Date of publication: 2017-08-27 04:27
Thou shalt know him [God] without image, without semblance and without means.--"But for me to know God thus, with nothing between, I must be all but he, he all but me."--I say, God must be very I, I very God, so consummately one that this he and this I are one "is," in this is-ness working one work eternally but so long as this he and this I, to wit, God and the soul, are not one single here, one single now, the I cannot work with nor be one with that he. 9
Below is a reposting of Tom Pepper 8767 s essay 8775 Atman, Aporia, and Atomism: A Review of B. Alan Wallace’s Meditations of a Buddhist Skeptic. 8776 But first, an explanation.
69:67 Blakney, "About Disinterest," p. 87. The translator prefers "disinterest" to "detachment" for abegescheidenheit. I really do not know which is better. The German word seems to correspond to the Sanskrit anabh 799 nivesa or asanga ( mush 868 jaku in Japanese and wu chih chu in Chinese), meaning "not attached," "not clinging to."
note also that judaism, as contrasted with christianity does concentrate on works vs. beliefs, iow it's more in line with what el segundo talked about in that the past to salvation is not about "accepting jesus" (obviously) or any particular BELIEF, but about works, mostly. iow, a person gets in god's good graces not by his beliefs, but by his acts, primarily
Could there be a ground for a healthy mind, a trained mind an ethical mind in this western way of life for the practice of Tantra? I really wonder. I don 8767 t know.
As a Tibetan Buddhist, this piece appears wrong on so many levels. There are no gold fat buddhas in any Tibetan tradition. At least none that any westerner would recognize. I suppose the author could have seen Dzambhala, who is connected to prosperity. That might explain the money around the statue.
I don’t believe it’s an appropriate entry point into Buddhism. It distracts from the basic practice of attention to your mind as it is. This simple practice is demanding and unglamorous, but essential. If you don’t know your own mind, how can you possibly transform it?
You are clearly too dense to converse with. I never made a statement as to the veracity of beliefs. The argument was over whether people can find profundity and depth in a belief system when others in the past have claimed faith while performing violent acts. AFAIK, war and killing were not part of the Buddha's teachings. But you're not interested in honest debate, only attempting to score points with non-sequiturs.
I don't think you know what orientalism is. If you did, you'd understand that *YOU* are being extremely reductionist in your own understanding of Tibetan buddhism. I suspect that this diagnosis has more to do with your pre-ordained anti-religious agenda than with any thing you actually learned or came to understand about buddhism. More study next time please. It might save you from publishing similar, useless drivel.
"The argument was over whether people can find profundity and depth in a belief system when others in the past have claimed faith while performing violent acts."
I guess it's certainly possible for the naive to poke through the debris of most any faith and find something to ogle hell, some people claim the same about Depak Chopra.
Just don't bother to label it "profundity" without the scare quotes it's triviality or nonsense on stilts.
Gender inequality is when people of all gender do not get equal privileges. It refers to the unequal treatment of people belonging to various genders.
The starting points of individualism and communitarianism are closely related to face. If I see myself as a self-determining individual, then face has to do with preserving my image with others and myself. I can and should exert control in situations to achieve this goal. I may do this by taking a competitive stance in negotiations or confronting someone who I perceive to have wronged me. I may be comfortable in a mediation where the other party and I meet face to face and frankly discuss our differences.
While I respect the power of some of the Tibetan practices, I wonder why you would even do them? Yes, they may indeed work, but at what risk? In my mind, the Buddha, either from legend or in fact, never practiced any of this except before he woke up. His wake up came through simple awareness meditation, nothing more. If that is the goal of Buddhism, to wake up to reality, then why make things so complicated? Basic awareness meditation, along w/ a simple ethical methodology like the eight fold path (which is redundant once we do wake up) DOES work, to a greater or lesser extent, w/ anyone that practices it w/ intention.