what is the point of religion?

[ftil]

What you get with Buddhism is a set of tools. If you choose not to use what they offer, then that's quite rightly up to you. They use tried and tested methods which are skillfully delivered - hopefully. You might call it a rigid scheme of practice. They might call it a systematic approach to achieving a particular goal. Buddhism doesn't suit everyone.

Why should they offer the image without the pre-requisite practice? You're not compelled to follow them, and they are not compelled to take your advice. It seems as though both parties are free in that sense.

You talk to me as if I didn’t know how to read LOL! I spent considerable time to study Buddhism. I never make up my mind without studying the subject. You may not see that it is a control to ask people to follow a rigid regime. I do. I have spent time to study about cults. The practice they required absolutely fits into that category. We are lucky that we have psychologists who study cults in depth.

I agree that Buddhism is not for everybody. It is definitely not for me. Too bad that I had to waste my time and money to buy books. But in the end of the day, I freed my mind. I agree what Buddha said, “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth. “
Sadly, those who do have secret knowledge of Buddhism don't want to talk.
I would be very interested to learn about it, not practice, though.

[MarkBastable]

Surely these two statements, which appear in the same paragraph, are contradictory.

I agree that Buddhism is not for everybody. It is definitely not for me. Too bad that I had to waste my time and money to buy books.

I would be very interested to learn about it, not practice, though.

[ftil]

Surely these two statements, which appear in the same paragraph, are contradictory.

No it is not if you have studied that subject. I am interested in esoteric one. I would love to know why it is a secret.

[stuntpickle]

I can think of a cases where your assertion is dubious. What about a situation where the economic motives are those of the religion itself, as when the RCC is motivated to wage/fund warfare against a protestant rival to preserve market share? (e.g., Thirty Years War) Seems in this case the religion would rightly be considered the cause.

Then consider sectarian violence in the Moslem world. Are the suicide bombers currently killing pilgrims of another sect motivated by economics? Seems unlikely.

Your statements are guilty of equivocation. No religion is synonymous with its psychical institutions. Any "Christian" war concerning "the economic motives [that] are those of the religion itself, as when the RCC is motivated to wage/fund warfare against a protestant rival to preserve market share" is an abortion of the Christian religion, which counsels against violence and the collection of riches. Moreover, one finds in Christianity, the greatest indictment of religious institutions in history. Jesus criticized nothing more than the "church," and examples of corrupt churches confirm his teachings. Jesus' main thesis was that we are all corrupt and awful and, therefore, are neither arbiters nor executors of judgment--a statement that anticipates all varieties of corruption in churches and their members and admonishes them. Christianity is a corrective mechanism for precisely the sort of thing you're talking about.

Islam is a bit different. Perhaps an argument can be made that the religion is one fundamentally about conquest. I think, in many ways, Islam is the antithesis of Christianity. However, I am not prepared to pursue such an argument.

[MarkBastable]

Islam is a bit different. Perhaps an argument can be made that the religion is one fundamentally about conquest. I think, in many ways, Islam is the antithesis of Christianity. However, I am not prepared to pursue such an argument.

If you're not prepared to pursue it, don't make such provocative statements then run away from them.

It's disingenuous and cowardly, and you're bright enough to know it.

[stuntpickle]

If you're not prepared to pursue it, don't make such provocative statements then run away from them.

It's disingenuous and cowardly, and you're bright enough to know it.

I think it's obvious without pursuing. Jesus was an itinerant healer who was executed by the Roman state and forgave those who executed him. Muhammad was a warlord who subjugated the Arabian Peninsula. Jesus is famous for saying to those about to stone an adulteress, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone." More than once Muhammad advocated stoning people for adultery. Both figures had philosophies consistent with the aforementioned lifestyles. I'm not afraid of the argument, but rather I don't want to distract from the point, which is that the comments made regarding Christianity are wrongheaded. I'm not interested in debating the virtues of Islam.

[Theunderground]

Religion does have some apsects in it which correlate with genuine human yearnings. But unfortunately priests and polits misuse these aspects and dogmatise and preach to others.While scientists just posit there opposition to these aspects just for the sake of being reactionary or demanding unreasonable evidence.

[Paulclem]

You talk to me as if I didn’t know how to read LOL! I spent considerable time to study Buddhism. I never make up my mind without studying the subject. You may not see that it is a control to ask people to follow a rigid regime. I do. I have spent time to study about cults. The practice they required absolutely fits into that category. We are lucky that we have psychologists who study cults in depth.

I agree that Buddhism is not for everybody. It is definitely not for me. Too bad that I had to waste my time and money to buy books. But in the end of the day, I freed my mind. I agree what Buddha said, “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth. “
Sadly, those who do have secret knowledge of Buddhism don't want to talk.
I would be very interested to learn about it, not practice, though.

If you have studied it then why are you surprised when the group you were with didn't just let you have what you requested without doing the practice?

You may not see that it is a control to ask people to follow a rigid regime.

No, I think it fair that if you want to join a group that is offering teachings, then you follow the prerequistes for that group. You are free to join in or free to go your own way. Take it or leave it.

I have spent time to study about cults.

So it's cults now is it.
I think you just like arguing with me. You've moved away from the original premise into wind up mode.

We are lucky that we have psychologists who study cults in depth.

Wind up mode

Sadly, those who do have secret knowledge of Buddhism don't want to talk.

Are we back to Tantra and the secret teachings? I did read that the secret is actually embodied in the relationship between the Teacher and the Student. At that level a Student has a Teacher with which they form a strong Karmic bond - or reawaken one. Transmissions are actually an oral tradition. I suspect all the teachings are already available, but that mere study will not capture the essence of the teachings.

[ftil]

If you have studied it then why are you surprised when the group you were with didn't just let you have what you requested without doing the practice?

Yes, I was surprised because if it was a truly spiritual practice they wouldn’t need to push people to be engaged in a regime. Everybody knows that Mercedes is a good car. It doesn’t need any advertisement. It sells. Period. The same applies to any school of thoughts. It Buddhism was a practice that bring tolerance and acceptance of others not mentioning happiness and fulfillment…people would be attracted to it. They wouldn’t need to put any requirements but people would choose on their own to practice. It is as simple as that.

So it's cults now is it.
I think you just like arguing with me. You've moved away from the original premise into wind up mode

No, I don’t argue with you. I mentioned cults because I was in a group of people who followed certain teachings. I took me less then 6 weeks to figure it out that something was wrong. I did some research about cults and I was surprised that I had a very wrong idea about cults. I did examine many beliefs and experiences I had in the past. Practice of Buddhism I was asked to do to get an image was nothing else but a cult. You may not agree with it but why don’t we leave it here. I respect that you follow Buddhism teachings and you need to respect that I don’t. We are free to question, aren’t we?

Are we back to Tantra and the secret teachings? I did read that the secret is actually embodied in the relationship between the Teacher and the Student. At that level a Student has a Teacher with which they form a strong Karmic bond - or reawaken one. Transmissions are actually an oral tradition. I suspect all the teachings are already available, but that mere study will not capture the essence of the teachings.

No, I didn’t think about Tantra only. I thought about 2 people involved in Buddhist secret teachings. One person was a Zen master and another was initiated into Vajrayana. They said a little but it was profound and I wish they could reveal more but they didn’t want to do so. As I said, I am not interested in Buddhist teachings they offer for masses. I want a secret knowledge.

This is my last response to your posts. Have you noticed that whenever I talked about Buddhism you deny everything what I say? I question every belief and I don’t have any needs to defend any religious belief system. You need to find people who are as enthusiastic about Buddhism as you are. I prefer to be around those who question everything. I learn faster in that interactions.LOL!

Enjoy LitNet.

[Paulclem]

Yes, I was surprised because if it was a truly spiritual practice they wouldn’t need to push people to be engaged in a regime. Everybody knows that Mercedes is a good car. It doesn’t need any advertisement. It sells. Period. The same applies to any school of thoughts. It Buddhism was a practice that bring tolerance and acceptance of others not mentioning happiness and fulfillment…people would be attracted to it. They wouldn’t need to put any requirements but people would choose on their own to practice. It is as simple as that.




No, I don’t argue with you. I mentioned cults because I was in a group of people who followed certain teachings. I took me less then 6 weeks to figure it out that something was wrong. I did some research about cults and I was surprised that I had a very wrong idea about cults. I did examine many beliefs and experiences I had in the past. Practice of Buddhism I was asked to do to get an image was nothing else but a cult. You may not agree with it but why don’t we leave it here. I respect that you follow Buddhism teachings and you need to respect that I don’t. We are free to question, aren’t we?






No, I didn’t think about Tantra only. I thought about 2 people involved in Buddhist secret teachings. One person was a Zen master and another was initiated into Vajrayana. They said a little but it was profound and I wish they could reveal more but they didn’t want to do so. As I said, I am not interested in Buddhist teachings they offer for masses. I want a secret knowledge.

This is my last response to your posts. Have you noticed that whenever I talked about Buddhism you deny everything what I say? I question every belief and I don’t have any needs to defend any religious belief system. You need to find people who are as enthusiastic about Buddhism as you are. I prefer to be around those who question everything. I learn faster in that interactions.LOL!

Enjoy LitNet.

Practice of Buddhism I was asked to do to get an image was nothing else but a cult. You may not agree with it but why don’t we leave it here.

I have no way of evaluating your experiences except from what you say. You initially framed this as a form of Buddhism, which, if it is a cult seems unfair to then cast aspersions upon the valid practices and to then claim that Buddhism has the same faults.

No, I didn’t think about Tantra only. I thought about 2 people involved in Buddhist secret teachings. One person was a Zen master and another was initiated into Vajrayana. They said a little but it was profound and I wish they could reveal more but they didn’t want to do so. As I said, I am not interested in Buddhist teachings they offer for masses. I want a secret knowledge.

Why do you think that might be? When we've discussed higher teachings before we've talked about how the practices need skill and guidance. As I said, to have such teachings requires a teacher. This is standard practice because it is important to have guidance when confronting the psychological/ karmic issues that these practices assist with. I'm also interested, but I now appreciate that I need to practice the path first.

From your former posts I detect that you are interested in the mind and its workings, which is exactly what Buddhism is about. You clearly have some connection through your family too, but you can't expect to run before you can walk. As I said earlier, the texts are all probably available, but the secret will be embodied in the relationship with the Teacher. (They may also have a part of the text as an oral transmission, or key practice which renders the texts unworkable).

Have you noticed that whenever I talked about Buddhism you deny everything what I say?

If you look over the posts you'll see that I respond where I can see people have written something incorrect. In the case of Mazhur, he had written the complete opposite of the practice. In that case you decided to join in. You don't have to talk to me of course. It's up to you.

[ftil]

Originally posted by Paulclem

Why do you think that might be? When we've discussed higher teachings before we've talked about how the practices need skill and guidance. As I said, to have such teachings requires a teacher. This is standard practice because it is important to have guidance when confronting the psychological/ karmic issues that these practices assist with. I'm also interested, but I now appreciate that I need to practice the path first.

From your former posts I detect that you are interested in the mind and its workings, which is exactly what Buddhism is about. You clearly have some connection through your family too, but you can't expect to run before you can walk. As I said earlier, the texts are all probably available, but the secret will be embodied in the relationship with the Teacher. (They may also have a part of the text as an oral transmission, or key practice which renders the texts unworkable).

You don't have to talk to me of course. It's up to you.

Oh, I just don’t want to talk about Buddhism any more. What I am interested in is deeply guarded by a few. They only give us crumbs and I want a three dish meal. Nothing has changed since Mesopotamia or ancient Egypt and if people believe otherwise, well, I am not going to disturb their sleep.

I am interested in working of the mind but it was not what people I have mentioned talked about.
It was much more interesting than the workings of our minds.

[Paulclem]

Oh, I just don’t want to talk about Buddhism any more. What I am interested in is deeply guarded by a few. They only give us crumbs and I want a three dish meal. Nothing has changed since Mesopotamia or ancient Egypt and if people believe otherwise, well, I am not going to disturb their sleep.

I am interested in working of the mind but it was not what people I have mentioned talked about.
It was much more interesting than the workings of our minds.

It is all about the mind. Perhaps that's what they're not telling you. Without a practice though, whatever it is that hasn't been passed to you is useless.

[ftil]

It is all about the mind. Perhaps that's what they're not telling you. Without a practice though, whatever it is that hasn't been passed to you is useless.

It is not about mind at all! In my post there was nothing that indicted that people I mentioned talked about mind. You have made assumptions and you are wrong. It is much deeper than that. I guess, we are attracted to the different writings and no wonder we can’t understand each other.

[Paulclem]

It is not about mind at all! In my post there was nothing that indicted that people I mentioned talked about mind. You have made assumptions and you are wrong. It is much deeper than that. I guess, we are attracted to the different writings and no wonder we can’t understand each other.

If you are talking about a form of Buddhism then it is about the mind essentially. That's what the practices are aimed at changing. I know you didn't indicate that, but what else is Buddhism concerned with?

[ftil]

If you are talking about a form of Buddhism then it is about the mind essentially. That's what the practices are aimed at changing. I know you didn't indicate that, but what else is Buddhism concerned with?

It is not but if you want to want to simplify it and believe it…so be it. I don’t have any business to convince otherwise.