romansh

Was not sure about your concrete seems to have a positive valence means I think having an awareness of how we are interconnected with our food is fine. Blessing it per se is unnecessary at least in the literal Christian words we use.

Went through Chapter 8 yesterday ... more of the same: be compassionate in action not just in thought and word. I get it. Secure in the womb???? Perhaps. ! will read Chapter 9 today ... won't take long.

We diffuse our energy (spread it out) by existing ... full stop. It continues after death. Most of "our" energy is that of the sun and prior to that an imbalance of energy (differentiation of matter and gravity) at the start of at least this universe. "Our" energy is only 'borrowed'. As for the subtle energies that do or don't pass into what we perceive as consciousness (at least to varying degrees) they are of the same substrate. The stories I tell myself can be seen as positive or negative socially speaking. Even the positive ones can be seen as in a negative light ... eg some might claim my ego is overwhelming. I don't think our supposed inner life is what it seems. But it is a pattern of moving matter that we seem to experience and we do give the various aspects of the movement names. Much in the same way I suggested tree is a verb. From your post it was not clear, is it OK to lie on certain occasions?

Chapter 7 For a Future to be Possible Hanh and I seem to wander off in different directions here Rerooting No longer believing in the traditions of parents and grandparents. This I don't think is necessarily a problem even if we have not replaced them, especially with some new dogma. Who am I to suggest another person's values are lifeless? While I agree religions should renew themselves. but the young are not leaving their churches because they don't think it is reasonable to be nice to another. They are leaving because these churches to varying degrees require a belief in some sort of literal belief or another. Jewels of Our Own Tradition Ancestors ... here are the ancestors of my tradition Cultivating Compassion This section I found difficult. I could not help thinking of how compassion has increased suffering in Africa. The food, medical aid. shelter we provide has allowed more to survive and then endure famine, war and devastation due to the elements; don't get me wrong I don't what is the right path. But I am well aware even our best intentions have unexpected consequences. A classic example is some religions stance on AIDS in the west and particularly in Africa. Hahn goes on about cultivating compassion, which is fine; but some reason would not go amiss either. Hahn almost seems to want to step in to Jainism. If that is his path so be it. But he seems to be flirting with his own personal dualism. Joseph Campbell saw three types of religion 1) reverence of nature and the recognition of our part in it. 2) A withdrawal from nature and our part in it (as exemplified by Jainism) and 3) our modern religions that want to make nature better particularly that of humans. I must admit I am closest to number 1. Cultivating Loving Kindness No problem here ... put cultivating the ability to reason won`t go amiss either. The Oneness of Body and Mind I had high hopes based on the title. I could not help thinking this section seemed a little sexually repressed. Personally I would not prescribe on what another`s sex life should look like. More than One Root `We know that when someone does not have any root he or she will suffer tremendously` Do we indeed? Well while I agree community is important, I think we can do without religious roots at least without tremendous suffering? Unmindful Speech can Kill While I do try to be truthful and I am cognisant of lying by omission as well as commission, there are times where a lie might be better. The classical example is a wife asking "does this dress make me look fat?" Not only do we have to lie with our words, our eyes, facial expressions and actions. The timing has to be impeccable. for there is no honest answer here. Mindful Consuming "... interbeing, your body is not yours alone. It also belongs to your ancestors, ..." to paraphrase "ownership is theft. I can see connectedness and interrelatedness, but belonging? Abuse of toxins? Every thing is toxic, it is simply a matter of dose. Moderation and awareness the various aspects of addictiveness we find in life. We were definitely not on similar paths in this chapter. Here Hanh is almost promoting that man is somehow separate from nature. He almost has taken on the mantle of a class 3 religion.

Technically we have more than five senses ... but not really that important. But this is fairly obvious ... Extremely subtle energy we will need more sensitive equipment. We can detect single photons (massless phenomena), so I am not sure how "sensing" even more subtle energies is relevant to my day to day activities. But you are right that our senses are limited ... so this is in part why I take an agnostic stance on the everyday as well as the supposed divine. Chapter 6 Peaceful Heart Generally found more in common here with Hanh than in the previous chapter. Collective Awareness Hanh thinks capital punishment is a sign of weakness. Personally if I ever needed to vote, I would vote against capital punishment. I would also avoid describing those in favour as weak. Having said that I don't think any rational debate would sway those. I would have to find some emotional hook. Looking Deeply I can't help thinking, it is not to have enemies or to be an absolute pacifist (eg Bertrand Russell) that is the issue. It is that if we do go to war we do it with understanding where the soldier or militant terrorist is coming from. ie not to go to war with hate in our hearts. Highest Form of Prayer Praying without practicing is not real prayer. ??? Why not just practice? Karen Armstrong in her book said of theists it is not what you believe that matters it is what you do. I can't help too many people focus more on what they believe (or not) than what they do. Understanding Brings Liberation I can't help but think of free will with this section title. While some might argue that understanding that we are causal beings (and that free will is a nonsense) is a form of liberation and people may find it freeing, the question for me remains why would I want to do anything independently of the universe? But I agree with Hanh that any dualistic response ... will make the situation worse. Well sort of, I think we also need to understand the universe is just fine even with our dualistic responses. Understanding Brings Forgiveness I don't know if this title is tailored for Christians who are "into" forgiveness, but for me understanding brings the understanding there is nothing to forgive. While I have no problem with compassion, I don't feel the need to perseverate on it. If it comes it comes. But my suffering, should I feel it, is OK. I don't need to see the many causes ... I understand they are there. While I might agree with some of the details here, I do see that I am on a similar path.

Well Lex ... I can't help thinking I am a product of the universe ... no more no less. My personal sound bite ... When I look deep inside myself, the universe quietly stares back at me.

I had trouble getting past the first phrase ... it should read: We see, hear, taste, smell and feel differences in energy, ... Skimming the rest of the post I found similar sort of statements.

Well I don't know how it comes across to you Burl, but to me it comes across that you are unwilling to challenge your personal axioms.

I can't help thinking we are not understanding the flower, clouds/rain/sun allegory. There might be actions or behaviours that each of us might not like. But those actions are all made up of aholy or holy movements. There are no evil actions (or good) just the so called sin of thinking in such terms. Despite what Hanh might suggest ... there is no energy that is divine or not divine. It is.

Funnily enough, that apparently is what Jesus taught ...accept what is true for you. PCs as far as I can tell don't take everything hook, line and sinker. I am sure someone could find the appropriate verse in the New Testament if required. Interestingly Buddhism seems to have a similar take on its writings.

Chapter 5 Communities of Practice Mindfulness of Working When James died, after two weeks went back to work. People were kind and left me an appropriate amount of space. During the next few weeks I worked on a pet project that this `space` allowed me. Not directly relevant to my everyday work, but a useful tool for a quick check on thermodynamic feasibility. It involved primarily collating and checking data. It was mindless/mindful in that there was nothing else but the data and the spreadsheet. There was no perseverating grief during that time. Time for the perseverating grief was reserved for trips to the bathroom. I know what mindfulness means for me. What does it mean for Hanh? Monastic Culture touching the ultimate dimension ... yes really? Reads very new ageish ... not that there is anything wrong with the New Age ... just that it is not my path. The Holy Spirit is the Energy of Love and Understanding. Please don't practice "religious imperialism". Yes I get this. But some questions. Is it OK to question another's beliefs? If so how vociferously? I can't help thinking if someone actually believes an angel came to Mary and foretold that a Godly parthenogenic birth will occur, that any reasoning on my part will be pointless. Is it OK to promulgate this belief to little children? Is it OK to resist this promulgation? To Be Real Salt The teachings must be practiced as they were lived by Jesus. I asked before ... how far do we go? Do I give up all my worldly goods and become an itinerant teacher spreading the Gospel according to rom? Sort of doing that now except, have not given up my worldly goods and the internet allows me to be virtually itinerant.

Definitely not!

I am a little confused by original sin. As far as I can make out the first "sin" was when Adam and Eve disobeyed God and tasted the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil? Genesis 3:22 (if I remember correctly) describes God's reaction. Christianity seems to focus on the disobeying bit, but somehow misses the metaphor of the tree of knowledge good and evil completely (well almost completely). I would argue the original sin is seeing the world in terms of good and evil is the "sin".

Did Jesus actually say these things? Or was it later scribes who added their world view to the New Testament? Again in some ways it does not matter. But if true we can start to ask questions of the text. In that are the words of some 2000 year old scribe any more divinely inspired than mine? And that of anyone else for that matter?

Hi Curious The confusion I think arises with strong and weak atheism. ie a positive belief versus a negative belief (philosophically speaking). While I could be described as a (weak) atheist. I prefer the term agnostic as for me way I see knowledge is far more interesting than my lack of belief in gods. Of course a theistically inclined person could also make the same claim. Here Neil Tyson de Grasse showing his [similar] point of view. I could even find a clip of Dawkins describing himself as an agnostic.

The relevant exchange: Burl: People often say stupid or meaningless things to the grieving. There is nothing one can say that helps. rom: ...do these people believe these stupid and meaningless things they are saying? Burl: Who knows? It's a hypothetical situation. I've seen enough grief to give anybody a pass on however they react to death rom: While I agree we might not know, but I was wondering as to your opinion. Burl: I don't know these people and I wasn't there. So who are these people who say meaningless or stupid things? Are you claiming you have never heard someone you know say something like this? This conversation I am finding a little surreal. I am not talking about different communities. I am talking about the people who you are not judging, but you do think they say stupid and meaningless things.

Chapter 4 Living Buddha, Living Christ Like I said earlier, I am beginning to struggle with this book. When Hanh spoke the historical Christ being born in Bethlehem, I could not wonder which Christ Hanh is referring to? Just curious biblical historians actually promote this as a literal historical truth? There is scant evidence of Nazaret existing in Jesus's time ... it could have been a small hamlet. There is some archeological evidence of homes nearby today's Nazaret. ... Hanh thinks the requirement for belief in a literal resurrection will put some people off. He is quite right there ... we can also include a whole bunch of miracles too. To me Hanh conflates the myth and literal, which for me is a shame. Animated by the energy of the holy spirit? This is not in his glossary terms, so Hanh is leaving me behind here. Jesus's life is his most basic teaching. I don't think Hanh means we should all become itinerant teachers giving up our worldly goods, but he is not clear what the teaching does actually mean. Buddha ... who shows us the way in this life. Joseph Campbell would at this point interrupt and point out, yes but it hat to be our way. To be fair Hanh in the same passage does point this out. Dharma seems to have many meanings but I put them into two basic categories. The Buddhist one is like a set of rules or guidelines and the Hindu version is closer to karma (but not karma) where say a cat's dharma is to catch mice and for mice it is to try and evade being caught. I always thought the Hindu version was more appealing. Having said that Hanh does point out the rules/guidelines do change. true love and understanding? oh dear. Conditions have to be right/phenomena to see sunflowers? This I find confusing. Just because I don't see the pestilence that may decimate my sunflower crop, does not mean it does not exist either. Negative seed? For me they are all part of the interbeing. These negative seed are also a reflection of clouds, rain, sun and minerals. I am reminded of Joseph Campbell's quote which goes something like this. ...one of the greatest challenges in life is to say “yea” to that person or act or that condition which in your mind is most abominable. Traditional Christianity has problems with this. I hope Progressive Christianity is a little more understanding. Hanh frequently talks of God ... Campbell's take on the Buddhist perspective ... Buddha … God … It both is and is not; neither is nor is not. Now that all is clear. This is why I am quite happy not to worry to much about this god concept. Having said that when someone tries to existence in terms of this concept, I personally don't find it helpful. ... but it is important to do so [find time to pray or meditate] Why? What is the evidence ... is this the only way? I read the rest of the chapter ... I kept finding similar sort of questions. I will move onto chapter five. As I am getting bogged down.

I agree ... and our desires, wants, wishes etc are quite often unconscious choices. They may be choices that I have become aware of. Conscious and unconscious choices are a result of the same substrate. That the idea that all this is bafflegab to some, is in my mind, simply the recognition that some of us do not see the interconnectedness of it all. I am pretty sure without my bafflegab [matter] what passes as my consciousness will disappear. It disappears for the most part every night even with it. I do not recall experiencing it without matter. And as for undefined ... Any scientific description of the processes of brain function and how it correlates with what passes as consciousness will give you some insight. I won't argue with Aristotle, but I will argue with those that promulgate Aristotelian axioms without inspection of those axioms. Don't you think it is worthwhile to check our axioms once in a while? After all our understanding of how the world ticks has changed in the last 2.3 millennia.

It is a bit more than hypothetical ... we had a example of that it in Bill's initial post. While I agree we might not know, but I was wondering as to your opinion.

I am not sure how we got on to the topic ... I will have to back and read the new posts. But: When we look into the heart of hemorrhoids, we see clouds, sunshine, minerals, time, the earth, and everything else in the cosmos in it… There are ho hemorrhoidal parts ... Said partly in jest. I was away on business and I have been unfaithful. Started reading The Domesticated Brain by Bruce Hood. Basically describes the more [possible] proximate causes of flowering of humanity. I am beginning to find Hahn tough going. I found the chapter four starting to be repetitive, but I will create a bit of time to give my initial comments.

While it my be stupid or meaningless, do these people believe these stupid and meaningless things they are saying?

"Will" is a description of a behaviour, a set of electrochemical/biochemical reactions a pattern of fundamental "particles". "Will" and other so called non material concepts are written in the physical ... brain function, air molecules vibrating, symbols on a piece of paper, light emanating from a monitor. Touch of a braille surface, purr of a cat. I am reminded of a Douglas Adams quote: Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too? I can't help thinking that this non material is an unnecessary division of the universe. The fairies being the non material. There is also a paradox in your claim that logic cannot be used for the non material [concepts] in that logic itself is a concept. And that you are using logic to claim that it can't be used.

But to get back to the original purpose of this thread ... for those of us who believe in a God that has a direct and active involvement in our lives as exemplified by those who claim that God had a reason for wanting Bill's grand daughter at his side, to me seems simply a soporific designed to distract our grief. I can't help thinking evolution has given us a capacity for this emotion, so I would no more advise someone to drink their way out of grief than imbibe in literal faerie stories to fool ourselves.

Here is a good place as any to start ... a ten minute read and years of digestion.

ps just googling Victor Frankl's quote came across this site http://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org/history-of-happiness/viktor-frankl/ here he says Human freedom is not a freedom from but freedom to. In philosophical terms, he in this quote is specifically referring to freedom of action and not freedom of will. These two concepts are often confounded in philosophical discussions. Note I am not saying Frankl made this error.