The holy life can be lived just as a begger, its not possible to live the holly life as a lord or rich householder using others. The holly life does not depend on cast, on birth at all and one refraining from harm and not living for sensual pleasure is wothy of gifts. Kings an outcasts walked this way. To do is just a matter of vision and will.
Besides vision and will it would also require a great deal of trust and faith. I realize the begging tradition is more normative in the East, but is frowned upon in the West...I believe with good reason. Too many take advantage of the kind heartedness of strangers. I can tell stories of experiences, but it would not be important. In the end it would depend a great deal on motives and intentions.
IF know. For now just know the pleasure of sensuallity and so mind takes bi(r)th again and again in this world. To know a different, one needs to try the different. Otherwise one stays doomed and believes that things are just to bear as they are.
I don't feel like my existence is "doomed." Quite the contrary, with all of my suffering, and I assure it is great, I am blessed.
I am confused though, because later you say: "rebirth does not mean reinca(r)nation of an inherent personality." So if the learning portion of the spirit does not transfer, what point is there to rebirth? I'm sorry, every time I visit the subject I keep returning to how incredible it sounds...just a bit too convenient for the benefit of the rulers. (Not unlike other religions)
There is nothing esoteric. Or does Juantoo believes that people take birth poor or rich by accident or because of the mood of a higher "dont know what"?
It is *all* esoteric, we have no way to *know.* By definition that means esoteric. All claims by all religions that cannot be verified by external sources is esoteric.
Beings depend on. So what ever comes into be does not only be subject to decay but also causes, nourishes on death and suffering of others.
You see this as a bad thing. I see it as the way of nature, the way of the universe, the IS. Life is created, born, lives, becomes diseased, grows old and dies. More life continues.
I am the most ardent opponent of how evolution is currently taught, and the religious methodologies employed to defend it....evolution is only another way for humans to explain and understand the process of life developing. The process is real, it isn't difficult to see all around us. We don't know how to explain the process accurately, but we know the process occurs. As we learn more, we discover what Native Americans have long taught, that *all* life is connected.
To me, this is a good thing. Why would I wish to separate myself from the IS, to which I intuitively know I belong?
Good observation of anatta, not-self.
I am not certain I fully understand in context. I will say, that every struggle I have faced, every crisis of faith I have overcome, every challenge that demands an action...I weigh not only for the good of myself, but for the good (or at least no harm) to others.
What is good for the goose, is good for the gander. Do not wish for me, what you do not wish for yourself.
"Compassion" without wisdom causes much suffering.
Compassion without wisdom is better than no compassion at all.
Which count(r)y leads the most wars,
China? Rome? Egypt? India? Oh!, you mean *only* today....
wast(e)s the most resources, does not care about enviro(n)ment and anicent ethic at all, has build up its welfare on third world and slaves?
No slaves in India? Seems to me a whole class of society was denigrated to the level of slaves, or even lower, for over a thousand years. The US is what....241 years old. In my view, you are not in a position to criticize on the subject of slavery, the US did not invent it.
The US has given the world technology. Yes, that is a double edged sword, often it is what the holder does with it, whether it is for good or bad. I have reservations about much technology, but it remains that without our lives all over the world would *not be as good* as they are today. Yes, you can point to exceptions, and my heart goes out to those enduring warfare...but again, warfare has been with humanity since we became human...the US did not invent it. Indeed, I have argued in the past that the very essence of warfare exists in even the most microscopic life, as "eat or be eaten."
Point being...how would your life be now without the internet? Without electricity? Without refrigeration? Without vaccinations? I can go on, for hours.
What has India's venerable and ancient culture given the world in the last two hundred years? Call centers and tea farms. And Mohandas Gandhi. And that's about it.
So much easier to make us the devil, so you look better in your own eyes and not have to face your own failings.
Taking and giving more intensively just causes more heat. That is why taking from one side to give to the other never helped anybody but is just used to justify ones good livelihood using the Robin Hood image.
Don't flatter yourself.
Of course America, or better leading people, has a big share on setting the wheel of lasting global darkness, caught in sensuallity deeply, turning faster then ever did, but how ever, the doer receives his gifts and the time of running out of places to just take is not so far away. Soon the results will be seen, stronger as they already do. So it's actually a good global sample, but such is to much, and better focuse on the same ways and systems within the formation that is called self.
And in India it is OK for young men to gang rape a woman and get away with it, and somehow it becomes her fault...even if she dies because of the attack. But India of course is not "caught in sensuality deeply." That was sarcasm.
You tell me nothing I don't already know about the US. I know we have failings...we are human too. We simply happen to be prosperous enough to share some of our wealth with the rest of the world, and the world ultimately is better for it. It is not without cost, and benefits do need to be carefully considered against consequences, in that we would agree. But the US is not the devil that you seem to believe.
Not always are non reacions on what one means that it was waste effort really a waste. Sometimes things need to sink in and the "Ahh!" could come years later and sometimes there are others, third persons, not direct infolves, who benefit a lot while the taught has nothing from it.
I agree the teacher can only assist with so much towards learning, and often the student doesn't fully grasp until later...if at all.
It shows of course good sign that no out of range for a way out and that there have been deeper considerations.
Still, just to stick to a certain believe does not mean that one has already faith in the context of this topic.
I think there is still some grammatical confusion on my part. The OP stated faith as a verb, a behavior. That is how I have used that word to this point in the conversation. Now I'm beginning to believe you are using faith as a noun, referring to the various religious faiths.
You presume my faith is Christian, and that would be mostly accurate. My heritage includes a large part of Native American blood, from my father's father's father's father's side...in other words, my family name. I have an affinity with nature since I was a child, that cannot be taught. But I have experienced it. Unlike what you teach here, which is alien to me.
Does sensual lust and desire for becoming/being come again and again?
I don't understand your question. Do you deny the role of physical love between two consenting adults? I ask particularly considering a bonded pair mated for life?
Yes, by deed, and not by birth a Brahman can be called Brahman, is by deeds, not by birth, that a Brahman is called, is an outcast.
How many times has this happened in Indian history? Particularly during the caste era? Specifically, how many times has an untouchable become an accepted Brahman?
