Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are correct that it is not about the personalities of Jesus and Buddha which are individualistic expressions of the Spirit that motivates them. As I conceive of Maitri, it refers to the Spirit that motivates your approach to life. The misunderstanding of these terms and concepts stems largely from their primitive origins. Maitri is the more comprehensive term as I read and understand its applicability to Buddhist practice and life so it would contain Karuna. This is what I referred to about not everything (except for Jesus) being exactly like the consciousness I encountered.
I doubt Jesus ever taught anything remotely like hell and damnation but His disciples and others at the time interpreted in their primitive way His warnings about negative spiritual consequences for what we BECOME. The Hebrews were essentially taught to fear God and damnation during the schoolmaster stage (Moses) to TAME their savagery. No surprise it continued and influenced everything else they believed or interpreted about God and Jesus. (BTW, Buddhism contains Hells but since there is no God, they are simply consequences.)
Karuna actually encompasses maitri, friendship, within it, it’s the other way around. Karuna is what one asks the Divinity, forgiveness, mercy, and love. That we can also express that karuna to other beings is the light of that Divinity that is within us all. Jesus with his lamb, Buddha with animals and the concept of ahimsa, and Lord Shiva with his bull, dogs, and little children, all depict this Karuna.
Karuna actually encompasses maitri, friendship, within it, it’s the other way around. Karuna is what one asks the Divinity, forgiveness, mercy, and love. That we can also express that karuna to other beings is the light of that Divinity that is within us all. Jesus with his lamb, Buddha with animals and the concept of ahimsa, and Lord Shiva with his bull, dogs, and little children, all depict this Karuna.
I will not get into a semantic dispute in a language that is not English. All I can say is that is NOT the impression I got from reading the Buddhist scriptures. Maitri was paramount and the Maitreya was expected to possess it perfectly. YMMV. Either way, whether it is karuna or maitri, Jesus possessed it PERFECTLY!!!
I will not get into a semantic dispute in a language that is not English. All I can say is that is NOT the impression I got from reading the Buddhist scriptures. Maitri was paramount and the Maitreya was expected to possess it perfectly. YMMV. Either way, whether it is karuna or maitri, Jesus possessed it PERFECTLY!!!
I wouldn't say matters above all else. (Though it does to me, rather than the science of it.
And all giddy is a huge understatement).
I would compare my feeling about it like laying on my beach towel enjoying the sounds, the warmth, the smells...but then,
trying to scientifically figure out were those particles or waves.
I'm not a big fan of Masters and Johnson either.
BUT, this is more of an intellectual group...oil/vinegar - left brain/right brain people here in the mix.
From my Right brain: If I'm a baby in my dad's arms - I, personally, would not be so keen about the time he spent
afterwards with calculators figuring out blood flow, heart beats and temperatures....just pick me up again~!!!
So my ''albeit'' is my own bias that Mystic knows about for maybe a decade now.
We differ on some things...not many, tho.
No doubt lots and lots of people are trying to enjoy some time on a beach towel lately, not only enjoying the sounds and smells, but to get out of the heat! Pass the sun screen. These temperatures all across California and other parts of the west are a bit much! Counting my lucky stars as we're just back from triple digit temps in SLC. Back to where we're closer to the ocean that provides 24/7 sounds, smells and cooler temps.
Forever feeling very grateful I've got it better than I deserve...
I got to wondering about the other voice we all hear in our heads. The one that sometimes brings thoughts we don't expect or sometimes wish we hadn't thought at all. The other voice we reason with. Think with. The other voice it seems we often can't really control. I hope I'm not the only one, because that might make people think I'm crazy, but I know better. I've read enough about the "internal dialogue" all us humans engage in daily, and of course we all know what I'm referring to here...
Just recently, however, I got to thinking how easy it is to perhaps confuse this experience as one having to do with a connection with god. How easy it would be for some people to confuse that "communication" as coming from somewhere outside our minds. From God for example. I often get the sense that people who believe they are experiencing communication with God, or praying to God with a sense of being heard, are actually just mistaking that same "internal dialogue" we all experience as not internal.
Accordingly, it seems quite possible we are all experiencing the same thing but just interpreting that "dialogue" in different ways. Namely as external rather than just internal, and not all of the dialogue of course. For theists just the "dialogue" intended to be for or with God. I know my experiences along these lines have been quite varied, as I'm sure has been the case with just about everyone else.
Who, what is that "other voice?"
What do you think?
I did not read through all of the responses here, but I wanted to mention this book in case you have not heard of it…
The idea presented in this book is that Man has only become conscious in “recent” history. As Mankind was starting to become conscious, he would hear voices (God?).
“… prior to the “learning” of consciousness, human mentality was what Jaynes called "the bicameral mind" – a mentality based on verbal hallucination...”
The “age of prophets” who would hear God’s voice were transitional types, their minds still operating partly in the old manner.
Jaynes also pustulates that some forms of modern mental illness are throwbacks to this state.
The idea presented in this book is that Man has only become conscious in “recent” history. As Mankind was starting to become conscious, he would hear voices (God?).
“… prior to the “learning” of consciousness, human mentality was what Jaynes called "the bicameral mind" – a mentality based on verbal hallucination...”
The “age of prophets” who would hear God’s voice were transitional types, their minds still operating partly in the old manner.
Jaynes also pustulates that some forms of modern mental illness are throwbacks to this state.
Interesting and another to add having to do with the subject of consciousness. Lots of reading along these lines that has been recommended to me recently, and I think lots of new research, thinking and writing emerging from out there lately too...
What Is Consciousness?
Scientists are beginning to unravel a mystery that has long vexed philosophers.
I know this will vex some religious people who really hate when science is invoked to consider some of these uniquely human characteristics, but what's the harm in broadening our understanding about such things and/or considering alternative perspectives?
The idea presented in this book is that Man has only become conscious in “recent” history. As Mankind was starting to become conscious, he would hear voices (God?).
“… prior to the “learning” of consciousness, human mentality was what Jaynes called "the bicameral mind" – a mentality based on verbal hallucination...”
The “age of prophets” who would hear God’s voice were transitional types, their minds still operating partly in the old manner.
Jaynes also pustulates that some forms of modern mental illness are throwbacks to this state.
Huh. So the mentally ill side of my family, its' really just "verbal hallucination"? That would explain a lot.
That's an interesting idea, but I think mental illness is just that, mental. It's hereditary. It's unfair. It's not a good life. It's mental pain and anguish. It's devastating to the person and the entire family, plus friends. Nothing to take lightly or pass off as some old manner of thinking.
Not saying that YOU are, but maybe the author. But, it can't be compared to mental illness. Nothing can. The stigma is horrible. Having to live with it is unimaginable. It gets used against you and you get discriminated against. Sounds a lot like any other disease.
I am interested in reading that book but unfortunately my inability to focus doesn't allow me to read books. I can barely focus on reading posts on CD. I admit that the really long ones I don't try to even read because it hurts my head. So, thanks for the recommendation. Do you mind reading it to me?
Huh. So the mentally ill side of my family, its' really just "verbal hallucination"? That would explain a lot.
That's an interesting idea, but I think mental illness is just that, mental. It's hereditary. It's unfair. It's not a good life. It's mental pain and anguish. It's devastating to the person and the entire family, plus friends. Nothing to take lightly or pass off as some old manner of thinking.
Not saying that YOU are, but maybe the author. But, it can't be compared to mental illness. Nothing can. The stigma is horrible. Having to live with it is unimaginable. It gets used against you and you get discriminated against. Sounds a lot like any other disease.
I am interested in reading that book but unfortunately my inability to focus doesn't allow me to read books. I can barely focus on reading posts on CD. I admit that the really long ones I don't try to even read because it hurts my head. So, thanks for the recommendation. Do you mind reading it to me?
Jayne's hypotheses of the bicameral mind is a minority view and while it is an interesting and, to me, compelling hypothesis, it remains unproven. I am not aware of a way TO prove it. One can present circumstantial evidence consistent with the hypothesis, but I don't see a way to verify its correctness. So it is an interesting sociological idea, nothing more.
By all accounts Jaynes was not an asshat so I don't think his intention was to belittle the suffering of mental illness, but rather to suggest that some presently dysfunctional and maladaptive ways of thinking might have had more utility in the ancient past. The main religion of that time would have been animism, and so personifying various spirits and consulting them might have been a way to work out problems, deal with loneliness, etc. And there would have been no stigma since most people were doing it. Today it is stigmatized and no longer helpful as you can't function effectively in a technological society where everyone's skills are specialized, and be marching to a very different drummer so to speak. Rather than paying attention to your internal dialog you are supposed to be paying attention to others.
He also thought the shift in thinking was epigenetic in nature -- it required various environmental pressures to trigger a widespread change. It is not as if people just decided to think differently. New thought patterns became thinkable, because of the new environment. People started to frown on listening / talking to the voices as it wasn't helpful anymore. In a few generations, the old ways would have been lost.
Is that the way it really went down? As I say -- I doubt we'll ever know. It is just a legitimate thought experiment not to assume that humans have always thought substantially as they do today. Our thought patterns are shaped by environment, circumstance, habit, multigenerational reinforcement ... it could have changed, even more than once, in the past, for all we know.
Even assuming such shifts never occurred, you can't really understand the Bronze age world of the Bible unless you try to imagine being someone growing up and living in that environment. For example, the OT war-god, Jehovah, makes perfect sense as a standard-issue authoritarian despot of that era on steroids. Jehovah seems ghastly to some of us today, but a benevolent inspirational populist leader who protects civil rights was not a thinkable thought at the time. There WERE no civil rights. One took orders because one had no choice and no alternative concept. You pleased the despot or suffered the consequences. The strong man ruled. You just hoped your strong man was sane and had some kind of coherent vision and a detectable benevolent streak!
Jayne's hypotheses of the bicameral mind is a minority view and while it is an interesting and, to me, compelling hypothesis, it remains unproven. I am not aware of a way TO prove it. One can present circumstantial evidence consistent with the hypothesis, but I don't see a way to verify its correctness. So it is an interesting sociological idea, nothing more.
It definitely is interesting and makes you think.
Quote:
By all accounts Jaynes was not an asshat so I don't think his intention was to belittle the suffering of mental illness, but rather to suggest that some presently dysfunctional and maladaptive ways of thinking might have had more utility in the ancient past. The main religion of that time would have been animism, and so personifying various spirits and consulting them might have been a way to work out problems, deal with loneliness, etc. And there would have been no stigma since most people were doing it. Today it is stigmatized and no longer helpful as you can't function effectively in a technological society where everyone's skills are specialized, and be marching to a very different drummer so to speak. Rather than paying attention to your internal dialog you are supposed to be paying attention to others.
I love the way you throw in random words like "asshat", totally something I would say. Oh I'm sure he didn't actually mean to disparage mental illness, I just don't think someone who isn't mentally ill or had to deal with someone who is mentally ill should be making those sort of assumptions. However, I do understand what he is trying to say. And, maybe he DID deal with mental illness in whatever capacity and was trying very hard to soften the blow and stigma.
Quote:
He also thought the shift in thinking was epigenetic in nature -- it required various environmental pressures to trigger a widespread change. It is not as if people just decided to think differently. New thought patterns became thinkable, because of the new environment. People started to frown on listening / talking to the voices as it wasn't helpful anymore. In a few generations, the old ways would have been lost.
Ok, I get that. It was evolution and environment. It was evolution at it's best to stop everyone from listening to "voices".
Quote:
Even assuming such shifts never occurred, you can't really understand the Bronze age world of the Bible unless you try to imagine being someone growing up and living in that environment. For example, the OT war-god, Jehovah, makes perfect sense as a standard-issue authoritarian despot of that era on steroids. Jehovah seems ghastly to some of us today, but a benevolent inspirational populist leader who protects civil rights was not a thinkable thought at the time. There WERE no civil rights. One took orders because one had no choice and no alternative concept. You pleased the despot or suffered the consequences. The strong man ruled. You just hoped your strong man was sane and had some kind of coherent vision and a detectable benevolent streak!
For some strange reason, Putin came to mind. I love your posts, you have a way with words and dumbing it down for me. I appreciate that. There are so many ways to look at practically everything so you make me think. You and I both know that thinking for oneself is a rarity as a member of the cult of Christianity. I believe that religion works for some people, I see that.
I'm just glad I didn't live in the Bronze Age, I would have been beheaded for my never-ending sarcasm and the need to point out the obvious. I live in the right time to be a feminist and be able to be outspoken if I want. I definitely could have been a suffragette though.
For some strange reason, Putin came to mind. I love your posts, you have a way with words and dumbing it down for me. I appreciate that. There are so many ways to look at practically everything so you make me think
Well thanks, I am glad you're enjoying it. :-)
I honed that skill early in my career as an independent consultant doing software design / implementation / maintenance / trouble-shooting. In the late 20th century business people recognized that they needed computers but they did not understand them and mostly feared them. What set me apart in that era was my ability to explain complicated topics in simple terms without making captains of industry feel two inches tall -- which many of my competitors could not resist doing, lol. It was a "revenge of the nerds" thing.
These days it's a different dynamic because, much like the religious, everyone THINKS they understand the topic because now it is no longer strange and exotic -- computers are as ubiquitous as gods (as well as much cheaper) and so now if I propose something as a solution architect that costs "too much" or takes "too long" compared to someone's arbitrary quarterly targets, then it is countermanded and I am forced to create poop instead. But at least I get paid to do it, lol. And then paid to un-do it later, double-lol! Plus the satisfaction of saying "I told you so" -- bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
So that is what you are seeing -- I have been consulting or sometimes teaching complicated topics to people who, rightly or not, are insecure in their ability to understand it, for like 40 years now. And I also am, in my professional life, a follower of the thinking of Gerald Weinberg, one of the immortals in my field. His aphorism was, "Ultimately, all software problems are people problems" and his life work encouraged me to study human nature and thinking patterns as a prerequisite to being able to fully and efficiently solve business problems using software. So this helps me a great deal in my thinking about religious matters.
I will say that you are brighter than you think you are. Dial up your self confidence a notch or two because I am not telling you anything you don't already know, I am just validating it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
