Q: I am raised a Christian, went through an atheist phase, then studied Hinduism, Islam and other religions. Today I mostly think of myself as a Buddhist. But, as I find out more about Buddhism and some of the things some branches of Buddhism believe in, even Buddhism is not something I can wholeheartedly embrace. I basically just meditate these days and try to find my own way. I am tempted to call myself an Atheist again, but that also feels incorrect. I neither believe that there is a God, nor that there is no God.
MM: Do not be bothered by this. It is a sign of your intelligence. Don't let Buddhism interfere with Buddhahood, or Christianity with Christ Consciousness, or Atheism with science mindedness. There is no Lovism - only Love. No Compassionism - only Compassion. No Scientism only science. No Truthism - only Truth.
What you need to question, and drop - is your need to want to identify with any "ism" , or group of believers or non-believers.
Follow your own light and be willing to stand alone! That is the only way to become one with it all. This alone-ness that is wholeness, that is holiness is who you are.
Showing posts with label Science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Science. Show all posts
Monday, February 9, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
A Leg To Stand On
Q: I was out drinking last night and it was interesting to see all the old habits kick back in the more drunk I got, it was almost like stepping in a time machine and observing my old character traits.
It got me thinking, how would a Buddha act if he / she got drunk? In theory, if he / she was completely enlightened, would they act exactly the same as if they were sober? (bar limb control)
MM: Alcohol removes inhibition. A buddha is already his most ancient self. We on the other hand, have an "old self" and an "improved self" that is easily undone by alcohol. When one is one's most ancient self, even "happy drunk people" seem in great suffering.
Then there is being drunk on the divine as in this video of Amma
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIGidWtaMD8
and my post on this kind of drunkeness here
There is no question that an enlightened one would be subject to almost the same physical effects of alcohol - loss of coordination, dulling of the senses like smell, sight, etc, as mentioned above (maybe slower) - just as he or she would go unconscious with anesthesia and could be operated on, but there would not be any change in personality or behavior as in reverting to a more primitive or uninhibited self.
There is no uninhibited self. Even the most deep seated, primitive reactions and reflexes from the reptilian brain are well known and conscious to an enlightened one and are relaxed consciously and instantly before they manifest in behavior. Not suppressed, mind you - that is a different mechanism, which is easily undone by alcohol.
If you want to practice, try to make yourself sneeze - or when you need to sneeze, stop yourself. Or - learn to master your startling reflex. A gun shot goes off right near you and you don't have any reaction at all. Or your toaster. This takes a few decades to master. You need a friend or master to keep startling you. Actually this is just training that does not guarantee enlightenment, but - someone who is enlightened is very familiar with relaxing the most deep seated reflexes.
The only way to get enlightened is relaxing the most fundamental and deep seated reflex of all - the one of not wanting to die. If you can do that in meditation - the truth opens up before your very eyes and you are forever free. Unless - you then become identified with being enlightened, and being free.
It got me thinking, how would a Buddha act if he / she got drunk? In theory, if he / she was completely enlightened, would they act exactly the same as if they were sober? (bar limb control)
MM: Alcohol removes inhibition. A buddha is already his most ancient self. We on the other hand, have an "old self" and an "improved self" that is easily undone by alcohol. When one is one's most ancient self, even "happy drunk people" seem in great suffering.
Then there is being drunk on the divine as in this video of Amma
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIGidWtaMD8
and my post on this kind of drunkeness here
There is no question that an enlightened one would be subject to almost the same physical effects of alcohol - loss of coordination, dulling of the senses like smell, sight, etc, as mentioned above (maybe slower) - just as he or she would go unconscious with anesthesia and could be operated on, but there would not be any change in personality or behavior as in reverting to a more primitive or uninhibited self.
There is no uninhibited self. Even the most deep seated, primitive reactions and reflexes from the reptilian brain are well known and conscious to an enlightened one and are relaxed consciously and instantly before they manifest in behavior. Not suppressed, mind you - that is a different mechanism, which is easily undone by alcohol.
If you want to practice, try to make yourself sneeze - or when you need to sneeze, stop yourself. Or - learn to master your startling reflex. A gun shot goes off right near you and you don't have any reaction at all. Or your toaster. This takes a few decades to master. You need a friend or master to keep startling you. Actually this is just training that does not guarantee enlightenment, but - someone who is enlightened is very familiar with relaxing the most deep seated reflexes.
The only way to get enlightened is relaxing the most fundamental and deep seated reflex of all - the one of not wanting to die. If you can do that in meditation - the truth opens up before your very eyes and you are forever free. Unless - you then become identified with being enlightened, and being free.
God As The Number Zero
Atheist are committed truth seekers and often had very strict religious upbringing by the wrong people, or had none, and are scientifically minded.
Consider this, scientifically minded truth seeker - God is like the number zero and is both absolute power as well as absolute powerlessness. Both undetectable and obvious depending on the circumstances. He doesn't matter, unless he does. Both at the same time. It all depends on how you use the number zero in your calculations whether it makes a difference or not. It seems when atheists and believers argue about the existence of God it is like arguing whether the number zero is a number. It is not - and yet it is - it is a non-number-number. It names that, which is not. God is that, which is not matter. It is that out of which everything arises and to which everything returns. As such it matters more than matter itself. People who say God exists and people who say he doesn't exist - are both right for reasons they do not understand.
Consider this, scientifically minded truth seeker - God is like the number zero and is both absolute power as well as absolute powerlessness. Both undetectable and obvious depending on the circumstances. He doesn't matter, unless he does. Both at the same time. It all depends on how you use the number zero in your calculations whether it makes a difference or not. It seems when atheists and believers argue about the existence of God it is like arguing whether the number zero is a number. It is not - and yet it is - it is a non-number-number. It names that, which is not. God is that, which is not matter. It is that out of which everything arises and to which everything returns. As such it matters more than matter itself. People who say God exists and people who say he doesn't exist - are both right for reasons they do not understand.
If we thought of God as the number 0, and were to describe an atheist as the number 5, a believer would be the number 05. Jesus would be the number 50, and someone like Hitler would be the number 55.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
