Kindest Regards, earl!
I find your posts in general to be thoughtful and introspective. I appreciate your comments here as well.
While I tend to agree with you that "all prayers are answered," as you point out, the only way we might realize they were is if we can suspend our "self"-ish wants, open our eyes & mind & see what's happened and how it fits the bigger, broader picture.
OK, I'm not positive that is really what I meant, at least in total. I find myself generally agreeing, yet some prayers are answered best by not being answered.
I also have some perceptual trouble with the concept of doing away with "self." I understand that to be a core component of Buddhism. Yet, self is what defines each of us as individuals. To further complicate matters, philosophically, I do not see "selfish" as inherently wrong or bad. I will agree that "self" to the exclusion of others is not good. But is not "self" also "personality?," in the sense that without self we have no personality, nothing that denotes or defines any of us as individuals? I cannot help but think that in the effort to gain the "collective mind," that Buddhism as a philosophy loses sight of the beauty that is (or at least, can be) the individual.
I will rely on Vajradhara to correct what may be a misstatement by me,
Vajradhara is wonderful for that.
but as I understand traditional Buddhist philosophy, their chief disputation that there is a "creator God," relates to how so many of us define "God-" as an entity that pulls the strings from above or that "creates" as a doll maker has shaped a piece of wood into its current form.
I find myself in agreement with the concept, if not the application. I think in terms, rightly or wrongly only God knows, that once set in motion, the natural laws that govern the universe cannot be undone. Willy-nilly "pulling of strings" would upset that balance, if it even could be done. This does not prevent
the possibility of some agent acting (even invisibly) on behalf of God, such as angels (spirits, ghosts, demons or any of a host of other terms for spirit entities. Obviously not all, and this is not even stated as assurance or evidence, just a possibility, one of many possibilities, of which we will likely only know the actual factual truth once we leave this existence.) I do not personally think God can be bothered with our personal disasters, and leaves this "light work" to those to whom these duties have been given.
My heretical take on both the "buddhist" and theistic notions of "God" leads me to believe those camps may be simply different sides of the same coin.
I have watched your "heresy" over the course of your threads, and find myself more and more in general agreement. Not through your specific posts, but my own learning has lead me further along in this direction.
Buddhists tend to think of an enlightened individual as one who has overcome any notions of self and in so doing allows every action to be "right" for oneself and others simutaneously in that moment.
Yeah, see, I have a little difficulty with this. I am sure it is a cultural thing that does not translate well in the West. "Every action being right" effectively in my mind means "no morality." I realize this is not the intent, and that words fail to capture the essense, especially in this. Provided one has good intent to begin with, perhaps one could begin to say that every action is right. However, since from my perspective people are fallible, every action cannot possibly be right, even with good intent. Even good people, even enlightened people.
One is by being in that flow then in a way serving some innate force that serves to bring forth what is innately right in all beings. One can only do that in Buddhism by moving beyond our "small-minded self" to contact, enact that force, which Buddhism sees as who we fundamentally "are."
There is an element of trust required here, that I am not willing to breach just yet. Since I accept that all "spirit" is not all "good," then I have this little qualifier that says "try the spirits." "You will know them by their fruit." There are things about "using" the "force" that disturb me at a spiritual level.
Case in point; I do not seek dreams or visions. In my mind, that is not the correct way to go about things. In the course of my seeking, I may find something that masquerades as what I am looking for. No, I do not seek. Yet, from time to time, and never is the time known beforehand to me, I have dreams and visions. Now, I suppose I could as easily mistrust those dreams that come to me without my seeking. Yet they have not to this point let me down. I do not have that level of faith or trust if I go looking.
As I've said before in this thread; to me that suggests a "sentient design/intent" whether 1 chooses to find a "designer."
I am not fully sure I follow, but I think I agree in concept.
Similarly, in theistic religions, one can only theoretically contact and enact "God's" will by setting aside ego-bound concerns and perceptions to enlarge the heart/mind. When we manage that it does seem in those moments what we do for another we truly have done for ourselves in the bigger scheme of things. I use the term "openness" dimension of a religion-when we have moved into that open heart-mind space where the flow works for some larger purpose no matter how momentarily inconvenient for our "ego." What is this seemingly "intelligent design?" Call it Buddha Mind, call it God, call it Joe-doesn't matter.
Perhaps you are more experienced in spiritual matters than I, there is really no issue there. I still have some trouble getting beyond the "self" here. Is it not "self" that directs us in unselfish actions? Granted, that self may be acted upon by: conscience, spirit, faith, doctrine...but without self there is nothing to direct. Maybe better stated, there is no individual to direct in the collective.
best we can tell going back to prehistoric culture of earliest known vintage, humanity has always been reaching out to, looking for, and/or honoring that "something." Whatever you want to call it, we honor ourselves and the bigger whole best whenever we can find that heart-mind space.
I am only just beginning to reach out spiritually, ever mindful of caution. Even in the context of "go with the flow," I cannot help but want to jump up on top with a surf board and steer a course along that flow. (The image of the "Silver Surfer" plays so well in my mind to this regard...) I do not have the level of trust required to just let go and see where the flow takes me, I feel it is my "selfish" imperative to be responsible for me, to steer my course myself, and not trust my soul to any other human, doctrinally or spiritually.
But that is just the way I see things. To each their own. My hope is that God will guide those who sincerely seek "Him," in whatever way this is suitably translated across cultures, traditions and religions.
I have learned a great deal about Buddhist beliefs here, especially lately with the discussions on the other thread, as well your contributions Earl. I find a lot I can agree with, in that it seems to correspond with my learning. And there is a lot that still seems contrary to me. Not enough to separate myself from Buddhists, but enough to exercise caution. All the while knowing that it may well be my perception that is not quite accurate, yet it is what I have for now, and so far it seems to work pretty well for me.
Love it and God bless, Earl
