as depicted in the Bible. in contrast, the story of Hinduism is not all peace and love for one's fellow man either.
It is not until the Indian king Ashoka that we see Hinduism being given sway to Buddhism. Ashoka wins a great battle but sees the truth about suffering revealed to him after being advised by a Buddhist monk about his responsibility regarding the war in which he lost friends. In response, he becomes a Buddhist king who spreads the message of Buddhism far and wide. As a Buddhist, he spread peace throughout India.
It isn't until the modern era that organized religion caused Buddhism to affect Sri Lanka and Burma, although in different ways. This is due to organized religion not Buddhism and it is not restricted to Buddhism either. It is because of organized religion that warfare has been the legacy of monotheism, be it Christian, Judaism or Islam.
Perhaps few people are patient enough to reflect on the deep spiritual meaning of their faith due to their belief in a higher power than themselves. Such humility has lost the respect of many people in the face of the distractions of every day life in the postmodern world. So many people have no time to consider the many faces of God for many reasons, be it a matter of convenience or an overall disbelief in God.
I as a Buddhist know that the belief in God and the associated faith in his existence should be tempered by knowledge. However, the limited knowledge of Christians is focused on the Bible. Thus the faces of God are limited to God, the Son and the Holy Ghost. In a way, each part of the Trinity are merely the many faces of God, limited and simplified by Christian dogma.
It's simpler to consider three aspects of God than a handful of gods and goddesses of Hinduism, even though the Godhead of both Christianity and Hinduism are roughly the same.
Though the Christian will dispute this, the Hindu might agree.
As a Buddhist, I lean towards a nondual concept of God as the Absolute, the closest of which is the Pure Land of Bliss. In my eyes, Heaven and the Pure Land are similar in that they are ideals of their respective faiths. However, I prefer Buddhism over Christianity mainly because I prefer not to stay ignorant about other faiths.
For knowledge is only dangerous when the little that you know leads you to ignore the consequences of your ignorance.
YMMV
Originally posted on February 28, 2014 at 02:02 AM
References:
Modalism - Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modalism
The Absolute - Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_(philosophy)
20140805
Who is God? (poem)
God rules none.
Each of us is but God
in his many disguises,
each of us, hiding, seeking,
in a game of hide and seek.
Only the awakened
understand this divine truth.
Everyone else will remain
asleep in their madness,
having forgotten the Godhead.
I know myself, and you yourself;
but who is God?
Indeed, you and I are
God who rules none.
Originally posted on April 24, 2005 at 2:04 AM
Each of us is but God
in his many disguises,
each of us, hiding, seeking,
in a game of hide and seek.
Only the awakened
understand this divine truth.
Everyone else will remain
asleep in their madness,
having forgotten the Godhead.
I know myself, and you yourself;
but who is God?
Indeed, you and I are
God who rules none.
Originally posted on April 24, 2005 at 2:04 AM
20140115
Parable of the Burning House & Buddhism Today
One day, a fire broke out in the house of a wealthy man who had many children. The wealthy man shouted at his children inside the burning house to flee. But, the children were absorbed in their games and did not heed his warning, though the house was being consumed by flames.
Then, the wealthy man devised a practical way to lure the children from the burning house. Knowing that the children were fond of interesting playthings, he called out to them, "Listen! Outside the gate are the carts that you have always wanted: carts pulled by goats, carts pulled by deer, and carts pulled by oxen. Why don't you come out and play with them?" The wealthy man knew that these things would be irresistible to his children.
The children, eager to play with these new toys rushed out of the house but, instead of the carts that he had promised, the father gave them a cart much better than any he has described - a cart draped with precious stones and pulled by white bullocks. The important thing being that the children were saved from the dangers of the house on fire.
"Fire" refers to desire and its sinful daughter, lust. Desire leads to anger and hatred if a person's lust is unchecked. Lust for things like money is greed. Lust for sex leads to sexual dysfunction.
Lust for power is the worst of all — this is what the Republicans and their religious right supporters suffer from, due to self-denial and repression of their sexual urges.
"House" refers to the human body.
Thus a burning house refers to a person who is not yet Enlightened.
"Wealthy man" refers to a Buddhist priest who is given spiritual wealth through faith in the Buddha and belief in the core tenets of Buddhism, as well as the core practice of samatha-vipassana. It may also refer to the spiritual aspects of a Buddhist who practices his faith earnestly. Thus meditation provides spiritual wealth that being worldly does not. Indeed, being worldly results in spiritual poverty.
"Many children" refers to his Buddhist pupils. It may also refer to the six consciousnesses of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and cogitating (thinking limited to the five senses).
The wealthy man shouting to his children to flee the burning house refers to the Buddhist meditating and discovering what the six consciousnesses are. It also refers to the call of Amida Buddha, the Name-that-calls.
"The children absorbed in their games" refers to the six consciousnesses which are too ignorant to flee the body and come to the safety of the wealthy man, to be under his control.
Not heeding the wealthy man's warning is the lot of a person who has yet to meditate, and cannot control his senses including the use of his mind.
In the second paragraph is the paraphrase of what the Buddha does: he "lies" to the six consciousnesses in order to save them. The three carts pulled by goats, deer and oxen refers to the Three Treasures of the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha.
The children coming out of the burning house refers to the six consciousnesses being trained through meditation.
The cart draped with precious stones and pulled by white bullocks refers to samadhi, the mind focused on meditation.
In this parable is the story of a Buddhist who puts his faith in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha. The "lie" that the Buddha tells Buddhists is that by putting faith in the Three Treasures, one is saved from lust. The truth is this: Samatha-Vipassana meditation helps the Buddhist to place the six consciousnesses under his control.
For the Buddha is long dead, the Dharma is rarely preached, and the Sangha organized Buddhism into a religion. Since then, rare is it that the Sangha practices what the Buddha taught. Instead, the Theravada Sangha has lusted for political power, and control who becomes the leader of a nation where the Sangha are king-makers such as Burma, Thailand and Sri Lanka. This is the fuel for the fire, and their houses burn.
In contrast, the Mahayana and the Vajrayana sects have flourished wherever they kept their noses out of politics and instead, led the people to respect the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha through meditation and optionally chanting the Buddha's name, provided that they do not make a religion of their practice to force upon Hindus, Muslims, and the people who practice other faiths.
Let this be a warning to Buddhists and other faiths. When you turn your faith into a religion, you only cause lust to inflame desire for power and control over others. Instead, strive to turn your faith into no religion by practice of compassion. Then you shall be rewarded with spiritual treasures beyond your imagination.
YMMV
Originally posted: December 24, 2005 10:12 PM PST
Then, the wealthy man devised a practical way to lure the children from the burning house. Knowing that the children were fond of interesting playthings, he called out to them, "Listen! Outside the gate are the carts that you have always wanted: carts pulled by goats, carts pulled by deer, and carts pulled by oxen. Why don't you come out and play with them?" The wealthy man knew that these things would be irresistible to his children.
The children, eager to play with these new toys rushed out of the house but, instead of the carts that he had promised, the father gave them a cart much better than any he has described - a cart draped with precious stones and pulled by white bullocks. The important thing being that the children were saved from the dangers of the house on fire.
"Fire" refers to desire and its sinful daughter, lust. Desire leads to anger and hatred if a person's lust is unchecked. Lust for things like money is greed. Lust for sex leads to sexual dysfunction.
Lust for power is the worst of all — this is what the Republicans and their religious right supporters suffer from, due to self-denial and repression of their sexual urges.
"House" refers to the human body.
Thus a burning house refers to a person who is not yet Enlightened.
"Wealthy man" refers to a Buddhist priest who is given spiritual wealth through faith in the Buddha and belief in the core tenets of Buddhism, as well as the core practice of samatha-vipassana. It may also refer to the spiritual aspects of a Buddhist who practices his faith earnestly. Thus meditation provides spiritual wealth that being worldly does not. Indeed, being worldly results in spiritual poverty.
"Many children" refers to his Buddhist pupils. It may also refer to the six consciousnesses of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and cogitating (thinking limited to the five senses).
The wealthy man shouting to his children to flee the burning house refers to the Buddhist meditating and discovering what the six consciousnesses are. It also refers to the call of Amida Buddha, the Name-that-calls.
"The children absorbed in their games" refers to the six consciousnesses which are too ignorant to flee the body and come to the safety of the wealthy man, to be under his control.
Not heeding the wealthy man's warning is the lot of a person who has yet to meditate, and cannot control his senses including the use of his mind.
In the second paragraph is the paraphrase of what the Buddha does: he "lies" to the six consciousnesses in order to save them. The three carts pulled by goats, deer and oxen refers to the Three Treasures of the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha.
The children coming out of the burning house refers to the six consciousnesses being trained through meditation.
The cart draped with precious stones and pulled by white bullocks refers to samadhi, the mind focused on meditation.
In this parable is the story of a Buddhist who puts his faith in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha. The "lie" that the Buddha tells Buddhists is that by putting faith in the Three Treasures, one is saved from lust. The truth is this: Samatha-Vipassana meditation helps the Buddhist to place the six consciousnesses under his control.
For the Buddha is long dead, the Dharma is rarely preached, and the Sangha organized Buddhism into a religion. Since then, rare is it that the Sangha practices what the Buddha taught. Instead, the Theravada Sangha has lusted for political power, and control who becomes the leader of a nation where the Sangha are king-makers such as Burma, Thailand and Sri Lanka. This is the fuel for the fire, and their houses burn.
In contrast, the Mahayana and the Vajrayana sects have flourished wherever they kept their noses out of politics and instead, led the people to respect the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha through meditation and optionally chanting the Buddha's name, provided that they do not make a religion of their practice to force upon Hindus, Muslims, and the people who practice other faiths.
Let this be a warning to Buddhists and other faiths. When you turn your faith into a religion, you only cause lust to inflame desire for power and control over others. Instead, strive to turn your faith into no religion by practice of compassion. Then you shall be rewarded with spiritual treasures beyond your imagination.
YMMV
Originally posted: December 24, 2005 10:12 PM PST
20140111
Beyond I AM Still is Consciousness (satire)
Guru Nisargadatta Maharaj said: "I used to sit for hours together, with nothing but the 'I am' in my mind and soon peace and joy and a deep all-embracing love became my normal state. In it all disappeared — myself, my Guru, the life I lived, the world around me. Only peace remained and unfathomable silence."
When I used to do a lot of sitting meditation for more than fifteen minutes, my back would ache and my knees would hurt.
Then it came to me that I need not suffer in pain doing Zen meditation with my left kneecap shattered and never touched by doctors. Instead, when I did Nembutsu meditation, and chanted for all humanity, my left knee healed on its own.
In my mind, how can there truly be "I am" when only Buddha Nature exists? The answer is, that which is "I am" is Buddha Nature. However, this "I am" is the consciousness stream itself.
Indeed, all the joy and deep love for humanity could be encountered after chanting Nembutsu with love for all sentient beings in this invisible net of Indra spread around the world!
Suppose then that my highest state of consciousness achieve is when insomnia has overtaken me and only the psychiatric professionals are left to worry if I am ready to crack.
However, the only crack to come out of all this Nembutsu chanting is, "You don't need to sit on your ass for hours to chant."
Sometimes when chanting it even seems like the whole world has gone, myself, my home, my present life, and even traffic noise.
In that silence, I find peace because Amida is calling without words.
Namu Amida Butsu!
20131223
Further Thoughts on Good and Evil
For the record, I refuse to believe the devil or satan or whoever you call this dark angel, created by God represents evil. In my eyes, even the devil's original nature is good.
For God is actually the creator of good and evil. Check the Old Testament.
As well, neither the devil nor satan actually are mentioned to in the New Testament except as statement made by Jesus and others e.g. "Satan get behind me" which implies an internal moral struggle to control egoistic impulses with respect to power and control that Satan promised if Jesus were to exercise his divine powers to control others and become "King of the Jews".
Ergo, this duality of God as representative of Good and the devil as representative of Evil is neo-Platonian and thus was influenced Christian doctrine to the point of becoming dogma. The sames goes for the concept of an immortal soul, which has almost become a doctrine which is non-Biblical.
As well, Good and Evil never existed before human existence. Rather, good and evil are concepts thought up by men, and this includes the thought of good and evil existing before man's existence. Thus, I am sympathetic to the Jewish God.
Perhaps the real reason for Jesus was God's way of making up for all the violence he either meted on humanity or got his followers to mete on other people. However, I refuse to be a martyr for Christ.
As a Buddhist, I object to the violence done in the name of Jesus. This includes child abuse done in the name of Jesus, which is not Christian.
For any fundamentalist Christian parents who subject their children to violence in the name of their God, but call it discipline do not know what discipline actually means. Indeed, discipline done in anger too is violence.
Hopefully from this little rant of mine you can understand that a parent who disciplines their child in anger is not doing God a favor.
What has this to do with good and evil? Well, I tend to believe that a person is capable of great evil yet also of great good.
Even so, I also believe that if a person who is good shall become a good person, so too may a bad man, once he turns over to the cause of good, be it as a Christian, Jew, or Muslim, as well as a Buddhist, a Hindu, a pagan, a Wiccan, or even a La Vey Satanist.
Originally posted December 20, 2012 at 0310H
For God is actually the creator of good and evil. Check the Old Testament.
As well, neither the devil nor satan actually are mentioned to in the New Testament except as statement made by Jesus and others e.g. "Satan get behind me" which implies an internal moral struggle to control egoistic impulses with respect to power and control that Satan promised if Jesus were to exercise his divine powers to control others and become "King of the Jews".
Ergo, this duality of God as representative of Good and the devil as representative of Evil is neo-Platonian and thus was influenced Christian doctrine to the point of becoming dogma. The sames goes for the concept of an immortal soul, which has almost become a doctrine which is non-Biblical.
As well, Good and Evil never existed before human existence. Rather, good and evil are concepts thought up by men, and this includes the thought of good and evil existing before man's existence. Thus, I am sympathetic to the Jewish God.
Perhaps the real reason for Jesus was God's way of making up for all the violence he either meted on humanity or got his followers to mete on other people. However, I refuse to be a martyr for Christ.
As a Buddhist, I object to the violence done in the name of Jesus. This includes child abuse done in the name of Jesus, which is not Christian.
For any fundamentalist Christian parents who subject their children to violence in the name of their God, but call it discipline do not know what discipline actually means. Indeed, discipline done in anger too is violence.
Hopefully from this little rant of mine you can understand that a parent who disciplines their child in anger is not doing God a favor.
What has this to do with good and evil? Well, I tend to believe that a person is capable of great evil yet also of great good.
Even so, I also believe that if a person who is good shall become a good person, so too may a bad man, once he turns over to the cause of good, be it as a Christian, Jew, or Muslim, as well as a Buddhist, a Hindu, a pagan, a Wiccan, or even a La Vey Satanist.
Originally posted December 20, 2012 at 0310H
20131204
The Hypocrisy of Religious Violence (satire)
One root of violence is alienation. When a minority has an opposing view to the majority, that minority may become marginalized and alienated from the masses.
This has happened in nations previously colonized by the former British, Belgian, French, German, and other European empires prior to the post-modern period of history.
Another kind of violence is when a people are placed in prison camps during wartime. This applies to the Jewish Holocaust, the Japanese internment camps in the Americas during World War2, and even the imprisonment of Ukrainians in Canada during the Great War (1914-1918).
In our enlightened times in the post-911 21st Century (the post-modern era), prison camps will be used only as a last resort. Indeed, in Canada this also happened when the BC government moved children of Doukhabours from their homes into the former prison camps which once house the Japanese-Canadians displace from the West Coast of BC.
Furthermore, home-grown terrorists with no ties to Al-Qaeda are fervently Muslim but wholly radicalised due to their sympathies for their Muslim brethren in Gaza, South Lebanon and elsewhere in the world such as the Palestinian Diaspora of the Americas and the European ghettos of Western, Central and Eastern Europe as well as Eastern Eurasia and Central Asia (e.g. Azerbaijan, Kosovo, Turkey and other Muslim enclaves of Eurasia like Kazakhstan), and so willing to turn to violence for purely ideological reasons.
Most non-Muslim people in the West (the Americas, the UK, the Netherlands and other European nations with large Muslim populations) who mistrust the Muslim immigrants are totally ignorant of the Koran (including the Sharias and Hadiths).
A few of them (especially in the US) have even chosen to slander Mohammed and Islam itself, while calling themselves "God-fearing Christians".
What utter religious hypocrisy!
Even Sri Lanka fell into this religious hypocrisy by endorsing Theravada Buddhism as state religion and Sinhalese as state language in 1956. This political act in the mid-20th Century led first to riots and, in the wake of anti-communist fear, finally led to the assassination of the fourth Prime Minister, S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, a Sinhalese Anglican Christian, of Sri Lanka in 1959 by a radical Buddhist cleric named Talduwe Somarama. In 1962, Mr. Somarama shed his orange robes and converted to Catholicism before dying as a "martyr" when he was executed in 1962.
However, Somarama was part of a conspiracy headed by Mapitigama Buddharakkitha of the Kelaniya Raja Maha Vihara, for the Kelaniya Temple was historically a hotbed of trouble for Sri Lanka since its founding circa 500 BCE in south-western region near Colombo.
Civil unrest due to oppression by the Sinhalese of the Tamil militants later led to the Hindu militants radicalising when they formed the Tamil Tigers in 1976. After much turmoil over the next seven years, civil war broke out in 1983 and lasted until the Sri Lanka Army assassinated the Tamil Tiger founder, Velupillai Prabhakaran, on May 18, 2009 after over a quarter-century of war.
Violence in the name of God, by Christian, Hindu or Muslim, and even Buddhist militants is religious hypocrisy at its worst. For there is no peace of mind behind any intent to harm others in the name of religion.
This civil war was summed up by Gandhi when he suggested that those who believe that religion has nothing to do with politics do not know religion at all. For religious leaders and politicians have slept in the same bed called warfare since the time of Ashoka.
Originally posted: November 8, 2009 at 10:36 PM
This has happened in nations previously colonized by the former British, Belgian, French, German, and other European empires prior to the post-modern period of history.
Another kind of violence is when a people are placed in prison camps during wartime. This applies to the Jewish Holocaust, the Japanese internment camps in the Americas during World War2, and even the imprisonment of Ukrainians in Canada during the Great War (1914-1918).
In our enlightened times in the post-911 21st Century (the post-modern era), prison camps will be used only as a last resort. Indeed, in Canada this also happened when the BC government moved children of Doukhabours from their homes into the former prison camps which once house the Japanese-Canadians displace from the West Coast of BC.
Furthermore, home-grown terrorists with no ties to Al-Qaeda are fervently Muslim but wholly radicalised due to their sympathies for their Muslim brethren in Gaza, South Lebanon and elsewhere in the world such as the Palestinian Diaspora of the Americas and the European ghettos of Western, Central and Eastern Europe as well as Eastern Eurasia and Central Asia (e.g. Azerbaijan, Kosovo, Turkey and other Muslim enclaves of Eurasia like Kazakhstan), and so willing to turn to violence for purely ideological reasons.
Most non-Muslim people in the West (the Americas, the UK, the Netherlands and other European nations with large Muslim populations) who mistrust the Muslim immigrants are totally ignorant of the Koran (including the Sharias and Hadiths).
A few of them (especially in the US) have even chosen to slander Mohammed and Islam itself, while calling themselves "God-fearing Christians".
What utter religious hypocrisy!
Even Sri Lanka fell into this religious hypocrisy by endorsing Theravada Buddhism as state religion and Sinhalese as state language in 1956. This political act in the mid-20th Century led first to riots and, in the wake of anti-communist fear, finally led to the assassination of the fourth Prime Minister, S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, a Sinhalese Anglican Christian, of Sri Lanka in 1959 by a radical Buddhist cleric named Talduwe Somarama. In 1962, Mr. Somarama shed his orange robes and converted to Catholicism before dying as a "martyr" when he was executed in 1962.
However, Somarama was part of a conspiracy headed by Mapitigama Buddharakkitha of the Kelaniya Raja Maha Vihara, for the Kelaniya Temple was historically a hotbed of trouble for Sri Lanka since its founding circa 500 BCE in south-western region near Colombo.
Civil unrest due to oppression by the Sinhalese of the Tamil militants later led to the Hindu militants radicalising when they formed the Tamil Tigers in 1976. After much turmoil over the next seven years, civil war broke out in 1983 and lasted until the Sri Lanka Army assassinated the Tamil Tiger founder, Velupillai Prabhakaran, on May 18, 2009 after over a quarter-century of war.
Violence in the name of God, by Christian, Hindu or Muslim, and even Buddhist militants is religious hypocrisy at its worst. For there is no peace of mind behind any intent to harm others in the name of religion.
This civil war was summed up by Gandhi when he suggested that those who believe that religion has nothing to do with politics do not know religion at all. For religious leaders and politicians have slept in the same bed called warfare since the time of Ashoka.
Originally posted: November 8, 2009 at 10:36 PM
20130207
My Faith is the Same as a Christian's or a Hindu's
Jodo Shinshu has similarities to Lingayatism and Protestant Christianity in that all of these religions claim that an intercessor between humanity and the Absolute is unnecessary.
Jodo Shinshu abandoned tradition in that priest could marry as happens in Protestant Christianity. In Lingayatism, castes were set aside and lower castes were as likely to be members as upper classes. Likewise in Jodo Shinshu, priests, samurai, merchants and commoners are equal before the Buddha.
Despite the dissimilarities between Honen, Basavanna, and Martin Luther, I can safely say, a Buddhist's faith is no different from a Shaivite's or a Protestant's faith.
If we used the differences between Buddhism, Christianity and Hinduism to argue among ourselves, then organized religion is but a place to differ about dogma and doctrine.
However, given that faith is the equalizing factor along with the fact that humanity is free to believe in the form of the Absolute according to the doctrine of their respective religions, nothing is served by argument and differences of opinion.
Although I practice Jodo Shinshu differently from Lingayatism and Christianity, it is sincerity of faith that unites us.
Jodo Shinshu abandoned tradition in that priest could marry as happens in Protestant Christianity. In Lingayatism, castes were set aside and lower castes were as likely to be members as upper classes. Likewise in Jodo Shinshu, priests, samurai, merchants and commoners are equal before the Buddha.
Despite the dissimilarities between Honen, Basavanna, and Martin Luther, I can safely say, a Buddhist's faith is no different from a Shaivite's or a Protestant's faith.
If we used the differences between Buddhism, Christianity and Hinduism to argue among ourselves, then organized religion is but a place to differ about dogma and doctrine.
However, given that faith is the equalizing factor along with the fact that humanity is free to believe in the form of the Absolute according to the doctrine of their respective religions, nothing is served by argument and differences of opinion.
Although I practice Jodo Shinshu differently from Lingayatism and Christianity, it is sincerity of faith that unites us.
20100820
Meditation on The Divine Nature of Everything
Even though everything is of divine origin, 1/2 of humankind are skeptical about it but are willing to keep an open mind about it; but of the other half, 1/4 is fully awakened and deeply spiritual, and 1/4 totally unawakened and materialistic.
Once awakened to this truth that everything is of divine origin, it does no good to share it with the world openly. For the skeptics and the materialists will at first doubt it; and the materialists will be dead-set against this truth.
However, a person who is open to the truth will be able to convince a few of the skeptics with the help of the deeply spiritual who are fully awakened.
It depends on how willing one is to carry on in her spiritual practice quietly without making a fuss about the spiritual truth that everything is of divine origin.
Nor could one state "everything is of divine origin", and then add that about one billion people believe this to be true.
For both the skeptics and the materialists will dispute this statement. They will also claim that most of those people mindlessly believe anything their religious leaders state.
Indeed, the statement "everything is of divine origin" needs to be looked at within context of the religion from whence it came.
Through the theistic lens, a higher power created everything. This higher power is thus given unspeakable divine rights over all of its creation.
When the believer sees everything as of divine origin, one respects all living beings. He also respects his family and community, following both tradition and social norms according to his customs.
However, through the humanist lens, one would be very doubtful that a higher power created everything. Furthermore, a materialistic explanation could be given which denies the divine origin of everything.
IMHO I don't think the theists, the humanists, the skeptics and the materialist are right or wrong about their respective beliefs about the matter.
Belief and faith is not about being right about spiritual matters. Whatever you have faith in, that's based on years of doubt about what you don't have faith in. Whatever you believe, you just believe. In this way, one is living the religious life.
Thus, the statement "everything is of divine origin" is more of a philosophy about life that shapes the social and cultural lens through which people see themselves and the world.
Once awakened to this truth that everything is of divine origin, it does no good to share it with the world openly. For the skeptics and the materialists will at first doubt it; and the materialists will be dead-set against this truth.
However, a person who is open to the truth will be able to convince a few of the skeptics with the help of the deeply spiritual who are fully awakened.
It depends on how willing one is to carry on in her spiritual practice quietly without making a fuss about the spiritual truth that everything is of divine origin.
Nor could one state "everything is of divine origin", and then add that about one billion people believe this to be true.
For both the skeptics and the materialists will dispute this statement. They will also claim that most of those people mindlessly believe anything their religious leaders state.
Indeed, the statement "everything is of divine origin" needs to be looked at within context of the religion from whence it came.
Through the theistic lens, a higher power created everything. This higher power is thus given unspeakable divine rights over all of its creation.
When the believer sees everything as of divine origin, one respects all living beings. He also respects his family and community, following both tradition and social norms according to his customs.
However, through the humanist lens, one would be very doubtful that a higher power created everything. Furthermore, a materialistic explanation could be given which denies the divine origin of everything.
IMHO I don't think the theists, the humanists, the skeptics and the materialist are right or wrong about their respective beliefs about the matter.
Belief and faith is not about being right about spiritual matters. Whatever you have faith in, that's based on years of doubt about what you don't have faith in. Whatever you believe, you just believe. In this way, one is living the religious life.
Thus, the statement "everything is of divine origin" is more of a philosophy about life that shapes the social and cultural lens through which people see themselves and the world.
20100616
Advice to India
http://www.dlshq.org/download/brahmacharya.htm
"If our motherland wants to rise high in the scale of nations, her children, both male and female, should study the important subject of Brahmacharya in all its bearings, understand its supreme importance and observe the great Vrata strictly.
In conclusion, I fervently pray, with folded hands, that you all should sincerely struggle hard to control passion—the enemy of peace and prosperity—by Sadhana. A true Brahmachari is the real mighty emperor of this world. My silent adorations to all Brahmacharins! Glory unto them!
May you be seated firm as the Mahameru in your Satchidananda Svarupa without any impure, lustful thought! May God bless the aspirants with strength and energy for keeping up Brahmacharya! May you, with a pure, stainless mind, unintermittently be in the cognition of your Atmic Reality! May you, without worldly desires and ambition, rest in That which ever is in the midst of the enjoyer and the enjoyed!
May the divine splendour shine in your face! May the divine flame grow brighter in you all! May the divine power and peace abide in you for ever! Om Santi! Santi! Santi" -- SRI SWAMI SIVANANDA
"If our motherland wants to rise high in the scale of nations, her children, both male and female, should study the important subject of Brahmacharya in all its bearings, understand its supreme importance and observe the great Vrata strictly.
In conclusion, I fervently pray, with folded hands, that you all should sincerely struggle hard to control passion—the enemy of peace and prosperity—by Sadhana. A true Brahmachari is the real mighty emperor of this world. My silent adorations to all Brahmacharins! Glory unto them!
May you be seated firm as the Mahameru in your Satchidananda Svarupa without any impure, lustful thought! May God bless the aspirants with strength and energy for keeping up Brahmacharya! May you, with a pure, stainless mind, unintermittently be in the cognition of your Atmic Reality! May you, without worldly desires and ambition, rest in That which ever is in the midst of the enjoyer and the enjoyed!
May the divine splendour shine in your face! May the divine flame grow brighter in you all! May the divine power and peace abide in you for ever! Om Santi! Santi! Santi" -- SRI SWAMI SIVANANDA
20100421
Seeing God and the Soul Through a Buddhist Lens
My personal philosophy about the dead goes like this: Once the dead go to heaven, their souls return to God. Having been wiped clean of their earthly existence, they become the pure and immaculate souls they originally were at the moment of creation by God.
Regarding my personal philosophy about the soul, it transcends the dualistic concept of a soul existing apart from the body.
I use it to reconcile the Buddhist concept of oneness and unity with God as Creator of the soul.
God, within context of my personal philosophy is closer to the Hindu concept of God, where He is both the Creator and the Created.
As for the soul, it is consciousness-genius, the "incorporeal mental processes" which continues after death.
However, Buddhist philosophy teaches that the soul has a finite existence. In its place is Buddha Nature, which is the karmic fruit of Amida Buddha's vows to become a Buddha.
Thus, God as Creator of the Buddha is part of the Buddhist concept of oneness and unity.
Personally, I do not see God as separate from the universe, the world and all life.
For my view of God is closer to panentheism than to Deism.
However, the Buddhist view of God as the Absolute transforms panentheism into the philosophy that the divine is in all things.
For everything in the cosmos is Buddha.
References:
Buddhist concept of oneness and unity: see Net of Indra
Deism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
Hinduism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism
"incorporeal mental processes": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul#Buddhism
Net of Indra: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_of_Indra
Panentheism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism
edited 20121114.220211
20100217
Ganesha: His Relationship to Hinduism and Buddhism
The Story Behind Ganesha's Elephant Head
Ganesh is the Indic archetype for the warrior-guardian. In the cosmology of Vedic times, Ganesha is elephant-headed, having had been decapitated by his father, Shiva, during a drunken rage.
Why was Rama angry?
His son Ganesha had been retained by his mother Parvati to guard her door from unwanted intrusions during her bath.
Once he sobered up, Shiva realized his error, and asked the animals who would donate their head to replace Ganesha. Only the loyal war elephant offered her head to replace Ganesha's, seeing as Ganesha was her master. It is said that the elephant reincarnated as Ganesha's consort...
The Myth of Ganesha
In actual fact, Parvati created Ganesha because Shiva was away so much she missed conceiving and giving birth to another son. (See the link in the following URL for more details.)
Here's a link to the etymology and background for Ganesha, who may actually had been a tribal leader of a group of indigenous tribes called the Vināyakas who were conquered by the ancient Aryans of India.
Also, the Vinayaka is mentioned in Buddhist Tantra as the the six-armed form of the Buddhist protector Mahakala (Shadbhuja), which is an emanation of Avalokiteshvara standing atop an elephant headed supine figure.
Relationship between the Vinayakas and Ganesha
Quite possibly then, the Vinayakas were mythologized as demons (psychological manifestations of spiritual evil which creates difficulties and obstacles) in the Veda.
With Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhist tradition, the psychological aspects of the mind represented by the Hindu god Ganesha, the Remover of Obstacles, were spiritually "propitiated" through Buddhist meditation to serve the Buddha.
Thus, the Buddhist Vinayaka represents the emanation of Avalokiteshvara known as the Buddhist protector Mahakala, who represents absolute reality without attribute, form or quality.
Later in East Asian Buddhist history Mahakala becomes one of the Chinese Seven Gods of Fortune, the God of Darkness (in Chinese, Dà hēi tiān (大黒天), and in Japanese, Daikokuten.
Through Daikokuten's relationship with Marici, Vinayaka is related to Bhaisajya Guru Buddha, the Medicine Buddha.
Reference:
Vinayaka's connection to Buddhism: http://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=207
Ganesh is the Indic archetype for the warrior-guardian. In the cosmology of Vedic times, Ganesha is elephant-headed, having had been decapitated by his father, Shiva, during a drunken rage.
Why was Rama angry?
His son Ganesha had been retained by his mother Parvati to guard her door from unwanted intrusions during her bath.
Once he sobered up, Shiva realized his error, and asked the animals who would donate their head to replace Ganesha. Only the loyal war elephant offered her head to replace Ganesha's, seeing as Ganesha was her master. It is said that the elephant reincarnated as Ganesha's consort...
The Myth of Ganesha
In actual fact, Parvati created Ganesha because Shiva was away so much she missed conceiving and giving birth to another son. (See the link in the following URL for more details.)
Here's a link to the etymology and background for Ganesha, who may actually had been a tribal leader of a group of indigenous tribes called the Vināyakas who were conquered by the ancient Aryans of India.
Also, the Vinayaka is mentioned in Buddhist Tantra as the the six-armed form of the Buddhist protector Mahakala (Shadbhuja), which is an emanation of Avalokiteshvara standing atop an elephant headed supine figure.
Relationship between the Vinayakas and Ganesha
Quite possibly then, the Vinayakas were mythologized as demons (psychological manifestations of spiritual evil which creates difficulties and obstacles) in the Veda.
With Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhist tradition, the psychological aspects of the mind represented by the Hindu god Ganesha, the Remover of Obstacles, were spiritually "propitiated" through Buddhist meditation to serve the Buddha.
Thus, the Buddhist Vinayaka represents the emanation of Avalokiteshvara known as the Buddhist protector Mahakala, who represents absolute reality without attribute, form or quality.
Later in East Asian Buddhist history Mahakala becomes one of the Chinese Seven Gods of Fortune, the God of Darkness (in Chinese, Dà hēi tiān (大黒天), and in Japanese, Daikokuten.
Through Daikokuten's relationship with Marici, Vinayaka is related to Bhaisajya Guru Buddha, the Medicine Buddha.
Reference:
Vinayaka's connection to Buddhism: http://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=207
20071017
Critique of Kramer and Alstad's The Guru Papers Masks of Authoritarian Power
While Kramer and Alstad have good intentions in the Guru Papers, it is obvious that a subtle socialist view of religion is present.
They even attack Eastern religions, and thus ultimately disrespect the Buddha.
Possibly their work has influenced left-wing thinkers who conclude Buddhism is as authoritarian as monotheism because it is a religion, ignoring the fact that Buddhism was itself a critique of the Hinduism of the Buddha's time.
If the Buddha was originally authoritarian at the start of his popularity, he was not when he died.
At first, he refused to allow women to join, due to misogyny he inherited from his Hindu roots. Then he has a change of heart when he realized that gender does not truly determine who reaches Nirvana.
I know several sutras sound misogynist, but they may have been written by Hindus because by the time most sutras were written, they were written at the school at Nalanda and mainly were written by Hindus. The school at Nalanda was a Hindu-Buddhist school.
Thus, any Oneness religion from India is authoritarian because Hinduism is an authoritarian religion. For Buddhism is a lot more unconditional than Hinduism is.
They even attack Eastern religions, and thus ultimately disrespect the Buddha.
Possibly their work has influenced left-wing thinkers who conclude Buddhism is as authoritarian as monotheism because it is a religion, ignoring the fact that Buddhism was itself a critique of the Hinduism of the Buddha's time.
If the Buddha was originally authoritarian at the start of his popularity, he was not when he died.
At first, he refused to allow women to join, due to misogyny he inherited from his Hindu roots. Then he has a change of heart when he realized that gender does not truly determine who reaches Nirvana.
I know several sutras sound misogynist, but they may have been written by Hindus because by the time most sutras were written, they were written at the school at Nalanda and mainly were written by Hindus. The school at Nalanda was a Hindu-Buddhist school.
Thus, any Oneness religion from India is authoritarian because Hinduism is an authoritarian religion. For Buddhism is a lot more unconditional than Hinduism is.
20070616
The Goddess Mantra - Maha Tripura Sundari
I bow to the Supreme Goddess
who abides in all beings
in the form of the Mother,
To that great Mother of all things,
I pay homage again and again!
Satyam shivam sundaram
'Absolute Truth is Ultimate Good is Supreme Beauty.'
who abides in all beings
in the form of the Mother,
To that great Mother of all things,
I pay homage again and again!
Satyam shivam sundaram
'Absolute Truth is Ultimate Good is Supreme Beauty.'
20041215
Does god exist?
The inner person is a jewel. It is life itself. It is the treasure of the vital breath called prana.
Everyone is deluded by errors and confusions about God. They don't understand the true inner meaning (marma) of life.
The divine love (prema) of the inner person does not usually appear in the earthly realm., but only through the inner person can people experience divine love.
Those people who experience the inner person are the inner person, because the inner person (God) recognizes the inner person.
These people and the inner person (God) seem to exist separately, yet it is the inner person who realizes the inner person (God).
Those who experience the inner person are dead-yet-alive (jiyante mara). They are the very essence of that inner person (God).
Initial experiences of the inner person (God) are signs of great good fortune. The inner person is on the far shores of experience.
Chanting the name of the inner person (God) leads to a separate mystical place (heaven). Distinct from this world, it has its own customs. Candidas says: Everything about it is distinct. Who can fathom its customs?
- from Manusa manusa sabai balaye, in Sahajiya sahitya by Manindramohan Basu
Everyone is deluded by errors and confusions about God. They don't understand the true inner meaning (marma) of life.
The divine love (prema) of the inner person does not usually appear in the earthly realm., but only through the inner person can people experience divine love.
Those people who experience the inner person are the inner person, because the inner person (God) recognizes the inner person.
These people and the inner person (God) seem to exist separately, yet it is the inner person who realizes the inner person (God).
Those who experience the inner person are dead-yet-alive (jiyante mara). They are the very essence of that inner person (God).
Initial experiences of the inner person (God) are signs of great good fortune. The inner person is on the far shores of experience.
Chanting the name of the inner person (God) leads to a separate mystical place (heaven). Distinct from this world, it has its own customs. Candidas says: Everything about it is distinct. Who can fathom its customs?
- from Manusa manusa sabai balaye, in Sahajiya sahitya by Manindramohan Basu
20041213
All About Hinduism (Shiva, Shakti and Maya)
All About Hinduism:
Siva, Sakti And Maya
The Lord Siva pervades the whole world by His Sakti. He works through His Sakti. Sakti is the conscious energy of Lord Siva. She is the very body of Lord Siva. The potter is the first cause for the pot. The stick and the wheel are the instrumental causes. The clay is the material cause of the pot. Similarly, Lord Siva is the first cause of the world. Sakti is the instrumental cause. Maya is the material cause.
Sakti is not the material cause of the universe, because she is of the nature of consciousness (Chaitanya). Siva is pure consciousness, but matter is pure unconsciousness. Sakti is the intermediate link between the two.
Sakti is the reflex of Siva. It has no independent existence. Siva assumes this form out of His great love for mankind. Siva wishes that all should know Him.
Commentary: Shiva is pure consciousness, and matter, pure unconsciousness. Shakti is the intermediary between consciousness and unconsciousness.
Maya is thus pure unconsciousness.
Anava, Karma and Maya
Souls (Pasu) are by nature infinite, all-pervading, eternal and all-knowing like Lord Siva (Pati). Yet they think that they are finite, limited and little-knowing, ignorant and temporary. This is due to their bonds (Pasa), viz., Anava, Karma and Maya which are called the three Malas or impurities. Anava is the impurity which makes the all-pervading Jiva think itself to be atomic (Anu). It produces the erroneous notion of finiteness. The second impurity or bond is Karma. The soul acts in certain ways on account of its limitation and does good and evil actions. Karma brings about the conjunction of the soul with its body. The results of the Karma have to be worked out in the world. There should be worlds and bodies, in order to experience the fruits of actions and acquire knowledge. These are provided by Maya, the third Mala or bond. Maya is the material cause of the world. The soul gets experience and limited knowledge through Maya.
The soul learns, by long experience, that this Samsara is full of pains and is transitory, and that he can attain eternal bliss and immortality only by attaining Sivatva or the nature of Siva or God-realisation. He develops Vairagya (dispassion), and Viveka (discrimination between the real and the unreal, the permanent and the impermanent).
Commentary; Anavan Karma and Maya are the Trimala, the three malas (impurities).
Jiva refers to the ego-self which thinks itself to be atomic.
Siva, Sakti And Maya
The Lord Siva pervades the whole world by His Sakti. He works through His Sakti. Sakti is the conscious energy of Lord Siva. She is the very body of Lord Siva. The potter is the first cause for the pot. The stick and the wheel are the instrumental causes. The clay is the material cause of the pot. Similarly, Lord Siva is the first cause of the world. Sakti is the instrumental cause. Maya is the material cause.
Sakti is not the material cause of the universe, because she is of the nature of consciousness (Chaitanya). Siva is pure consciousness, but matter is pure unconsciousness. Sakti is the intermediate link between the two.
Sakti is the reflex of Siva. It has no independent existence. Siva assumes this form out of His great love for mankind. Siva wishes that all should know Him.
Commentary: Shiva is pure consciousness, and matter, pure unconsciousness. Shakti is the intermediary between consciousness and unconsciousness.
Maya is thus pure unconsciousness.
Anava, Karma and Maya
Souls (Pasu) are by nature infinite, all-pervading, eternal and all-knowing like Lord Siva (Pati). Yet they think that they are finite, limited and little-knowing, ignorant and temporary. This is due to their bonds (Pasa), viz., Anava, Karma and Maya which are called the three Malas or impurities. Anava is the impurity which makes the all-pervading Jiva think itself to be atomic (Anu). It produces the erroneous notion of finiteness. The second impurity or bond is Karma. The soul acts in certain ways on account of its limitation and does good and evil actions. Karma brings about the conjunction of the soul with its body. The results of the Karma have to be worked out in the world. There should be worlds and bodies, in order to experience the fruits of actions and acquire knowledge. These are provided by Maya, the third Mala or bond. Maya is the material cause of the world. The soul gets experience and limited knowledge through Maya.
The soul learns, by long experience, that this Samsara is full of pains and is transitory, and that he can attain eternal bliss and immortality only by attaining Sivatva or the nature of Siva or God-realisation. He develops Vairagya (dispassion), and Viveka (discrimination between the real and the unreal, the permanent and the impermanent).
Commentary; Anavan Karma and Maya are the Trimala, the three malas (impurities).
Jiva refers to the ego-self which thinks itself to be atomic.
20040804
Love and Compassion
While feelings of desire, lust, and passion are fleeting, Love and compassion will sustain the universe.
However, it is foolish to think that the physical root of feelings are lesser than the spiritual roots of love and compassion. Were it not for such feelings, life would be empty of love and compassion.
Love and compassion is called loving-kindness in the Buddhist, Christian, and Jewish traditions and Muslim traditions, yet it may predate the establishment of contemporary organized religion.
Here is an incomplete list on love and compassion for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and Judaism.
Buddhism
Dhagpo Kagyu: http://www.dhagpo-kagyu.org/anglais/science-esprit/fondements/bodhicitta/sham-love-compassion.htm
Christianity
John Roberts' Divine Love and Compassion: http://www.godispirit.info/divine-love-and-compassion.html
The God of Love, Compassion and Forgiveness: http://people.opposingviews.com/hindu-god-love-compassion-forgiveness-3315.html
Islam:
Love and Compassion in Islam: http://www.wccm.org/content/love-and-compassion-islam
Judaism:
Compassion for Humanity in the Jewish Tradition: http://www.bodhicitta.net/Compassion%20for%20Humanity%20in%20the%20Jewish%20Tradition.htm
However, it is foolish to think that the physical root of feelings are lesser than the spiritual roots of love and compassion. Were it not for such feelings, life would be empty of love and compassion.
Love and compassion is called loving-kindness in the Buddhist, Christian, and Jewish traditions and Muslim traditions, yet it may predate the establishment of contemporary organized religion.
Here is an incomplete list on love and compassion for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and Judaism.
Buddhism
Dhagpo Kagyu: http://www.dhagpo-kagyu.org/anglais/science-esprit/fondements/bodhicitta/sham-love-compassion.htm
Christianity
John Roberts' Divine Love and Compassion: http://www.godispirit.info/divine-love-and-compassion.html
The God of Love, Compassion and Forgiveness: http://people.opposingviews.com/hindu-god-love-compassion-forgiveness-3315.html
Islam:
Love and Compassion in Islam: http://www.wccm.org/content/love-and-compassion-islam
Judaism:
Compassion for Humanity in the Jewish Tradition: http://www.bodhicitta.net/Compassion%20for%20Humanity%20in%20the%20Jewish%20Tradition.htm
20030922
Humanity is one family
"Two instances of Hindu Principles that symbolize the outcome of freedom of thought are the pronouncements made not today, but four thousand years back by unnamed rishis (Hindu ascetics) that, 'This world is one family' (Vasudaiva Kutumbakam) and that 'The Universal Reality is the same, but different people can call it by different names' (Ekam Sat Viprah Bahuda Vadanti). In these two proclamations made in ancient Hindu India, we see the seeds of globalism and freedom of thought, four thousand years before the world was to become the global village of today." - http://veda.wikidot.com/hindutva
My objection to the modern interpretation that "vasudaiva kutumbakam" is the seed of globalism, is that the English rendering, "this world is one family" refers not to the whole world, but to the person. "World" is an late English term referring to "the people as a whole", i.e. humanity, reality. A closer translation of "vasudaiva kutumbakam" would be "Humanity is one family."
vasuda, vasudha (`containing wealth'): the earth, world, globe - http://vedabase.net/v/vasuda, http://vedabase.net/v/vasudha
iva: adv. & conj. Thus, like, in like manner as; as, in some way, almost, scarcely - http://vedabase.net/i/iva
kutumb: household, family - http://vedabase.net/k/kutumb
akam: without desire i.e. an epithet of the Supreme. - http://vedabase.net/a/akam
Thus "vasudaiva kutumbakam" means "the world as ideal family".
"Ekam Sat Viprah Bahuda Vadanti" is from RgVeda 1.164 verse 46c, and is translated as:
ekam: adj. One - http://vedabase.net/e/ekam
sat: the Supreme, pure, spirit, eternal, the cause - http://vedabase.net/s/sat
viprah: sage - http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/rv.pl?wort=vi/praa
bahuda: repeatedly - http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/rv.pl?wort=bahudhaa/
vadanti - to call it. - http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/rv.pl?wort=vadanti
But that quote from the RgVeda has continues on to read: "agnim yamam matarishvanam ahuh", which translates as "many gods the rishi call".
Thus, this line translates as:
One truth, the sage (repeatedly) calls it.
Many gods, the rishi call.
The implication is that Brahman has many names, the names of the devas and devis. Although Brahman is the one true God, a rishi may propitiate many gods representing aspects of Brahman.
Reference:
Sanskrit translations: http://vedabase.net
Rig Veda: http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/rv.pl
Hindutva: http://veda.wikidot.com/hindutva
My objection to the modern interpretation that "vasudaiva kutumbakam" is the seed of globalism, is that the English rendering, "this world is one family" refers not to the whole world, but to the person. "World" is an late English term referring to "the people as a whole", i.e. humanity, reality. A closer translation of "vasudaiva kutumbakam" would be "Humanity is one family."
vasuda, vasudha (`containing wealth'): the earth, world, globe - http://vedabase.net/v/vasuda, http://vedabase.net/v/vasudha
iva: adv. & conj. Thus, like, in like manner as; as, in some way, almost, scarcely - http://vedabase.net/i/iva
kutumb: household, family - http://vedabase.net/k/kutumb
akam: without desire i.e. an epithet of the Supreme. - http://vedabase.net/a/akam
Thus "vasudaiva kutumbakam" means "the world as ideal family".
"Ekam Sat Viprah Bahuda Vadanti" is from RgVeda 1.164 verse 46c, and is translated as:
ekam: adj. One - http://vedabase.net/e/ekam
sat: the Supreme, pure, spirit, eternal, the cause - http://vedabase.net/s/sat
viprah: sage - http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/rv.pl?wort=vi/praa
bahuda: repeatedly - http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/rv.pl?wort=bahudhaa/
vadanti - to call it. - http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/rv.pl?wort=vadanti
But that quote from the RgVeda has continues on to read: "agnim yamam matarishvanam ahuh", which translates as "many gods the rishi call".
Thus, this line translates as:
One truth, the sage (repeatedly) calls it.
Many gods, the rishi call.
The implication is that Brahman has many names, the names of the devas and devis. Although Brahman is the one true God, a rishi may propitiate many gods representing aspects of Brahman.
Reference:
Sanskrit translations: http://vedabase.net
Rig Veda: http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/rv.pl
Hindutva: http://veda.wikidot.com/hindutva
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)