Why we must destroy the Sphinx and Pyramids!

Al Arabiya; I. Rony, Wisdom Quarterly

These objects of awe and wonder need to be returned to dust; it's God's will (whatafy.com)

   

Murgan Salem al-Gohary (DreamTV)

An Egyptian jihad leader, with self-professed links to the [CIA's] Taliban, called for the “destruction of the Sphinx and the Giza Pyramids in Egypt,” drawing ties between the Egyptian relics and Buddha statues [in Bamiyan, Afghanistan], local media reported this week.

Murgan Salem al-Gohary, an Islamist leader twice-sentenced under former President Hosni Mubarak for advocating violence, called on Muslims to remove such “idols.”

Well, after sleeping on it, let's keep them.

“All Muslims are charged with applying the teachings of Islam to remove such idols, as we did in Afghanistan when we destroyed the Buddha statues,” he said on Saturday during a television interview on an Egyptian private channel, widely watched by Egyptian and Arab audiences.

  

“God ordered Prophet Mohammed to destroy idols,” he added. “When I was with the Taliban we destroyed the statue of Buddha, something the government failed to do.”

His comments came a day after thousands of ultraconservative Islamists gathered in Tahrir Square to call for the strict application of Sharia law in the new constitution.

But in retaliation to Gohary’s remarks, the vice president of Tunisia’s Ennahda party, Sheikh Abdel Fattah Moro, called the live program and told Gohary that famous historic military commander Amr ibn al-Aas did not destroy statues when he conquered Egypt.

Giza pyramid and ancient chimera Sphinx with cavern entrance under its paw and watermarks revealing its actual antiquity, Egypt, northern Africa (iamxa/trekearth.com)

  
“So who are you to do it?” he wondered. “The Prophet destroyed the idols because people worshipped them, but the Sphinx and the Pyramids are not worshiped.”

Gohary, 50, is well-known in Egypt for his advocacy of violence, Egypt Independent reported.

“He was sentenced twice, one of the two sentences being life imprisonment. He subsequently fled Egypt to Afghanistan... In 2007, he traveled from Pakistan to Syria, which then handed him over to Egypt. After Mubarak's fall in early 2011, he was released from prison by a judicial ruling,” the newspaper added. More

Two forms of Jesus (Issa), the popular vs. the historical, the make-believe vs.
the unknown. The edited Bible is not the place to look. Read the Apocrypha.

 
Thou Shalt Obey or Else
Pat Macpherson, Seven, Wisdom Quarterly (COMMENTARY)

If it's God's will, who are we to argue? As Holy Book-obeying Christians and Muslims, we must follow leaders like Gohary into battle against these graven images and idols.

  

It's not The God's will, it's His command. (Kinda makes one wonder why He doesn't do it Himself, but who are we to question the almighty star-god?)

  

Monotheisms

And it's not just him. The CIA created the "Taliban" from released prisoners in Pakistan and elsewhere, bringing them to a foreign land that did not practice violent jihad or Wahhabi-ism. What happened to the Buddhas of Bamiyan, Afghanistan, some of the largest in the world, and more recently to Buddhist rock art in Pakistan, is not an aberration of erratic Muslims.

These are staged activities -- staged by the CIA and US military PsyOps -- to infuriate otherwise peaceful bystanders. Why, for what? So that we will turn the other way whatever is done to our Muslim brothers and sisters. When we listen to religious edicts, particularly those of the barbaric Near East, we engage in a history of violence, from religious crusades, to imperial raids, to hegemony, and attempts at world domination.

How? Fear. In fear we kill, less often out of greed, and least often out of hate -- but always, always, co-motivated by delusion.

Whether Mr. Gotary really wants to destroy Egyptian heritage, long the pride of mathematically-amazing Muslims, it is no reason to call for or condone wars and attacks.

  

If propaganda says kill, let live. If propaganda says be afraid, live. Live and let live.

Maybe the CIA or extremist Christians and pious Islamists will demolish all art, particularly those gorgeous Greek nudes. So? That's on them. Stopping the destruction of arts and antiquities never needs to come to violence. Protection is defensive not offensive. Religious extremism is all around us.

The Near East has better reason to fear Judeo-Christian attacks than the West need fear the Near or Middle East.

But we would never know that because the mainstream media and the propaganda arm of our military constantly beats the drum of fear and war until we are ready to sign off on any atrocity -- drones, extrajudicial killings, assassinations, invasions, oil theft, rape, pedophilia, slavery, radioactive poisoning (particularly from the use of "depleted" uranium which is anything but depleted), and secret war crimes and unspeakable crimes against humanity we are not generally made aware of such as purposely contaminating water supplies, bombing hospitals, and worse.

• Excavating the Sphinx's paw (thank you, Edgar Cayce)
• VIDEO: Israel's enemy within (paranoia?)

Read More

Real "fasting" for Ramadan

Sabadabadooo (The Brown Girl Chronicles) 

Moderate fasting help many paths to meditation

In light of Ramadan, now that Boudicaspeaks [almost as if the Bouddha, rather than Boudica, were speaking] has given you an overview of fasting beyond just no food or drink, I feel the need to discuss something that I strive to do any time of the year: 

  

Remembering GOD or zikr. However, for me the intensification of Remembering God is a different one this year. Many will say that fasting helps do this, but I have found it is all about first silencing the mind, and then intensifying that silence with the hunger. I mean, being hungry and tired surely brings about silence, but I still have yet to reach that truly meditative silence.
 

“Silence is the Language of God,

All Else is Poor Translation” 

-Rumi

   

Persian mystic poet Rumi (Hossein Behzad)

No matter what state of spirituality I am in (and I do not believe in stages, but rather highs and lows), zikr reminds me of the source of spiritual refuge in this universe, regardless of what religion people classify themselves under.

Rather than trying to push forward our own views about right and wrong and the way people ought to live, it may just help to simply be silent, both physically and even mentally (and I can relate to mentally with my constantly wandering mind). More

“Out beyond ideas of right and wrong,
There is a field. I’ll meet you there.  

When the soul lies down in that grass,

The world is too full to talk about.

Ideas, language, even the phrase each other

Does not make any sense.”

-Rumi (A Shot of Zen)

Read More

What God Didn't Know (sutra)

Wisdom Quarterly based on Walshe’s* translation of Kevaddha Sutta (DN 11); "God" = Brahma

(Asyasolo/flickr.com)

   

Thus have I heard. Once the Buddha was staying at Nalanda,  in Pavarika’s Mango Grove. And the householder Kevaddha came, bowed, and sat down respectfully to one side. He then said:

   

“Venerable sir, this [City of] Nalanda is rich, prosperous, populous, full of people who have confidence [faith, belief] in the Blessed One.

   

It would be good if the Blessed One were to encourage some monastic disciple to perform supernatural feats and miracles. In this way Nalanda would come to have even more confidence.”

   

The Buddha replied: “Kevaddha, this is not the way I teach Dharma to the monastic disciples, saying: ‘Go, disciples, and perform supernatural feats and miracles for the white-clad lay people!’” [Faithful Buddhists in ancient India wore white when they went to see the Buddha and monastics, which they did weekly on lunar observance days.]

  

2. For a second time Kevaddha said: “Venerable sir, I would not be rude, but I still say: This Nalanda is rich, prosperous… and would come to have even more confidence in the Blessed One.” And the Buddha replied as before.

   

3. When Kevaddha repeated his request a third time, the Buddha said: “Kevaddha, there are three kinds of miracles that I have declared, having realized them through direct insight and experience. What are the three? The miracle of psychic power, the miracle of telepathy, and the miracle of instruction. 

  

Psychic Powers

Greek tele "distant" + patheia "feeling"

4. “What is the miracle of psychic power? Here [within the Buddha’s teaching], Kevaddha, a monastic disciple displays various psychic powers in different ways: The person being one becomes many, being many becomes one. One appears and disappears; one passes through fences, walls, and mountains unhindered as if through air; one sinks into the ground and emerges from it as if it were water; one walks on water without breaking the surface as if on land; one flies cross-legged through the sky like a bird with wings; one even touches and strokes with hand the Sun and Moon, as mighty and powerful as they are (as in “The Fruits of Recluseship” discourse, DN 2, Verse 87). And one travels in the body as far as the Brahma World [or “7th Heaven” known as Parisajja Brahma Deva Loka, “Brahma’s Retinue”]. Then someone who has confidence and trust sees that monastic doing these things. 

  

5. “That person tells this to someone else who is skeptical and unbelieving saying: ‘It is wonderful, it is marvelous, the great power and skill of that ascetic…’ And that person might say: ‘There is something called the Gandhāra [invisibility] charm. It is by means of this that that monastic becomes many…’

   

“What do you think, Kevaddha, would not a skeptic say that to a believer?” “Yes, venerable sir.” “And that is why, Kevaddha, seeing the danger [inherent] in such miracles, I dislike, reject, and [am] loathe [to use] them. 

   

Telepathy

Siddhartha’s period of severe austerities

6. “And what is the miracle of telepathy? Here, a monastic disciple reads the minds of other beings, of other people, reads their mental states, their thoughts and ponderings, and says: ‘That is how your mind is, that is how it inclines, that is in your heart.’ Then someone who has confidence and trust sees those things being done.

   

7. “One tells this to someone else who is skeptical and unbelieving, saying: ‘It is wonderful, it is marvelous, the great power and skill of that ascetic…’ And that person might say: ‘There is something called the Manika [mind reading jewel] charm. It is by means of this that that monastic can read the minds of others…’ And that is why, seeing the danger of such miracles, I… loathe them. 

   

Miracle of Instruction
8. “And what is the miracle of instruction? Here, Kevaddha, a disciple gives instruction as follows: ‘Consider in this way, don’t consider in that way, give up that, gain this and persevere in it.’ That, Kevaddha, is called the miracle of instruction.

   

9-66. “Again, Kevaddha, a Tathāgata [Wayfarer, Welcome One, Well Gone One] arises in the world, an arhat, a fully-enlightened buddha, endowed with wisdom and conduct, Well-Farer, Knower of the Worlds, incomparable Trainer of Persons to be Tamed, Teacher of Deva Beings and Human Beings, enlightened and blessed. 

   

“He, having realized it by his own super-knowledge, proclaims this world with its devas, māras, and brahmās, its princes, and peoples. He preaches the Dharma, which is lovely in the beginning, the middle, and end, in spirit and letter, and displays the fully-perfected and purified supreme life [of renunciation]. A disciple goes forth and practices the virtues... (as “The Fruits of Recluseship” discourse, DN 2, Verses 41-63).
   
“One guards the sense-doors and attains the [first] four absorptions (jhānas)... (as in DN 2, Verses 64-82); one attains various insights... (DN 2, Verses 83-84); one realizes the Four Noble Truths, the path, and the cessation of the corruptions (DN 2, Verses 85-97), and one knows: ‘[The ultimate goal is accomplished]…There is nothing further here.’ That, Kevaddha, is called the miracle of instruction. 

   

67. “And I, Kevaddha, have experienced these three miracles by my own super-knowledge.
   
“Once, Kevaddha, in this Monastic Order the thought occurred to a certain monastic: ‘I wonder where the four great elements -- earth, water, fire, air [actually the four characteristics of materiality: solidity, cohesion, temperature, motion] -- cease without remainder.’ And that monastic attained such a state of mental concentration [absorption] that the way to the deva-realms appeared.

   

Visiting the Heavens
68. “Then arriving in the [space] Realm of the Devas of the Four Great Sky Kings, that monastic asked those devas [gandharvas, entertainers, messengers]: ‘Friends, where do the four great elements -- earth, water, fire, air -- cease without remainder?’

“At this question the devas in the Realm of the Four Great Sky Kings said: ‘Monastic, we don’t know where the four great elements cease without remainder. But the Four Great Sky Kings [who look over the quadrants of space closest to Earth] are loftier and wiser than we are. They may know where the four great elements cease…’
   

69. “So the monastic went to the Four Great Sky Kings and asked, but they replied: ‘We don’t know, but the Thirty-Three [ruling] devas [who live in Tavatimsa, or the “Realm of the Thirty-Three”] may know…’

   

70. “So the monastic went to the Thirty-Three devas, who replied: ‘We don’t know, but Sakka, ruler of the [Thirty-Three] devas [as well as the Four Great Sky Kings], may know…’

   

71. “Sakka, ruler of the devas, said: ‘The Yāma Realm devas may know.’

   

72. “The Yāma Realm devas said: ‘Suyāma, born among devas, may know…’

   

73. “Suyāma said: ‘The Tusita Realm devas may know…’

  

74. “The Tusita Realm devas said: ‘Santusita, born among devas, may know…’

   

75. “Santusita said: ‘The Nimmānarati Realm devas may know…’

  

76. “The Nimmānarati Realm devas said: ‘Sunimmita, born among devas, may know…’

  

77.“Sunimmita said: ‘The Paranimmita-Vasavatti Realm devas may know…’

   

78. “The Paranimmita-Vasavatti Realm devas said: ‘Vasavatti, born among devas, may know…’

   

79. “Vasavatti said: ‘The devas of Brahmā’s Retinue may know…’

• Buddhist cosmology in general 
• Details of Buddhist cosmology  

80. “Then that monastic, by the appropriate concentration [absorption], made the way to the Brahmā World appear and went among the devas of Brahmā’s Retinue and asked them. They said: ‘We don’t know. But there is Brahmā, Great Brahmā [Maha Brahma], the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Lord, the Maker and Creator, the Ruler, Appointer and Orderer, Parent of All That Have Been and Shall Be. That Brahma is loftier and wiser than we are and would know where the four great elements cease without remainder.’

  

“And where, friends, is this Great Brahmā now?” 

  

“Monastic, we do not know when, how, or where Brahmā will appear. But when certain signs are seen -- when a light appears and a radiance shines forth -- then Brahmā will appear. Such signs are an indication that Brahma will soon appear.”

  

81. “Then it was not long before Great Brahmā appeared. And that monastic stepped up and said: “Friend, where do the four great elements -- earth, water, fire, air -- cease without remainder?” to which Great Brahmā replied: ‘Monastic, I am Brahmā, Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Lord, the Maker and Creator, the Ruler, Appointer and Orderer, Parent of All That Have Been and Shall Be.” 

   

82. “A second time the monastic said: ‘Friend, I did not ask you if you are Brahmā, Great Brahmā… I asked you where the four great elements cease without remainder.” And a second time Great Brahmā replied as before. 

   

83. “And a third time the monastic said: ‘Friend, I did not ask you that; I asked where the four great elements -- earth, water, fire, air -- cease without remainder.’

  

“Then, Kevaddha, Great Brahmā took that monastic aside by the arm and said: “Monastic, these devas believe there is nothing Brahmā does not see, does not know, is unaware of. That is why I did not speak in front of them. But, monastic, I don’t know where the four great elements cease without remainder.
  
“And therefore, monastic, you have acted wrongly. You have acted incorrectly by going beyond the Blessed Lord [the Buddha] in search of an answer to this question elsewhere. Now, monastic, you just go to the Blessed Lord and put this question to him, and whatever answer he gives, accept it.’

  

84. “So that monastic, as swiftly as a strong man might flex or unflex his arm, vanished from the Brahmā World and appeared in my presence. He prostrated himself before me, then sat down respectfully to one side, and said: ‘Venerable sir, where do the four great elements -- earth, water, fire, air -- cease without remainder?’

   

85. “I replied: ‘Monastic, once upon a time seafaring merchants, when they set sail on the ocean, took in their ship a land-sighting bird. When they could not see the land themselves, they released the bird. The bird flew to the east, south, west, and north, to the zenith, and to the intermediate points of the compass. If it saw land anywhere, it flew there.
   
“But if it saw no land, it returned to the ship. In the same way, monastic, you have been as far as the Brahmā World searching for an answer to your question and not finding it. And now you come back to me. But, monastic, you should not ask your question in this way: ‘Where do the four great elements -- earth, water, fire, air -- cease without remainder?’

 

“Instead, this is how the question should have been put: 

   

‘Where do earth, water, fire, and air find no footing?

Where are long and short, small and great, fair and foul -- 

Where are “name and form” wholly destroyed? 

And the answer is:

‘Where consciousness is signless, boundless, all-luminous,

That’s where earth, water, fire, and air find no footing,

There both long and short, small and great, fair and foul --

There “name and form” are wholly destroyed.

With the cessation of [the impersonal process of] consciousness this is all destroyed.’”

  

Thus the Buddha spoke, and the householder Kevaddha delighted and rejoiced at his words.

• *Translator Maurice O’Connell Walshe (1911-1998) was one of the foremost British-born Buddhist and Pali scholars, Vice-President of the Buddhist Society, Chair of the English Sangha Trust, and author of the definitive translation of the Digha Nikaya or Long Discourses of the Buddha.

Read More

Is Buddhism a Religion? Yes, and No. How's That for a Koan?

We often talk about Siddhartha, the young man who became known as the Buddha, as if he were a god. The fact is that he was just a simple Indian guy, a human being like you and me. We think of him as some kind of super-genius for having attained complete spiritual awakening, but in fact his real genius was in showing how any one of us can attain the same awakening as he did. We describe him as a prince and a member of the elite royalty of his time, and we think that must have given him an advantage over us -- but the reality is that most of us today are probably better off, in material terms, than Siddhartha was. The point is, we shouldn't mythologize Siddhartha's life and think that his spiritual awakening was due to his special circumstances. Most of us today actually live in conditions very similar to Siddhartha's, in terms of our material situation.

James: This is something that many in the West don't understand. They think we worship Buddha when we bow to his statues. I think a segment of this misunderstanding stems from the Western idea of what a religion constitutes. The main religions practiced in the West all have the common denominator of a belief in an omnipotent being that rules over all humanity--a "God." Combine that with a relative cultural isolation of many Americans and you have a recipe for misunderstanding Buddhism and other non-Western belief systems.

Siddhartha was a truth seeker, nothing more. He wasn't looking for religion, as such -- he wasn't particularly interested in religion. He was searching for the truth. He was looking for a genuine path to freedom from suffering. Aren't all of us searching for the same thing? If we look at the life of Siddhartha, we can see that he found the truth and freedom he was seeking only after he abandoned religious practices. Isn't that significant? The one who became the Buddha, the "Awakened One," didn't find enlightenment through religion -- he found it when he began to leave religion behind.

James: I don't think this means that we should abandon monasteries, temples and teachers but it is a necessary caution in reminding practitioners that these things are tools to help us along the path that only we can walk. For example, I think we deify our teachers a bit and lean upon them sometimes too much like a crutch. Yet Buddha was clear that we can know the Dharma like the back of our hand but all that is worthless unless we set out on our own and put them into practice. No one can walk the path for us. No teacher can cure us of our suffering--regardless of how enlightened and talented they may be. So, in that sense Buddhism isn't a religion in the Western sense but rather, perhaps, a spiritual school. Let me be clear, however. It doesn't hurt to practice with others in a physical sangha because it offers us support and encouragement but just remember that Buddha had none of these things. And if he can do it, so can we.

After all, what would you do if you were the last Buddhist on Earth? Would you stop practicing because there were no more teachers, temples, statues and sanghas? Of course not. These things are maps but they aren't the path itself. Spiritual materialism and attachment to it's trimmings is just as sure a pitfall as falling into the delusional hole that we don't need any teaching or guidance at all. Ironically, fittingly and beautifully we come back to the conclusion that Buddhism itself should be approached with the middle-path mindset. The way we view it should be balanced between traditional practice and freelance adaptation to an individuals particular karma.

Neither wrong to attend a temple or monastery nor wrong to be more of a hermit Buddhist as Buddha initially was. Some teachers I have read will actually recommend certain students leave the monastery to study on their own as a hermit. So, there are many paths but only one Dharma. That said, neither I, nor Rinpoche are advocating we do away with Buddhism as a religion but rather to go beyond Buddhism as a religion. This means having the structural integrity of the Dharma as our foundation but we shouldn't let organized religion hold back our practice to where we simply copy someone else's practice. In my years of practice I have found that mimicking the path of someone else is simply yet another delusion.

To read the rest of Rinpoche's insightful article, simply click on this sentence.

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

A Question for Brit Hume.

We all know by now that Brit Hume slammed Buddhism this past weekend by saying Tiger Woods needs to turn to Christianity if he wants to be forgiven and redeemed. The irony being that by bringing up Buddhism on such a public level he has sparked curiosity in the religion. That said, Buddhists really don't care how many Buddhists there are in comparison to other religions. We're not interested in competing with other belief systems. We don't do the proselytizing thing. It's a bit too forceful for us easy going Buddhists. For a more in-depth analysis of this statement click here to read my original post but for the purposes of this post I want to ask Brit a question.

You say Christianity is the way to go and that Buddhism is lacking. However, you didn't specify, which church is the right one? What if Woods chooses the wrong one and every day he just keeps making "God" angrier and angrier? You didn't stop to think about that one did you? Stick to the news, Brit or enroll in a theology course and get educated. Better yet, go interview an actual Buddhist -- You're a journalist, so, go find out the facts of Buddhism before you denigrate the religion of 330 million people. Thank-you.

Read More

Faith in Buddhism.

Perhaps because of our Judeo-Christian background, we have a tendency to regard doubt as something shameful, almost as an enemy. We feel that if we have doubts, it means that we are denying the teachings and that we should really have unquestioning faith. Now in certain religions, unquestioning faith is considered a desirable quality. But in the Buddha-dharma, this is not necessarily so. Referring to the dharma, the Buddha said, “ehi passiko,” which means “come and see,” or “come and investigate,” not “come and believe.”

An open, questioning mind is not regarded as a drawback to followers of the Buddha-dharma. However, a mind that says, “This is not part of my mental framework, therefore I don't believe it,” is a closed mind, and such an attitude is a great disadvantage for those who aspire to follow any spiritual path. But an open mind, which questions and doesn't accept things simply because they are said, is no problem at all.

–Ani Tenzin Palmo, from “Necessary Doubt,” Tricycle, Summer 2002. Special thanks to Philip Ryan at Tricycle for this quote.

James: This reminds me of the quote, "Minds are like parachutes. They only work when they're open." One of the reasons that I began to sour on Christianity was because of the insistence upon "blind faith." I never understood how using my mind to question the claims being made by adult leaders in my former church was giving into "Satan" when "God" was the one who gave me that brain, which is able to question in the first place!! I like the translation of "come and see" because it is an invitation to spirituality but coupled with an invitation to see for yourself. I was very impressed with that approach when I first began investigating Buddhism. It is a very science based approach to spirituality, which appealed greatly to me as one who was raised on the scientific method.

Seeing is believing as we say in the west and in many ways Buddha was an ancient scientist of the mind and perhaps the first psychiatrist. The teaching of cause and effect is very much a foundation of scientific inquiry. He was certainly compared to a doctor prescribing countless variations of the Dharma (medications) to each person based on their individual karmic needs. That said, let's get back to the psychiatrist analogy in specific. A psychiatrist knows that trust is vital to enabling the patient in believing that the specific treatment plan prescribed will be helpful to the patient. That means allowing the patient to ask questions about the process. That's because a psychiatrist/psychologist knows that if a person feels like they are doing something out of guilt, fear or blind faith it doesn't matter how helpful the therapy might be, the patient is simply not going to buy into the program.

Buddhism is a lot like psychological therapy program put forth by Buddha. He knew that being able to question his teachings was the only way people would fully consider what he taught without feeling forced into it and force is completely antithetical to the Dharma he revealed. Buddha was a great questioner as he dared question the great Brahmin priest class of his day, which was very rebellious. He took the power of religion out of the hands of the privileged few and gave it back to the masses. He was a Robin-hood of spirituality in a way. That great tradition of questioning phenomenon and experiences for oneself is to me what makes Buddhism such a respected tradition. It treats people like adults rather than children to be told what to think, believe and how to act.

He was not very interested in speculation and open-ended faith but rather faith, which is merely a step in-between ignorance and knowing for oneself. It is a pit-stop of sorts along the journey of experiential wisdom. The Great Awakened one said in the Kasibharadvaja Sutta of the Samyutta Nikaya that "Faith is the seed and practice is the rain" which is nothing near blind faith. He goes on further saying, "And wisdom is my yoke and my plough." Thus, without the wisdom (the plough) to prepare the fertile field (the mind) with experience the seed of faith will wither, dry up, die and be of no use. Faith in Buddhism is in large part more of a conviction to accomplish ones goals for oneself, rather than being a submission and obedience to others as is often the case with the monotheistic religions.

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

Of Gods, Bodhisattvas and Shrines.

This post was taken from a comment about a discussion of Richard Dawkin's excellent book, "The God Delusion" and the concept of a Creator God on Buddha Space. I've written about this before but have some new insights. Ah the many facets of the diamond that is the Buddhadharma:

My "Creator God" is science. However, I do not worship at the altar of science as some atheists and others do. Attaching too much to it. I see it as an impersonal force that holds everything together. The cosmic glue. I do not believe that one needs to believe in a God to be a good person. I am my own savior or my own destructive downfall.

However, I also believe that the existence or nonexistence of any deities is unknown but not necessarily unknowable. It's hard to shut the door on anything completely in this unpredictable universe. A scientist must also leave room for unforeseen information. For me personally I'm 99.99999% certain that there is no Creator God. Yet most of the time it doesn't really have much impact on my practice one way of the other--the idea of Creator God that is. I just don't see the need for a Creator God in my life or in existence overall.

The same goes for the gods and Bodhisattvas in Buddhism. I do not believe in the literal reality of these beings. I see them more as archetypes of what I want to become and need to avoid. So I believe in them in so far as I believe that I have their same potential with me. So I keep some Bodhisattva statues around the house like Avalokiteshvara/Kwan Yin because in part, I am a visual learner. I like having a visual representations as reminders to live more compassionately, etc. It's kind of like having a note up on the door to remind you each day to "Smile more" or a post-it note on the bathroom mirror to "be nicer."

The difference being the Bodhisattva "notes" are beautiful works of art to admire and find peace in. There is something in the way these Buddha and Bodhisattvas statues' faces are carved that always bring me a feeling of serenity and as an artist I really find something valuable in that. I forget easily and having that physical, visual reminder helps a lot. I'm not attached, however, to these statues and what they do for me. I am able to remember to be what I want to be without them as well. They simply add a flair to my practice, which I admit I have a bit of a weakness for at times. I do like a touch of artistic expression in my practice.

I certainly do not believe though that one must have these statues in their houses to be motivated and encouraged to be nicer, more compassionate, etc. And for those that firmly believe in the literal reality of bodhisattvas, gods, demons and believe in praying to them I say keep on doing what works best for you in your life. It it helps you reduce suffering in your personal life and within your relationships then that's about all that matters. There are many shades of light shining through the diamond of the Dharma; purple, red, green and blue but all is light. Plus the statues are beautiful art to have around the house. I believe that all that which encourages the Dharma is to be encouraged and shared with those who wish to hear of it. I do not believe in forcing others into hearing about Buddhism or coercing people into it. That only causes more suffering.

As for shrines I see them as places where a person can visit and find great strength and empowerment. As well as being a place where one can interactively and very physically make a connection with all humanity. There is a sense of connection when visiting places that many people consider special and places of refuge. It is a site that is a physical representation of all the aspirations and dedications of countless fellow aspirants practicing for the same ideals. That can be a powerful experience affirming the stabilizing presence of oneness. Offerings at shrines, altars and temples are for me symbolic acts of affirming my willingness to sacrifice my desires for realization of ultimate liberation from suffering. That said, I do not believe that offering a few coins at the alter will ensure a god intercedes on my behalf but if it helps you be a more centered person then all the best to you. Gassho.

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

Cancer, Meat and Vegetarianism. Also, We are Our Own Judges in Buddhism.

Interesting article on the association with meat based diets and cancer:

Although the initiated cells are not considered to be reversible, the cells growing through the promotion stage are usually considered to be reversible, a very exciting concept. This is the stage that especially responds to nutritional factors. For example, the nutrients from animal based foods, especially the protein, promote the development of the cancer whereas the nutrients from plant-based foods, especially the antioxidants, reverse the promotion stage. This is a very promising observation because cancer proceeds forward or backward as a function of the balance of promoting and anti-promoting factors found in the diet, thus consuming anti-promoting plant-based foods tend to keep the cancer from going forward, perhaps even reversing the promotion. consequences.

James: In Buddhism vegetarianism isn't a requirement partly because not everyone lives in an area where vegetables are abundant such as in Tibet. That said, many practitioners are indeed vegetarians especially in the west. I have found that the main reason for doing so is often out of compassion for animals. This is in part because Buddhism teaches that we are all interconnected and interdependent, which includes animals of course. This means that it is very possible that the cow we would eat might have been our mother in a past life. That realization was a big reason I finally made the switch to a vegetarian diet awhile back. I just couldn't look at a plate of meat ever again in the same way once I heard that.

The second reason I most commonly hear for a vegetarian diet is out of health concerns and this report backs that up even more. Just something to think about but no one should commit to something that they aren't ready to do or think is necessary especially out of guilt, which is a big reason I like Buddhism. There aren't many strict "rules" to live by in Buddhism and using guilt as a tactic to get people to do what you want is very much frowned upon from what I have studied. It's a very accepting religion for the most part. It accepts you where ever you are in life as it understands and teaches we are all in different places due to different karmic needs. The Dharma allows people to practice on various levels of commitment and experience, which I found refreshing when I really started looking into Buddhism.

There isn't much need for leaders to "punish" followers as Buddhism doesn't believe in a "God" or a Savior. There is no such thing as "sin" as understood in the Judeo-Christian sense. That is left up to our karma so that in essence we will be our own judges of how well (or how not so well) we lived our lives. It's like an accurate, non-feeling, non-biased computer giving us a read out of how well we accomplished a task. It is void of emotional judgments and simply renders data from the information that was input from outside experiments (Karma--or how we lived our lives. The cause and effect of our past actions whether they were helpful or not to both us and others).

Usually when an issue of reform needs to be addressed in Buddhism it is due to the practitioner seeking out an experienced teacher on their own for advise and advisement on over-coming a problem or obstacle. Outside monasteries it is nearly unheard of from my understanding of monks chastising people for their actions other than to give them general advice in a Dharma discourse on how to live a happy life free of less suffering. Usually this is delivered to many people and individuals in the audience decide if what was said was applicable to them or not and if so how they go about changing is up to them.

However, even in stricter monasteries disobeying rules is done in a very compassionate and open manner by the community of monks so that there is less chance of personal vindictiveness being apart of it. Some might find rebirth a tiresome notion of having to go around and around until they realize total oneness but I find it compassionate. It allows us to make mistakes and learn from them through long experience over incalculable lifetimes rather than saying you only have one life to "get it right."

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

Born Again Buddhists.

Heard this joke today,

"What did the Buddhist say to the Born-Again Christian missionary?"

"No Thanks. I've been born again many times!!"

O.k. so that's a bad joke but at least I got you to stop thinking about your worries for a moment.

Moving on, I was reading that FOX News here in America (known for its conservative, Christian slant) will be interviewing the Dalai Lama. The news channel is asking their viewers to come up with some of the questions to be asked of the Buddhist monk. So I was scanning some of the questions posted on their website--some are serious, some ridiculous like, "Who will win the American League baseball championship?" I think that person thinks the Dalai Lama is some kind of fortune teller.

Then there was this one, "Can I share with you the Gospel of Jesus Christ?" As if the Dalai Lama hasn't heard it before. I am convinced that this well-read, well-traveled, highly intelligent, Dalai Lama who has been apart of countless inter-faith forums knows well the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And I am sure that he finds much good in it and finds a lot of agreement in the teachings of Jesus. And he would probably listen to someone explain it to him again with a smile and a nod or two. He is very polite and understanding of people much more so than most of us including myself.

That said, I have found that many (not all) Christians think that the only reason that people aren't Christian is because they haven't heard "the gospel." These Christians (not all by any means) can't imagine that a person can have a happy, spiritually fulfilling life without the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Surely once they hear "the gospel" (these Christians think) they will drop Buddhism and become Christian and those who don't are dismissed as "not truly understanding" the gospel of Jesus. That or they say that we "know it to be true" but we reject it to try and thwart the plan of "God."

They can't fathom someone understanding "the gospel" and then saying, "No, I think I'll stick with Buddhism." To them it's like someone being handed a diamond and saying, "No thanks." The problem is that they are blinded by duality and can't see that Buddhism has its own diamond to cherish. They don't realize that for us, Christianity is but one diamond in a fisherman's net (Indra's net) of diamonds sown in at each knot in the net. All the diamonds are beautiful and just because the diamond you know is gorgeous doesn't mean that the diamond I know isn't.

Can't we just enjoy the diamonds instead of arguing over whose diamond is brighter? I'm not saying that all religions are the same but they all (or most at least) have the same roots in believing that we are apart of something bigger than ourselves. I can rejoice for the peace and joy that Christians find in their religion without it taking anything away from my own branch in the universal path of peace and love. May all awake from the great slumber.

Joseph Campbell said, "All religions are true. You just have to understand what they are true of."

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

Using Science to Explain Biblical Stories. Part One: Sodom and Gommorah.

**NOTE: This is not an attempt to insult anyone so if you are insulted by this post then I apologize. I am starting a series here on how Biblical stories can often be explained by a modern understanding of science. I am doing it not out of a desire to destroy anyone's faith but from a personal interest explaining the stories I've heard during my 22 years as a Christian. I am a skeptic by heart and enjoy explaining the seemingly inexplicable.***

---

Sodom and Gomorrah were two ancient cities mentioned in the Bible most likely near the Dead Sea. The story in the Bible says that the town was destroyed by "God" because of the their "wickedness" by fire and brimstone (sulfur rock). So what does science have to say about this story?

As we know much of the Middle East sits above oil and natural gas fields as well as atop pockets of sulfur rock or brimstone. There are fault lines in the area where most scholars believe Sodom and Gomorrah existed as well as within much of the "Holy Land." Ancients didn't know much science and therefore natural disasters would be seen as "God's" doing and explained by man's "sinning."

So all it takes is a decent sized asteroid to hit the area, which would ignite the oil and natural gas fields nearby and underneath the city. As well as the igniting and throwing sulfur rocks into the air, which would then reign down upon the nearby cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Thus giving off the effect of flaming rocks pouring down upon the cities and burning them to the ground.

Another explanation could stem from the many fault lines that exist in Israel, Jordan and throughout the Middle East. An earthquake could have cracked the Earth, which exposed natural gas pockets, pools of oil and veins of sulfur rock. All it would take is one spark from the many cooking fires to explode the pockets of gas, ignite the sulfur rock, which would reign back down upon the city burning it to the ground.

There are simple, (Occam's razor) scientific explanations for this event either way and so people who were not privy to science would seek to explain such a natural disaster with what they believed--"God." "God" was an understandable way to explain events, which were at the time mysterious in origin and thus very frightening.

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

Looking For Buddha.

Trying to find a Buddha or enlightenment is like trying to grab space. Space has a name but no form. It's not something you can pick up or put down. And you certainly can't grab it. Beyond this mind you'll never see a Buddha. The Buddha is a product of your mind. Why look for a Buddha beyond this mind?

-- The Zen teachings of Bodhidharma

James: This reminds me of the koan, "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him." Which for me means many things such as the message/teachings being more important than the teacher. For some It can be easy to get attached to the idea of Buddha and see him as some kind of god to be worshiped but I see that as being a distraction. It attempts to shift the responsibility for our liberation away from ourselves to a caricature of Buddha as a savior rather than an example. Buddha is not a god--my understanding is that Buddha is beyond all labels, forms and titles. For me, worshiping the Buddha is like worshiping a bar of soap because Buddha can not do anything for us except shine the torch to show the way.

Buddha is almost always depicted as meditating, which for me is a symbol of the DIY (do it yourself) philosophy that is so popular today. When Buddha was meditating on the night of his enlightenment he did not worship some mystic deity hoping that he didn't have to do the difficult work and could be saved without effort on his part. I have to do the heavy lifting on my journey just like Buddha so many years ago. Praying to Buddha is in my view pointless. I see it as a waste of time that could be spent meditating, which is the vehicle Buddha used to awaken from the slumber of the eg0-self and liberate himself from samsara. Again, the message (the dharma) is more important than the messenger. Buddha is long gone into mahaparinirvana.

Even if Buddha was around to hear those prayers he couldn't answer them or fulfill the desires they contain because he is not a god. The very idea of prayer is the act of trying to satiate our desires and that is a dead-end path according to Dharma.

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

Epicurus and Buddhism.

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"-Epicurus.

James: This is the quote that introduced me to the ancient philosopher Epicurus who has since become one of my favorites. So I began to study Epicurus and found that he had much in common with Buddhism and its non-theistic nature.

What I was most interested in was that he believed and taught "that events in the world are ultimately based on the motions and interactions of atoms moving in empty space." This sounds very similar to the pivotal Buddhist belief of interdependence or dependent co-arising, which says that nothing exists separate from anything else. All is interconnected in a web of cause and effect.

This includes sharing the belief that something can not come from nothing and therefore the Universe must be endless yet because of his belief in a shifting, interconnected web of atoms that same Universe can not be unchanging. It was his belief that the Universe is eternal but only in the sense that it goes through cycles of birth and death along the way. Yet another shade of thinking, which can be found in Buddhist philosophy. As well as a theory that can be found is still found in modern day science via the cyclic theory of the Universe.

He was also dedicated to over-coming pain and fear, which is not unlike the dedication that we Buddhists seek to over-come what we would call suffering in general. He taught that curbing desires are important if one wants to avoid that pain and fear, which is another teaching shared in Buddhism. This included going into the detail as to how desires cause suffering such as mentioning indulging too much on foods because it leads to pain that one might not be able to afford such delicacies in the future. The idea of short term happiness doesn't bring long term happiness.

He did believe that some pleasure is important, which has led some to believe he was a hedonist but he was more of a believer in the middle path of moderation. True he was no Buddhist monk following every precept. However, most argue that his ultimate definition of pleasure was actually tranquility, which is more akin to the Buddhist definition of enlightenment. This is because tranquility is defined as a state, which is free from stress and emotion; an untroubled state free from disturbances; a peaceful state. Enlightenment being (using a very basic definition) a nirvanic state of being freed from desire (emotions) and suffering (stress).

Epicureanism was often seen in ancient Greece as being a godless philosophy but while Epicurus denied being godless he also believed that if there were any gods that they most likely were ambivilant at best toward human beings. Thus they would not pursue punishing or rewarding us in this or any other life. In other words the idea being that a belief in a god or gods isn't important to man's day to day actions. In comparison Buddhists also usually do not concern themselves with a god as it is seen as irrelevant to realizing that the human condition is repleat with suffering and that praying to a god does not end our suffering. When we are honest with ourselves we realize that we are the only ones who can end our suffering.

Some Buddhists believe that there are gods living in a god realm but that they are like the gods of Epicureanism where they do not have power over human beings. These gods in Buddhism are subject to the same suffering as we human beings. According to these Buddhists being a god is a distraction where one is more concerned with pleasure and self adoration than certainly concerning oneself with human beings, meditation and over-coming the cycle of suffering. The problem is that even for these gods their pleasures and good karma run out eventually.

Epicureanism certainly does not mesh with Buddhism completely but Epicurus did teach many similar ideas. I wanted to do this post because I enjoy discovering how western and eastern philosophy and thought can be connected. We focus too often on how different we are and sometimes I wonder if that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The connections and shared ideals are there if we really want to see them and embrace each others cultures.

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

Non-Theism, Buddhism and God.

Nontheism (a.k.a. non-theism) is defined as the Oxford English Dictionary as: "... not having or involving a belief in God, especially as a being who reveals himself to humanity." The author Pema Chödrön, when writing about Buddhism, states:

"The difference between theism and nontheism is not whether one does or does not believe in God. ... Theism is a deep-seated conviction that there's some hand to hold. ... Non-theism is relaxing with the ambiguity and uncertainty of the present moment without reaching for anything to protect ourselves. ... Nontheism is finally realizing there is no babysitter you can count on."

James: I am of the belief that any sense of a "god" is merely an impersonal force that is made up of all things living and not living, which makes up what we define as the "Universe" experiencing itself in myriad and changing forms. Buddha reportedly said that the Universe is, "So large that is has no exterior, and so small that it has no interior."

I personally believe that sometimes a belief in a Creator God can be more of a hindrance and impediment than not. This is because the belief in this "God" often becomes the center of a person's life instead of the center being life itself. It means another attachment, which leads to obsession that says that one's life is basically meaningless without someone to give you purpose. This kind of obsession and subservience can lead some believers into living their life in a constant state of fear, guilt, shame, anger and resentment. Buddhists experience the same emotions but don't see it as punishment of who they are but rather a choice, which leads to a logical effect.

It means that you're in a constant state of worry because life doesn't just unfold as it will but instead is dependent upon the confusing whims and actions of this "God." It gives one a feeling that we have control over our lives but when our prayers don't work (because there is no "God" in my view) then we assume that we must be bad people for that can be the only reason that "God" would not answer our prayers. In Buddhism as there is no "God" or "Satan" then suffering and happiness just happen as a natural state of cause and effect. There is no mystery anymore and no fear as to why bad things happen to good people except to say that such is this existence.

---End of Transmission---

Read More

Non-Violence is the Right Choice--It Works.

New York, USA -- Nonviolent resistance is not only the morally superior choice. It is also twice as effective as the violent variety. That's the startling and reassuring discovery by Maria Stephan and Erica Chenoweth, who analyzed an astonishing 323 resistance campaigns from 1900 to 2006. "Our findings show that major nonviolent campaigns have achieved success 53 percent of the time, compared with 26 percent for violent resistance campaigns," the authors note in the journal International Security. (The study is available as a PDF file at http://www.nonviolent-conflict.org).

"First, a campaign's commitment to nonviolent methods enhances its domestic and international legitimacy and encourages more broad-based participation in the resistance, which translates into increased pressure being brought to bear on the target," they state. "Second, whereas governments easily justify violent counterattacks against armed insurgents, regime violence against nonviolent movements is more likely to backfire against the regime."

James: I think that one of the reasons that Buddhism and Buddhists are so peaceful, nonviolent (with some exceptions of course) and less likely to engage in violence and aggressive intimidating divisive talk that often breeds tension and conflict between religions is because of Buddhisms lack of a belief in a god. This helps neuter the defensiveness and aggression that often comes with religions that claim to be the sole religious truth and the fight that often ensues of "my god is superior to your god." It divides people to the point of seeing those who don't believe in your god and absolute truth as inferior and evil, which can divide families as well as turn brothers, friends and fellow human beings into enemies and set them against each other.

It can and often does very breeds intolerance rather than acceptance. It often leads to an attitude of superiority, which can also easily escalate to violent conflicts such as in the crusades, the inquisitions, the purge of pagans and Islamic jihadism/terrorism. This is not to say that all members of these certain religions act in such ways and agree with such aggressiveness.

As for nonviolence in general I think that it is more effective because it appeals to everyone's internal desire to avoid suffering and most people (except perhaps the most deranged) suffer greatly when they employ violent behavior, thought and speech. This can be seen throughout history when eventually the rank and file members of a violent organization/military either desert or turn on the leaders to end the bloodshed, oppression and overall suffering.

Nonviolence comes from a place of strength and violence a place of weakness therefore nonviolence can usually be sustained for a longer period of time. It is not unlike a strong oak tree that bends in the strongest wind but doesn't break for its roots are deep in the soil of interdependence. This a weird analogy but the word fascism is derived from the Italian word fascio, which means "bundle" or "union", and from the Latin word fasces. ^[12] The fasces, which consisted of a bundle of rods often tied around an axe.

The idea being that one twig on its own is weak and can easily be broken by force but when many weak twigs are tied together in a thick bundle not even the strongest hands can tear them apart. When a population unites together in a literal manifestation of interconnection their numbers and willpower will overwhelm and outlast the strongest, largest army. The general population of a country is almost always greater than the numbers of a military and unlike a military every citizen can participate in a nonviolent movement including the old, sick and young. Especially when the global population adds to the numbers. I'll end this post with one of my favorite quotes from Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. who explains why a seemingly weak strategy of nonviolence is so powerful:

Nonviolence is a powerful weapon and just weapon, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.-Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

~Peace to all beings~

Read More

"In God's Name." A Book Review.

I was recently invited by the National Geographic Society publishing department to read the book, "In God's Name" and do a review of the work. I found the title intreaging and agreed. I was provided a copy of the book and just finished it. It is by Jules Naudet and Gedeon Naudet. The photos are taken by Stephan Crasneanscki and the interviews by Virginie Luc.

The design of the cover was obviously the first thing that I noticed. It has a nice gold colored cover with a complimenting black binding and lovely white script. The mixture of these three colors lends itself well to the noble topic within as gold, black and white are all colors associated with spirituality in many religions.

Then I opened the book and was rewarded with a stunning, brilliant and artistic photo of a trio of Buddhist monks wrapped up in their robes with one monk peering out from around his shroud at the camera. The pictures in this book live up to the standard of photography that the world has come to expect from National Geographic. There is also a wonderful picture of Buddhist nun peering over glasses while reading as well as young Tibetan Buddhist monks playing soccer. The wisdom in her face and eyes is endearing and captivating.

And so this book is worth buying for the pictures alone but the wisdom from diverse religions within is just as worthwhile. The various religions include: Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Sikhism, Shinto and Hinduism. I hope I named them all. So the wisdom is simple but like most simple messages of spirituality that are deeply profound. I will touch on a few of the quotes from other religions but being a Buddhist I will focus more on those.

The Dalai Lama was introduced in this book with him describing the balance between being seen by Tibetan Buddhists as Avalokiteshvara (Kwan Yin) and a sentient being like everyone else. He has such disarming honesty when he says, "I am also ridden with a bit of laziness. So, while talking to other people, I do not give airs to myself. I speak the real fact. That is why people love me. For me too, I have no uneasiness. It is troublesome if I think I am smart and higher." This kind of humility is exactly what makes him such an enlightened being. He is truly living and epitomizing the middle way.

Another spiritual leader in the book that I found fascinating is the Archbishop of Canterbury and head of the Church of England. His answer to the question, "How do you feel the presence of God?" sounded very similar to Buddhism and reminded me how similar we are all despite our different spiritual beliefs. He says, "I am aware of the presence of God every time I'm aware of my own breathing, my own heartbeat. (James: That's very Buddhist to talk of finding peace in one's breath and heartbeat).

Then when asked, "What is the meaning of death" the Dalai Lama said, "If you think that a natural thing has come, tranquility shall prevail. For example, fruits fall down when ripened. There is no reason to be surprised. That is what it is. But if you think that something catastrophic has happened, then a lot of unhappiness shall follow.

When asked, "Can different religions coexist" the Dali Lama responded, "In early times, in each place, people lived in isolation from the rest. It was right for them to abide within a solitary religious milieu. In their isolated milieus, it was right for them to promote their particular religion. We can't decree that this or that particular religion is the most important. I can not say that Buddhism is the best for each one of us." This kind of acceptance is a big reason that I became a Buddhist.

All in all I was enthralled with this book and pleased to have had the chance to read and review it. I would highly recommend this piece of art and would be a great gift. It would be a great coffee table book.

Read More