Bibilcal Swine?

quote:

I,m glad budhists are generaly peaceful apart from what they did to the inhabitants of tibet .

Dear Rube,

I am assuming you meant what china did and is doing to Tibet? When one considers the 20% of the population was ordained (monk or nun)and the remainder deeply religious we can get an inkling of what it must have been like to have had 98% of their monasteries destroyed during the so called 'cultural revolution'. Many monks and nuns are still imprisoned by the Chinese. I think the Tibetan army numbered 500 at the time China invaded but these soldiers were little more than border guards and their weapons were ancient. China was sytematically stamping out all Tibetan culture in Tibet until they realised there was money to be made from tourism and some monasteries have been re-built but the monks and nuns are watched tirelessly.

China may well be the next great emprire but it has already sown the seeds of it's own destruction. The only good to come out of their illegal invasion of Tibet (the west did nothing to help - no oil in Tibet) is that many qualified Buddhist teachers are now in the west.

Regards,

Erik

quote:

Originally posted by Malky:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by erik scothron:
The entire old testament, IMO, is little more than the history of tribal warfare.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

While we're on the OT, just where did Cain's wife spring from?

Mail order bride catalogue? Remind me please, I don't remember.

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Malky:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by erik scothron:
The entire old testament, IMO, is little more than the history of tribal warfare.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

While we're on the OT, just where did Cain's wife spring from?

Mail order bride catalogue? Remind me please, I don't remember.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Well, you may remember in the beginning God created Adam, then Eve from Adam's rib. Genesis chapter 4, v. 1 tells us Adam 'knew' his wife, who then produced two sons, Cain and Abel. Forward to V.17 where Cain 'knew' his wife. No explanation as to where she came from!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Malky:

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Malky:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by erik scothron:
The entire old testament, IMO, is little more than the history of tribal warfare.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

While we're on the OT, just where did Cain's wife spring from?

Mail order bride catalogue? Remind me please, I don't remember.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Well, you may remember in the beginning God created Adam, then Eve from Adam's rib. Genesis chapter 4, v. 1 tells us Adam 'knew' his wife, who then produced two sons, Cain and Abel. Forward to V.17 where Cain 'knew' his wife. No explanation as to where she came from!!!

Malky,

Yes, I remember now. Just googled it and found a bunch of pro-creationist websites that make painful reading. How long before heretics are locked up in the US? I certainly don't believe in a literal genesis and I don't believe in a good deal of evolutionary theory either. It was interesting to see Prof. Richard Dawkins on the box recently atacking the theistic religions but I think he went to far and looked every bit as fundamentalist as the fundamentalists he obviously despises so much. In fact, I think it is demostrable that much of the 'faith' scientists have in what they think is reality (but is just mere theory) is every bit as 'religious' as religion.

The trouble with Dawkins is, his argument is essentially; if you believe in God you're thick. This demonstrates no understanding of the complex factors which lead to belief in a deity, leaves little room for debate and immediately offends and alienates people who may otherwise be willing to engage in constructive dialogue.

quote:

Originally posted by Malky:
The trouble with Dawkins is, his argument is essentially; if you believe in God you're thick. This demonstrates no understanding of the complex factors which lead to belief in a deity, leaves little room for debate and immediately offends and alienates people who may otherwise be willing to engage in constructive dialogue.

I certainly agree. I have always said that faith 'functions' but Dawkins doesn't get this. People do benefit from their faith and it is often a force for great good in the world. Dawkins own work is quite easy to pull apart so who is he to talk? Science is his church and he is the self appointed pope of this church and believes himself to be infallible IMO. My other pet peeves are Daniel Dennett and VS Ramachandran both of whom make stunningly incoherent comments about brain/mind/consciousness/cognition etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
If objects cannot exist without the mind, mankind - or conscious thought - would have to have been around for about 16 billion years, or however old the universe is supposed to be nowadays.

This is presupposing that time is not also illusionary. There is thought that time is a concept that the mind has evolved to order our “conventional” reality.
(along with space)?

“Even for physicists time does not exist. Time is an illusion. The phenomena from which we deduce its existence are real, but we interpret them wrongly.”….
Julian Barbour, a theoretical physicist.

Just another view, John.

This is so good. I can only read in appreciative awe of what is going on here! Fredrik

quote:

This is presupposing that time is not also illusionary. There is thought that time is a concept that the mind has evolved to order our
“Even for physicists time does not exist. Time is an illusion. The phenomena from which we deduce its existence are real, but we interpret them wrongly.”….
Julian Barbour, a theoretical physicist.

Just another view, John.

John,

Yes time is illusory, like any other phenomena it's conventional reality can be deconstructed. Have you read Barbours book 'The End oF Time'. From my view he gets it right some of the time and wrong some of the time but he gets it right a good deal more than some physicists and The end of time is a mind boggling good read.

All the best,

Erik

That Dalai Lama is no fool. When he was a boy in Tibet there were no cars in the country. He had one shipped in and then took it to pieces and reassembled it on his own. I understand that the chief rabbi in Israel has proposed a sort of United Nations of religions with the Dalai Lama at its head.

Religion is such a personal thing but for me the biggest persuaders that there's something going down (spiritual I suppose rather than 'religious') are the near death experiences (caused by fatal breakdown of the brain - yeah right!) and the sense of awe. Most (but not all) of my experiences of the latter have been in the presence of outstanding natural beauty - the Grand Canyon, Yosemite National Park, etc.

Regards
Steve

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
If time is illusory when presumably it follows that we can make the illusion run the other way, fast forwards and rewind "at will"?

M

Mike,

Then it would still be an illusion. It is said that enlightened beings 'know all objects of knowlege, directly and simultaneously, in the past, present and future'. I think this refers to having a direct realisation of emptiness (ultimate reality) rather than knowing what colour panties Monica Belluci is wearing at the mo (or indeed whether she is wearing any at all). It is said it is possible to train the mind to go back and review past lives but I have no experience of this. Buddha is said to have done this and that having looked back could find no beginning. As for looking forward this is also meant to be possible. It is said that when one purifies one's mind to the right degree one develops certain miracle powers e.g clairvoyance and all I can say is that on a meditation retreat (I prefer the term 'meditation tactical withdrawal' as the PWRR never retreats)I have experienced some weird stuff indeed. So yes, Mike, you may well be right.

Regards,

Erik

quote:

for me the biggest persuaders that there's something going down (spiritual I suppose rather than 'religious') are the near death experiences (caused by fatal breakdown of the brain - yeah right!)

There are a number of scientific articles to be found on the lancet webite (the lancet being the British medical journal) Lancet

You will have to register to download the articles but the Dutch one is particularly good and seems to offer evidence for NDE (near death experience) and the out of body experience.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

quote:

Originally posted by 7V:
... and the sense of awe. Most (but not all) of my experiences of the latter have been in the presence of outstanding natural beauty - the Grand Canyon, Yosemite National Park, etc.

Hi Steve

That sounds a bit like pantheism - the thought that God is in everything we see. I understand exactly what you mean and agree with you.

M

Mike and Steve,

Except to say that if one took a square metre (any square metre will do)of Yosemite or one's own back garden for that matter and subjected it to close scrutiny over a 24 hour period and logged how many insects were eaten alive by other insects or birds and other animals in the daily vicious fight for survival then the view changes from one of beauty to one of horror. It is very tempting to look out on a grand view and see only beauty but the reality is somewhat different possibly? Lions ripping a gazelle apart in Africa on the beautiful serengetti at sunset or a bunch of ducks gang banging a female duck even after it had died in glorious sunshine in Lewes last weekend. It all goes on. However 99.999 % of it goes unnoticed by us. Nature is vicious in the extreme as well as beautiful, it just depends on your view, as does everything.

Erik

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
or a bunch of ducks gang banging a female duck even after it had died in glorious sunshine in Lewes last weekend.

That's Lewes for you - a long history of horror in the name of religion and dodgy politics too. Even the ducks, eh?!

If all is illusion, nothing good or bad actually happens (but what an imagination I must have)... though I will ponder the Belluci question some more...

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:

Except to say that if one took a square metre (any square metre will do)of Yosemite or one's own back garden for that matter and subjected it to close scrutiny over a 24 hour period and logged how many insects were eaten alive by other insects or birds and other animals in the daily vicious fight for survival then the view changes from one of beauty to one of horror. It is very tempting to look out on a grand view and see only beauty but the reality is somewhat different possibly? Lions ripping a gazelle apart in Africa on the beautiful serengetti at sunset or a bunch of ducks gang banging a female duck even after it had died in glorious sunshine in Lewes last weekend. It all goes on. However 99.999 % of it goes unnoticed by us. Nature is vicious in the extreme as well as beautiful, it just depends on your view, as does everything.

This reminds me of a story I sometimes tell my students (aikido or meditation) to describe the ego.

It concerns Dr. Livingstone, who when he was attacked by a lion went through all the expected sensations of fear and panic before surrendering with the thought "Here is one of God's creatures being attacked by another". *

There's truth in that statement (for those who believe in God, of course) and it's a truth involving the dissolution of the ego. However, it's not a truth that's very conducive to survival, for which fight or flight (ego) would be the best strategy.

As you say, Eric, it all depends on your view.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

That sounds a bit like pantheism - the thought that God is in everything we see.

Ah ha! I wondered what pantheism really was. I assumed that 'God in everything' was straightforward spirituality or mysticism - Kaballah, Sufi, Tantra, Ayurveda, Christian, whatever.

Steve

* Of course he lived to tell the tale.

Hi Erik You were right about some scientists being as religious as
the people thay oppose .When you go into the stillness it all seems
irelevant.
On your meditations have you ever done chicken breathing
thats what the facilitator called it on the course i attended its a
form of active medittation ,it looks strsnge people flapping there
arms and brathing rythmically through the mouth for half an hour or
so but it was quite effective .
I think the standard response about Cains wife is he narried his
sister Abraham if he actually existed that is, was married to his
half sister i think the Egyptians sometimes married their sisters
also ,the practice must have been outlawed later on due to birth
defects or something .
The link about Tibet is here http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html
its upsrtting to read but appears well documented .
Be well .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rube:

I think the standard response about Cains wife is he narried his
sister.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

What sister? According to Genesis, Adam and Eve had two sons, no daughter. Even if there was a sister, Leviticus 18:6 states "None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness"
Another random contradiction I find difficult to reconcile, Genesis 9:3 God tells Noah "Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you", yet Deuteronomy Ch. 14 proscribes a long list of animals and fish that may not be eaten.

quote:

Blake

Which episode of Blake's Seven does that coome from???

2000 + years later, philistines have become palestinians and are still prejudiced against.

moses brought his crew across the red sea and spent many years wandering before defeating the native tribes in the 'promised land'. who were these tribes, and did they not have any incumbent rights. lakota sioux, native 'australians', anyone ?

it's a long way, from tipperary ...

No, Philistines have not "become" Palestinians.

Today's Palestinians are Arabs and are rooted in the Arabian peninsular. The original inhabitants of the 'promised land' were Canaanites.

F****** Judean people's front, we're the people's front of Judea.

quote:

did they not have any incumbent rights. lakota sioux, native 'australians', anyone ?

No they didn't. It was a case of 'We're right cause you're all dead'.

I'm not saying anything with regard to the pros and cons of such a situation but merely that that was the case.

quote:

Originally posted by Rube:
Hi Erik You were right about some scientists being as religious as
the people thay oppose .When you go into the stillness it all seems
irelevant.
On your meditations have you ever done chicken breathing
thats what the facilitator called it on the course i attended its a
form of active medittation ,it looks strsnge people flapping there
arms and brathing rythmically through the mouth for half an hour or
so but it was quite effective .
I think the standard response about Cains wife is he narried his
sister Abraham if he actually existed that is, was married to his
half sister i think the Egyptians sometimes married their sisters
also ,the practice must have been outlawed later on due to birth
defects or something .
The link about Tibet is here http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html
its upsrtting to read but appears well documented .
Be well .

Hi Rube,

Nope, never done chicken breething and I've never heard of it either. If I went to a meditation course and that was on the menu I think I would start loking for hidden cameras .

I'v seen that website before. I have never subscribed to the Tibet as Shangr-la myth - life in Tibet was always hard. The arguments and evidense on that site is refuted elsewhere. Most people I know think it's Chinese propaganda. I've never had anything to do with the Free Tibet gang and nothing whatsoever to do with Tibetan politics, I don't even think HH the Dalai Lama is the most spiritually advanced Buddhist. Having said that I doubt there is a more spiritually advanced nation on this planet despite China's efforts over the last 50 years. It is quite rare to find pure Buddha Dharma in the world these days - we live in degenerate times - but there are pure lineages out there if one looks for them.

Erik