Thoughts on Buddhism

[Epimethean]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mirPnfe6dAE

[Bgood]

ABRA said

There's nothing more pathetic than an egotistical Buddhist. That's the the epitome of irony. If you're going to be egotistical about religion you may as well become a Christian. The Christians have already totally destroyed all respect for their religion anyway so you can't do much harm there.

Hey that's true, I'm glad for the honest feedback. I can at times, feel overly eager to spread the beautiful artistry, depth and scope of buddha's message. It is also a very intimate and subjective analiysis. It is just such a brilliant tradition all together, even with Hindu tantra and yoga to benefit mediation even more if I could just be more down to earth with it. I get carried away with it, I agree with that!

I m kind of like a walking contradiction in a twisted sense, though, hellbent on becoming the wealthiest atheist buddha Om gom buddha bomb to drop and attain to complain across AMerica some day. A personal fantasy of mine that makes me look up into my own intranced narcissistic slime and visualize a baby dinosaur being born from it's large shell. Where did my mind go???? And for how many years??????
I love that guy. Did you ever see the movie, starring Keanu Reeves, called "Little Buddha". great flick, Check it out. good time!
Mara atttacks Buddha with his army of demons under the bodhi tree.
The Serpent within covers the crown of the buddha when he reaches enlightenment....that HAS to be real! hock:

[Abracadabra]

Magic is the art of manipulating aspects of reality either by supernatural means or through knowledge of occult laws unknown to science.

It is true that if we were going to discuss "magic" we had better have a working definition. Otherwise our conversations would be pointless.

I'm glad that you placed the term "OR" in your definition.

As someone who studies and practices various Wiccan spiritual concepts, I'm fully aware of the need to define "Magic" before even speaking of it. In fact, part of the Wiccan traditions is to write a journal called a "Book of Shadows". One of the purposes of the journal is to document the concepts as the practitioner views them. One of the very first things I had to do was define what "magic" means to me. That would then be my "working definition" throughout my Wiccan rituals and practices.

The very first thing I did was chose to spell the work ending with a "k". So I refer to my practices as "magick". This reason for this is to distinguish between stage "magic" which is merely illusion and deception.

My own personal definition has then become as follows. This is precisely how I have written it in my "Book of Shadows":

Magick - The science and art of transformation of matter, spirit, and energy to orchestrated to bring about change in accordance with my will in ways that may not yet, or ever, be understood or explainable by scientific knowledge.

I refuse to use a term like "supernatural". That would be foolish. Whatever powers I use must necessarily be part of nature. What I don't require is that they make sense in any scientific or logical sense. I also don't restrict nature to solely the world that we call "physical".

Gee whiz, even scientists are proposing hidden and unseen dimensions, parallel universes, dark matter, dark energy, Higgs Fields, Inflaton Fields, etc., etc., etc. So why place limitations on what might be natural?

Our knowledge of nature through science could indeed be nothing more than a mere scratch on the surface for all we know. In fact, it appears the even scientists themselves are pretty convinced of this.

~~~~

However, when I was speaking to the issue of "magic" in my previous posts I wasn't thinking in terms of my Wiccan Spiritual Magick. I know that exists. That can even exist in a purely secular world actually. The term "spiritual" here can simply be thought of as emotional, cerebral, and psychic energy which we already know to exist from science.

When I was addressing magic in my previous posts I was thinking more in terms of anything that is a blatant violation and utter contradiction to what we consider to currently be "logical" or even mathematically or physical "sound".

We already have examples of such phenomenon in science. Like entanglement. We have no "rational explanation" for quantum entanglement to date. For all we know it may be caused by processes that are beyond our comprehension to even logically grasp. If so, it may forever be outside the realm of 'Scientific explanation' and thus forever remain "magic" to us.

In that sense I'm simply defining "magic" to be anything that science can never explain in rational terms that we would consider to be "natural" in the sense of being comprehensible.

Such "magic" may very well exist. We really have no reason to believe that we will ever be able to break the secrets of the Quantum World.

That's just a faith-based wishful thinking on the part of secularists as it is.

Am I right?

We don't have any guarantee, or even reason to believe that we should be able to understand everything there is to know about this reality we live in.

Some things may forever remain "magical" to us in this sense of the term.

---

Hey that's true, I'm glad for the honest feedback. I can at times, feel overly eager to spread the beautiful artistry, depth and scope of buddha's message. It is also a very intimate and subjective analiysis. It is just such a brilliant tradition all together, even with Hindu tantra and yoga to benefit mediation even more if I could just be more down to earth with it. I get carried away with it, I agree with that!

I understand. I agree that Buddhism can indeed be absolutely beautiful artistry and it certainly has much depth and wisdom. It's easy to fall in love with Buddhism when you see these things in it. And it's natural to want to "spread the joy" when you fall in love with something.

However, you mentioned the concept of a "Bodhisattva". This is both a term and a concept that I too have great respect for. However, just like Christian "evangelism" it can easily be abused.

The idea behind becoming a "Bodhisattva" is to help those who are themselves seeking the enlightenment. It's actually incorrect to think that it's the job of a Bodhisattva to go around trying to convince everyone to go the way of the Buddha.

I personally believe that Jesus (or the person who sparked the rumors of Jesus) was indeed a Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva. I have many historical reasons for coming to this conclusion. Not the least of which is that the teachings of Jesus match up far better to the teachings of Buddhism than they do to the teachings of the Torah which even the New Testament clearly shows that Jesus himself renounced.

Please bear with me on this, because if you'll think of Jesus as a Buddhist Bodhisattva for a moment things may become clear,...

According to the gospel rumors of Jesus (which I confess are highly undependable), even those authors recognized the following various things about Jesus:

1. Jesus obtained disciples and requested that they too spread his teachings.

This is one of the things that a Bodhisattva is required to do (at least in the Mahayana Tradition of Buddhism) which would have been the most powerful form of Buddhism at the time when Jesus lived. Mahayana Buddhism was at it's peak at that time in history.

In other words Jesus was asking his disciples to also become "Bodhisattvas" which was an important aspect of Mahayana Buddhism.

2. Jesus also taught his disciples that not everyone is prepared to hear these teachings nor understand them.

In other words, Jesus knew that the job of a Bodhisattva is to help others who are seeking enlightenment to become enlightened, but not to bother those who are not yet awakening.

3. Jesus even went further and taught his disciples not to argue with people about these teachings and that if someone wasn't interested in hearing this they should leave and not press it. (A teaching that has totally gone over the heads of Christian Evangelists and Fundies) Although, in all fairness there do exist Christian Evangelists who do understand this to some degree.

~~~~

So yes, love it, and spread it where it is welcomed! But don't go around "playing mental chess" with people who aren't interested. That's not what being a Bodhisattva is all about. That's the misguided mentality of Christian Fundamentalism.

YES, you can preach it and teach it, but be sure that you're doing this only for people who want to hear it.

Check out Deepak Chopra videos. Or just watch how the Dalai Lama does it. Although both of those men are in a special situation. But still, the key is in making sure your audience actually wants to hear the philosophy.

[Bgood]

MAGIC being defined as the great unknown, inexplicable force that drives growth and evolution is, I believe, an acceptable word to describe mystery, why not? Although when using the word "magic" it can easily be construed and associated with the illusions performed on T.V. and theatres by magicians which is obviously not what Abra is referring to. Ask yourself, what makes grass grow? What makes the sun shine? What makes humans and animals breathe in oxygen and expel carbon dioxide while conversely making plantlife "breathe" in CO2 and "expel" O2? And then ask yourself Why?

A simple atheist's answer to "What makes the grass grow? is tahdah, the soil! What in the soil makes the grass grow? Tahdah, the rain. What makes the rain fall onto the soil to make the grass grow? The rain comes from the clouds which come from the atmosphere which comes from the sky which comes from space which comes from.....it is endless and pointless. It is interdependent. There are many reasons how and why grass grows scientifically or in other words physically or chemically, but what is the whole point of there being any life on this planet at all? What pushes evolution and survival of the species? Is it an invisible force? Is it immeasurable and incalculable to our technology and instruments of science still?

Life is "magical" and mysterious and precious in this sense. What about auras, chakras, radiances and forces which are unseen to the naked eye that cause vibrations and pressure differences between people. What about places that have a certain "feel" of being spooky or haunted that scientists can't quite explain. What about the magic of human consciousness that still remains an elusive enigma for scientists? To simply just say 'I don't know' makes the most sense. And yet ironically, this humble attitude is what brings us closer into total union with the universe and the subconscious psychological concept of helpful gods.

Throughout all my research, Buddha has to be the most prominent and expressive human being ever to mindfully tap into this great Oneness and Emptiness called space. Not really magic, but it looks and feels that way for us finite beings in this infinite universe. Becoming one with nature, enlightened, has multidimensional benefits for all of mankind. Enlightenment is evolution of the mind/body/spirit. ("Spirit" here in the buddhist sense being more closely recognized and relating to emotions and inspiration rather than as something ghostly or eternal.)

[Abracadabra]

Throughout all my research, Buddha has to be the most prominent and expressive human being ever to mindfully tap into this great Oneness and Emptiness called space.

Well, that's certainly a personal perception there.

I personally find the life story of Siddhartha Gautama to be almost a story of desperation for a "lost" soul who simply convinced himself that he had found some sort of answer to his "problem".

I mean, I find Buddhism in general to contain a lot of wisdom. Especially if taken as a historical whole, there's a lot to be gleaned from the entire history of Buddhism, from it's earliest history of Siddhartha, through the trials and tribulations that gave birth to Mahayana Buddhism and so on, all the way up to the more modern forms of Zen Buddhism.

But I personally don't find the story of Siddhartha alone to be the most prominent or the most expressive. Siddhartha saw life and Samsara as a problem that needed to be solved. The idea was to get out of the cycle of reincarnation. This fundamental idea was not even his idea. He was working from a cultural belief in reincarnation to begin with. In India, people took reincarnation for granted. This is what their culture believed. They didn't even question it at all. At least those who believed in it didn't question it. They felt that it was "obvious". Mainly because they were brought up to view life in this way from the get go.

I also find it difficult to believe that Siddhartha wasn't aware of aging and death. How could they have hidden aging from him? Surely he would have seen that some people are "older" and others even in his protected palace life. The story of Siddhartha reeks of make-believe to me, to be quite honest about it. It may have been a parable, or at best an exaggeration of someone's life.

If you truly stop and think about it, Buddhism (especially the early Buddhism of Siddhartha), views life as a "problem" that needs to be solved. We need to figure out how to get out of life and the cycle of endless rebirth.

I'm not sure if that specific view of life is all that great. Thankfully all of Buddhism didn't take that view. Buddhism evolved quite a bit in many of the other forms. Even Mahayana Buddhism was more like "Christianity" in that it wasn't so much a need to get out of the cycle of Samsara but rather it was more focused on rising to something better (i.e. a place of eternal bliss), possible called "nirvana" which originally simply meant to be extinguished.

As much as I find the various forms of Buddhism to be attractive and wise in many ways, I personally abandoned Buddhism in the strictest sense simply because it seems to ultimately be treating life as something we need to strive to get out of.

Of course modern forms of, say Zen Buddhism from Japan, don't focus on that aspect. In fact, they may have abandoned that idea altogether actually. I think they accept a more "mystical" view. (i.e. life is just a mystery and let's leave it at that).

The idea of Zen Buddhism is more along the lines of Taoism where the main focus is to come into harmony with life as much as possible (i.e. learn to flow with the Tao). After all, Zen Buddhism evolved after Buddhism from India had migrated through China and became intimately entangled with Taoism. So Zen Buddhism is really a mixture of Buddhism and Taoism.

I do like Taoism very much. Even more so than Buddhism. In fact, if I had to choose the most prominent and elegant spiritualist my choice would be Lao Tzu far more than Siddhartha Gautama.

Siddhartha saw life as a problem to be solved. Lao Tzu saw life as something to become part of as much as possible.

It was actually my attraction to Taoism that finally brought me to Wicca, believe it or not. Although, I should clarify that by revealing that my personal form of "Wicca" is unique, and far more "Taoistic" than might be expressed in many books on "Wicca". In fact, I've had huge debates with other "Wiccans" as to whether or not I actually qualify as a "Wiccan". That all depends on who you ask and how liberal they are in what they accept as "Wicca".

I would certainly never claim to be a "spokesperson" for "Wicca". For me it's entirely a personal spirituality that I confess to having freely designed within what I consider to be acceptable limits.

In any case, I'm truly glad to hear that you view Siddhartha's Buddhism as a very beautiful thing. I certainly wouldn't want to take that away from you in any way. But as high as your are on it, it does contain concepts that other people may not find quite as attractive as you apparently do.

[Bgood]

Abracadabra wrote

The idea of Zen Buddhism is more along the lines of Taoism where the main focus is to come into harmony with life as much as possible (i.e. learn to flow with the Tao). After all, Zen Buddhism evolved after Buddhism from India had migrated through China and became intimately entangled with Taoism. So Zen Buddhism is really a mixture of Buddhism and Taoism.

Hmm...I never really thought of it that way. That is a very good insight. I am mostly attracted to Zen buddhism as I learn more about it. Taoism is also a great philosophy which I kind of automatically incorporated with my beliefs in Buddhism. Your last post is very informative and gives me some pause for reflection. You bring up alot of good points, especially when you mention how early Buddhism was geared toward escaping rebirth into the next life. It always seemed kind of backwards to me....I thought one would WANT to reincarnate into another human life after death, NOT stop that cycle! Yet perhaps if that cycle was stopped, something better would occur?? Who knows, but I see the point you are making that puts the focus on THIS life and THIS moment which ZEN does, as far more worthy of belief and acceptance than how Hindu/Buddhist Indians might percieve the teachings.

The Siddhartha tale of leaving his palace and such probably has some mythological exaggeration for sure as it was told and handed down for centuries as an oral tradition. I don't find it too hard to believe that he led a sheltered life within the walls when he was young though. I would guess that his realization and witnessing of old age, death, suffering was actually a more gradual "awakening" that occurred over many years rather than how in the story it sounds as if it happened overnight or over a couple of weeks or whatever. For "portable" reasons, I'm sure the Buddha's life was condensed and modified into a more parableistic form in order for it to be more easily remembered and shared with others. Probably happened with all the great religious founders I would suppose.

It is funny how you say that you are more of an 'unconventional' or 'maverick' or individualistic Wiccan in Wiccan circles. I think I am kind of like that in alot of Buddhist circles, in a sense, in that I am more freethinking and non attached to certain ideas. Or perhaps it is just that I am not as smart and educated on the subject as I like to think I am! lol But I think you got alot of good stuff to say Abracadabra and I enjoy your input and perspective. Take care and good luck in all you do!

[tackattack]

lol here's a question for a buddhist.. someone just claimed Jesus was buddhist, was he?

[KichigaiNeko]

I am thinking that Buddhism, Babylonian culture, history and sagas have been used by Judaism and Christianity to formulate their respective dogma.

As we have been saying Mighty Tack... it's just the same old story AGAIN!!

---

Reading the available information just from Wiki it would appear that much communication happened within the Levant and Mesopotamia and India and China around that time period.

I give you the Silk road as a means of stories and religious proclivities spreading to the point that even Islam was not spared the crime of stealing stories from other religious / cultural traditions.

[reverendjeremiah]

What I find hilarious is that fundies ARE quite happy with the goddit from nothing, but are rabid when it comes to science saying... "we just don't know at the moment"

When you stop and think about it, it's really not hilarious at all. I mean why laugh at people who are desperate to believe in something to avoid facing the possibility of an atheistic existence. Such people are truly suffering from extreme anxiety and if you think they aren't having trouble keeping their faith, think again. Behind their public facade they are seriously troubled. Especially the fundies who preach religion to the hilt.

Why do you think they do that?

They do it because they are trying to convince themselves that it's true.

Sure...I mean why laugh at people who want to believe in alien abductions? Or gravity.

reality sucks, and I know this, and obviously the thought of atheism isnt on the table... but magic and anal probing insectoids should very much be on the table and nobody should laugh at them for wanting to avoid reality and instead prefering to feel special

[The Grand Nudger]

Jesus fucking christ......Yes, it is an established fact that magic does not exist. In no instance, ever, have we investigated cases of "magic" and found any there. There is no known mechanism by which magic would or could operate, and there are physical laws, (well demonstrated) that rule magic out as a potential operator in this universe. If that's not enough to establish fact and hold it, I don't know what is. We've looked hard, and found nothing but constraints and evidence to the contrary. Magic does not exist.

(your best argument for karma and reincarnation is "maybe magic does exist"? Well, that's not very convincing, how about some evidence?)

"MAGIC being defined as the great unknown, inexplicable force that drives growth and evolution is, I believe, an acceptable word to describe mystery, why not? Although when using the word "magic" it can easily be construed and associated with the illusions performed on T.V. and theatres by magicians which is obviously not what Abra is referring to. Ask yourself, what makes grass grow? What makes the sun shine? What makes humans and animals breathe in oxygen and expel carbon dioxide while conversely making plantlife "breathe" in CO2 and "expel" O2? And then ask yourself Why?"

Photosynthesis, nuclear fusion, biology (your welcome for clearing that up for you). How about you invoke something mysterious whilst trying to redefine magic as mystery?