# Christian philosophy and the Big Bang



## Warrigal (Nov 5, 2015)

I just read this elsewhere and I'm pasting it verbatim. It is vey philosophical and although there is a Christian thread running through it, it does not mention Jesus or God and is something that people of all faiths and none might resonate with.



> A word from Richard Rohr:
> 
> We Are Already One
> There was no place in the universe that was separate from the originating power of the universe. Each thing of the universe had its very roots in this realm....
> ...



I was particularly struck by this sentence: "Every human person desires to love and to be loved, to belong to another, because we come from another."


----------



## Underock1 (Nov 5, 2015)

I agree with that almost entirely, Warri. I thought the piece was very well written and an excellent summation of the big picture. I have known love and value it above all else, but I would not equate the flow of the universe and the unity of everything with the human emotion and concept of love.
This is really an excellent piece. It prompts me to recall others I have read over the years that have come to similar conclusions. The truth of things seems to have been staring us in the face since ancient times. Its acknowledgement only seems to occur to a few.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 5, 2015)

Yes Underock. Contained within many ancient writing and stories we can find some deep truths about humanity. I even find them in modern stories like Star Trek. That doesn't mean that I believe Star Trek to contain all the wisdom of the universe, but it does occasionally drop a philosophical pearl. I like to gather in pearls of wisdom wherever I find them.


----------



## Underock1 (Nov 5, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> Yes Underock. Contained within many ancient writing and stories we can find some deep truths about humanity. I even find them in modern stories like Star Trek. That doesn't mean that I believe Star Trek to contain all the wisdom of the universe, but it does occasionally drop a philosophical pearl. I like to gather in pearls of wisdom wherever I find them.



There might even be a few rolling around on the floor right here. I think one fell out of my mouth just a few minutes ago! :rofl:

Ain't nothing wrong with Star Trek. It was my youngest's favorite show. I took an old photo of him, pasted a hand painted Star Ship Captain's shirt on it and pasted both on to a Hubble deep space photo. Its looking at me right now. He would have been very pleased.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 5, 2015)

I liked it, it was well written, but I have to take exception to the "we belong to one another" part as well as "we desire to love and to be loved".

Whether because of faulty wiring, bad life experiences or the much-vaunted diversity he spoke of, there are many who shun human contact.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 5, 2015)

All generalisations fail at some point, but as a general rule...

Even Newton's laws of motion fail when approaching light speed. Still they are useful equations for everyday considerations.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 5, 2015)

Well Phil and Underock, it seems that philosophers are rather thin on the ground today. 
Thanks for contributing and not leaving me stranded. :thanks:


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Well, now if they had spoke of the love of _guns_ I bet you would have had many more respondents ...


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2015)

Yes, but they get browned off with me when I start one of those.
My higher minded threads are largely ignored.

O well, no more Mrs Nicegal. :grin:


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

No, no, don't get discouraged. This place NEEDS some class, if only to counter the "What Underwear Do You Wear?" and "Here's Another Pointless Game" threads.

Personally, this piece resonated with me because of several of its more Taoist tones, so it's all good.


----------



## Underock1 (Nov 6, 2015)

Yes. Warrigal. Don't stop posting. If you do, I'm left with Phil, and I only understand him about half the time. :shrug:
Actually, I think we're being kind of pompous here. I think we have an above average group on here. Some pretty thoughtful stuff comes along fairly regularly.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Underock1 said:


> If you do, I'm left with Phil, and I only understand him about half the time. :shrug:



I've been misunderstood for about half of my life, so that makes sense ...


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2015)

I'm not going anywhere.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Nov 6, 2015)

This "heavy" stuff needs to be balanced with the mundane, like a discussion of manties, or more recently, Bernie Briefs...


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2015)

Bugger off Ralphy. Go back to the sand pit :grin:


----------



## Ralphy1 (Nov 6, 2015)

You guys are just being pretentious. We know you are fascinated by undergarments but won't admit it...


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2015)

:lofl: In my world undergarments are essential items. I was christened Methodist.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> I liked it, it was well written, but I have to* take exception to the "we belong to one another" part as well as "we desire to love and to be loved".*
> 
> Whether because of faulty wiring, bad life experiences or the much-vaunted diversity he spoke of, *there are many who shun human contact.*



Any one who says they don't desire to love and be loved is lying.

Those who shun human contact are miserable human beings who have obviously been very hurt.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> :lofl: In my world undergarments are essential items. I was christened Methodist.



In my world, commando is the Way, the Power and the Glory.



Ameriscot said:


> Any one who says they don't desire to love and be loved is lying.



That's a rather all-encompassing statement, is it not?



> Those who shun human contact are miserable human beings who have obviously been very hurt.



Not necessarily ... again, you're making a blanket statement.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

Ralphy1 said:


> You guys are just being pretentious. We know you are fascinated by undergarments but won't admit it...



Right Ralphy.  Since you want to know all about our knickers, these are the ones I wear and are called boy shorts: Sexy huh?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ladies-Micr...47&sr=8-2&keywords=microfibre+underwear+women


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> In my world, commando is the Way, the Power and the Glory.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes they are blanket statements.  I don't believe any psychologically healthy human being does not desire love.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2015)

I have to agree with Ameriscot on this one.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Nov 6, 2015)

Dame, you can't help being a Methodist...


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2015)

There aren't any Methodists left in Australia, but that's another story altogether.
But I still wear underpants.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2015)

I can't play this game any longer. It's nearly witching hour over here.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> Yes they are blanket statements.  I don't believe any psychologically healthy human being does not desire love.



So an emotionally stoic person would be considered psychologically unhealthy? By what standard? Certainly not by the DSM ... 

First off, people have been confusing need, want and love since Adam and Eve. Much of what we view as "love" nowadays is often one of the other two.

Second, are you saying that the monks who choose to live their lives in isolation, or at the very least in the company of like-minded brothers and sisters, are mentally bent? 

Finally, if as the original article claims "We are all One", how does that explain the actions of so many animal species that definitely do NOT show "love"? If we are truly all connected, how can it be that one group shows love and the other does not? 

Love is nothing more than a steamy mix of chemicals - oxytocin, dopamine, pheromones, estrogen and testosterone. Everything else is the work of poets. We as a society have bought into all of the fantasies that have been woven about love, but that's all they are - fantasies and a few bucks worth of chemicals.


----------



## Underock1 (Nov 6, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> I've been misunderstood for about half of my life, so that makes sense ...



Well then you're doing better than me. I have contemplated starting a thread titled "Are You Misunderstood".


----------



## Underock1 (Nov 6, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> I'm not going anywhere.



Neither am I. :xbone:


----------



## Underock1 (Nov 6, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> :lofl: In my world undergarments are essential items. I was christened Methodist.



I was christened Methodist and take a lively interest in undergarments. ...but not Ralphy's. :stop:


----------



## Underock1 (Nov 6, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> Right Ralphy.  Since you want to know all about our knickers, these are the ones I wear and are called boy shorts: Sexy huh?
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ladies-Micr...47&sr=8-2&keywords=microfibre+underwear+women



Those are more substantial than what I wear to go out to the mail box.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> So an emotionally stoic person would be considered psychologically unhealthy? By what standard? Certainly not by the DSM ...
> 
> First off, people have been confusing need, want and love since Adam and Eve. Much of what we view as "love" nowadays is often one of the other two.
> 
> ...



You seem to be saying love is only about ******/romantic relationships.  What about your parents, siblings, friends, etc etc?  Is that not love?  We even love our pets but that doesn't mean we are in love with them or want sex with them - well, maybe some do....

Are you saying monks don't love their fellow monks?


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

Underock1 said:


> Those are more substantial than what I wear to go out to the mail box.



They are comfortable, wick away moisture, and I never get VPL (visible panty line), although that's probably not a concern of yours.


----------



## Rocky (Nov 6, 2015)

_I believe this.  Always have.  Always will.

_"We Are Already One
 "There was no place in the universe that was separate from the originating power of the universe."_

Scientists are open to the possibility of a "creator".  

Religious scholars are open to the possibility of the "big bang".  If you speak with any but the most fundamentalist of ministers/priests/rabbis/etc., you will find agreement on that point.  BUT they dare not preach same to their congregants because the congregants have been so brain-washed they would revolt.  

I agree with Phil.  This was quite true to Taoist philosophy. _


----------



## Underock1 (Nov 6, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> So an emotionally stoic person would be considered psychologically unhealthy? By what standard? Certainly not by the DSM ...
> 
> First off, people have been confusing need, want and love since Adam and Eve. Much of what we view as "love" nowadays is often one of the other two.
> 
> ...



I can see this is heading for a dispute over definitions. I agree with Ameriscot that just about all "normal" human beings want to be loved. There are quite a few psychotics and sociopaths whose brains are wired differently who do not.

I think the religious communities provide the "love" for each other. The solitary monks and hermits may be solitary because they were unable to find the love that they needed.

If "we' is meant to include _everything_ in the universe, then we _are _all one. I include plants, and all inanimate matter in my definition of "we". Because everything is connected doesn't mean everything is the same. Many animals do show love. Plants, so far as we know do not. Nor do rocks.

As an incurable romantic, I wish it were not so, but I have to agree completely with your final statement.
 An excellent summation in two sentences of the hard truth of the matter.


----------



## Rocky (Nov 6, 2015)

"Finally, if as the original article claims "We are all One", how does  that explain the actions of so many animal species that definitely do  NOT show "love"? If we are truly all connected, how can it be that one  group shows love and the other does not"_: Phil.

Animal species demonstrate love amongst their own species.  Humans do the same.  Animal inter-species showing of love happens.  

Perhaps we have all just not evolved enough to show love, caring, compassion to all sentient creatures.  And I include any species in that statement.

Which sounds very Buddhist, doesn't it?  But no, I am not a practicing Buddhist.

BTW, Phil, you knocked being stoic.  To be stoic does not only mean to shun love/affection.  _


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> You seem to be saying love is only about ******/romantic relationships.  What about your parents, siblings, friends, etc etc?  Is that not love?  We even love our pets but that doesn't mean we are in love with them or want sex with them - well, maybe some do....



No, not differentiating between ****** love, romantic love, familial love or whatever other flavor you have - they're _all_ based on the same chemical reactions.



> Are you saying monks don't love their fellow monks?



Depends on which monks we're talking about. Some will spread their New Agey messages of love among themselves, sure. But others are so inwardly-focused that they'll walk over a dying brother monk without even realizing it.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Underock1 said:


> I can see this is heading for a dispute over definitions. I agree with Ameriscot that just about all "normal" human beings want to be loved. There are quite a few psychotics and sociopaths whose brains are wired differently who do not.



Exactly. And as a high-functioning sociopath with no desire to love or be loved I resent the implication that I am somehow sub-human. 



> I think the religious communities provide the "love" for each other. The solitary monks and hermits may be solitary because they were unable to find the love that they needed.



Interesting possibility.

Or, it could be that their pursuit of perfection didn't allow time for love, or they discovered that love wasn't something that would further their training. 



> If "we' is meant to include _everything_ in the universe, then we _are _all one. I include plants, and all inanimate matter in my definition of "we". Because everything is connected doesn't mean everything is the same. Many animals do show love. Plants, so far as we know do not. Nor do rocks.



And yet by those final exclusions you are breaking the "code" that has been set - when they said _everything_ did they mean it or not? Why are they so mealy-mouthed? 



> As an incurable romantic, I wish it were not so, but I have to agree completely with your final statement.
> An excellent summation in two sentences of the hard truth of the matter.



Don't feel bad - I used to be an incurable romantic myself. Whereas some would believe that I have somehow become dehumanized, I like to think I've become more realistic and moved beyond that particular urge.


----------



## Shirley (Nov 6, 2015)

_I read this last night but I wanted to give it some thought before I replied.__ 

Believe it or not, it was actually a Roman Catholic priest who first proposed the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe. Georges Lemaître, a Belgian priest, astronomer, and physics professor, not only proposed the theory of the expansion of the universe, he was the first to note in 1927 that the expanding universe might be traced back to a single point of origin called a singularity. As Ilia Delio describes, "Science would say it appeared like a little quantum size blip on the screen [Creatio ex nihilo] and inflated rapidly like a balloon and since that time, it has been expanding." _
_Delio explains the implications for this cosmology--our story of the universe:

_But where did the blip come from and why? 



_Deep within we long for unity because, at the most fundamental level, we are already one.


_​Sorry but in looking at the history of mankind, I don't see any longing for unity. Perhaps unity with those who are  like us but unity with all mankind? Nope, I can't see it.


----------



## Rocky (Nov 6, 2015)

Shirley said:


> _I read this last night but I wanted to give it some thought before I replied.__
> 
> Believe it or not, it was actually a Roman Catholic priest who first proposed the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe. Georges Lemaître, a Belgian priest, astronomer, and physics professor, not only proposed the theory of the expansion of the universe, he was the first to note in 1927 that the expanding universe might be traced back to a single point of origin called a singularity. As Ilia Delio describes, "Science would say it appeared like a little quantum size blip on the screen [Creatio ex nihilo] and inflated rapidly like a balloon and since that time, it has been expanding." _
> _Delio explains the implications for this cosmology--our story of the universe:
> ...


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Shirley said:


> But where did the blip come from and why?



Blip was the sidekick of Space Ghost - I would imagine he came from Mr. and Mrs. Blip ...


Blip




Space Ghost


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> No, not differentiating between ****** love, romantic love, familial love or whatever other flavor you have - they're _all_ based on the same chemical reactions.
> 
> 
> 
> Depends on which monks we're talking about. Some will spread their New Agey messages of love among themselves, sure. But others are so inwardly-focused that they'll walk over a dying brother monk without even realizing it.



New agey monks?  Buddhism is 2500 years old, hardly new age.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> New agey monks?  Buddhism is 2500 years old, hardly new age.



Well, wasn't / isn't the New Age movement really just a rehash of those ancient beliefs? That's how I've always seen it, anyway ...


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Well, wasn't / isn't the New Age movement really just a rehash of those ancient beliefs? That's how I've always seen it, anyway ...



No.  I have followed both at different times and they are not the same.  New Age stuff is fluff, Buddhism is not.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Yet if you look in many bookstores they will list Buddhist books under "New Age" categories. 

I always thought New Age to be a Western creation composed of many different older beliefs as well as newer ones such as the Human Potential Movement.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Yet if you look in many bookstores they will list Buddhist books under "New Age" categories.
> 
> I always thought New Age to be a Western creation composed of many different older beliefs as well as newer ones such as the Human Potential Movement.



Bookstores often put books in the wrong category.

http://www.everystudent.com/features/connecting.html


----------



## Rocky (Nov 6, 2015)

Yet if you look in many bookstores they will list Buddhist books under "New Age" categories. [Phil]
I always thought New Age to be a Western creation composed of many  different older beliefs as well as newer ones such as the Human  Potential Movement. [Phil]


 			 		 	 Bookstores often put books in the wrong category. 				[Ameriscot]

_If Buddhism is to be found under New Age, it is definitely not a bookstore where the proprietors/workers know what they're doing, Phil.

Buddhism should be found under the category Religions.

Which brings me to another subject, sort of ...... the chain bookstores have put the smaller, more inclusive bookstores out of business.  Years ago I had a favorite bookstore where you immediately knew you would be able to find anything you could possibly be looking for.  And if you couldn't find it quickly, the proprietor/owner/family member would be able to go with you and pick it out of a particular shelf.  I so miss having a bookstore like that ...... one where you could get lost in the stacks and not care one whit that you were lost!  The smells, the mustiness of the shop ...... so long gone now._


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

Rocky said:


> Yet if you look in many bookstores they will list Buddhist books under "New Age" categories. [Phil]
> I always thought New Age to be a Western creation composed of many  different older beliefs as well as newer ones such as the Human  Potential Movement. [Phil]
> 
> 
> ...



Actually Buddhism would fit better in the philosophy section as religion implies a belief in a diety(ies).


----------



## Rocky (Nov 6, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> Actually Buddhism would fit better in the philosophy section as religion implies a belief in a diety(ies).



_But there is a belief in Nirvana ...... heaven in Christian/Muslim/Jewish thought -- more or less._


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

Rocky said:


> _But there is a belief in Nirvana ...... heaven in Christian/Muslim/Jewish thought -- more or less._



No, it's not the same as heaven.

Nirvana:  (in Buddhism) a transcendent state in which there is neither suffering, desire, nor sense of self, and the subject is released from the effects of karma and the cycle of death and rebirth. It represents the final goal of Buddhism.


----------



## Rocky (Nov 6, 2015)

_Ameriscot, I think what you're bringing up is, in truth, a matter of semantics.

P.S.  I did write "more or less".
_


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

Rocky said:


> _Ameriscot, I think what you're bringing up is, in truth, a matter of semantics.
> 
> P.S.  I did write "more or less".
> _



Heaven:
a place regarded in various religions as the abode of God (or the gods) and the angels, and of the good after death, often traditionally depicted as being above the sky.


----------



## Cookie (Nov 6, 2015)

Although this is a bit off subject, but still in the same ballpark:

Watched on Netflix last night:  Awake -- life story of Swami Yogananda (you might be familiar with his book Autobiography of a Yogi). 






Samadhi is the state they were going for, like Nirvana, a state of consciousness aspired to by the practice of meditation.

I found the documentary interesting but pretty predictable, as by now we are very used to seeing these kinds of spiritual organizations and they all seem to function in the same way.

Also watched a documentary about a fake yogi/guru filmaker which is even more intersting, on how a film maker starts his own yoga cult, using the traditional methods used in India.  Verry intersting.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

Cookie, I believe these videos are about Hindus, not Buddhists.  Not sure, but nirvana may have a different meaning as Hindus do believe in dieties.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

Yet Buddhism is often referred to, by laymen and scholars alike, as one of the world's most popular religions.

But I've always taken that confusion into account because Taoism is the same way - it is both a religion and a philosophy and can be practiced either / both ways. 

I suppose in one way it's the equivalent of saying "I believe in God but I'm not religious - just spiritual".


----------



## AprilT (Nov 6, 2015)

Buddhism is a philosophy people have come to give it the title religion there's no deity, no being of worship so to speak.  But, over all Buddhism is about elevating ones mind, enlightenment.  Those who show what some interpret as worship for Buddha, is really great respect and wanting to learn to find the similar enlightenment, and following the path set forth by these teachings hope to attain this through their own journey. 

I in my late teens early 20's I was very much into Herman Hesse books, a fave was Siddhartha. That one was about a young man who gave up his rather materially comfortable life to set out on a journey to seek spiritual enlightenment.  Reading Hesse books was a phase, but, a wonderful one, I do however, like and still have some reading materials around my place in line with some of the buddhist/taoist philosophies.   Someday, I'll actually read more than a couple of chapters before forgetting it all again.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 6, 2015)

AprilT said:


> Buddhism is a philosophy people have come to give it the title religion there's no deity, no being of worship so to speak.  But, over all Buddhism is about elevating ones mind, enlightenment.  Those who show what some interpret as worship for Buddha, is really great respect and wanting to learn to find the similar enlightenment, and following the path set forth by these teachings hope to attain this through their own journey.
> 
> I in my late teens early 20's I was very much into Herman Hesse books, a fave was Siddhartha. That one was about a young man who gave up his rather materially comfortable life to set out on a journey to seek spiritual enlightenment.  Reading Hesse books was a phase, but, a wonderful one, I do however, like and still have some reading materials around my place in line with some of the buddhist/taoist philosophies.   Someday, I'll actually read more than a couple of chapters before forgetting it all again.



I've got quite a few Thich Nhat Hanh books, one of which is the story of the Buddha's life.   http://www.parallax.org/old-path-white-clouds-walking-in-the-footsteps-of-the-buddha/


----------



## Cookie (Nov 6, 2015)

Yes, I agree, AS, Buddhism is different from Hinduism, and so is Christianity, which is what this thread was originally about.

Just talking about all of these different ideas of what they consider the highest states of consciousness --- different names and different philosophies, but all in all, in my mind, about a group gathering around a leader (Buddha, Christ, Krishna) or whatnot, and a small group of followers of a small cult, eventually expanding into a full blown religion.  Then breaking off into sub-groups.  

I'm not into this sort of thing now, but I have read quite a bit about how these things get started and it is very interesting.  I belonged to an eastern spiritual group for many years then left, and I can now see how a lot of these groups have the same strategies for recruitment and religious idealism.  

All respect and best to those who believe and practice, especially if it helps one attain peace and joy.   Om and Amen to that.


----------



## AprilT (Nov 6, 2015)

Cookie said:


> Yes, I agree, AS, Buddhism is different from Hinduism, and so is Christianity, which is what this thread was originally about.
> 
> Just talking about all of these different ideas of what they consider the highest states of consciousness --- different names and different philosophies, but all in all, in my mind, about a group gathering around a leader (Buddha, Christ, Krishna) or whatnot, and a small group of followers of a small cult, eventually expanding into a full blown religion.  Then breaking off into sub-groups.
> 
> ...



LOL!  No real belief or practice here, just once in a while, need to breath so I don't smack the you know what out of someone.


----------



## Cookie (Nov 6, 2015)

Same here, April, I still do some meditation or some light yoga stretches, without getting following any dogma or belonging to an organization.


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 6, 2015)

I still meditate twice a day. Have since I was twenty years old. Used to drive my doctor crazy playing around with my blood pressure  and heart rate during check ups. Snicker. I don't subscribe to any particular group either. My mantra is in the end 

only kindness matters. Works for me. Whatever happens after I am dead, so be it. For now, I have found a way to live with purpose, and sometimes joy. Most of the time that is enough.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 6, 2015)

AprilT said:


> LOL!  No real belief or practice here, just once in a while, need to breath *so I don't smack the you know what out of someone*.



LOL - the Buddha would be proud of you!


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

Buddhists do not 'recruit' anyone.  I am not a Buddhist and doubt I would ever feel I could call myself one.  Unless you become a monk or nun there is no ceremony that makes you Buddhist.  What I like about it is that you can just take what you need of their practices or beliefs.  You don't have to be an atheist to practice Buddhism.  The practice of mindfulness has been corrupted and twisted recently and companies are sending their employees to mindfulness training classes.  They miss the whole point of it.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 7, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> Buddhists do not 'recruit' anyone.  I am not a Buddhist and doubt I would ever feel I could call myself one.  Unless you become a monk or nun there is no ceremony that makes you Buddhist.  What I like about it is that you can just take what you need of their practices or beliefs.  You don't have to be an atheist to practice Buddhism.  The practice of mindfulness has been corrupted and twisted recently and companies are sending their employees to mindfulness training classes.  They miss the whole point of it.



I think this has happened to every religion, philosophy and belief system extant.

We - Westerners - have developed the habit of picking and choosing what we want from these full-blown systems, and it raises both good and bad points. Good in the sense that we divest ourselves of some of the more occult or folk-lorish beliefs and practices, but bad in the sense that in doing so we blindly discard some very important points.

A system - a religion or belief - really only works when it is a whole. At least in the beginning, you need to "buy-into" the entire package in order to gain the insights that the founders put into place. Without knowing them, you are only miming the movements and words. 

I am guilty of this myself in my proclamation of being Taoist. First, I usually need to qualify that I am a philosophical Taoist, not a religious one. I received training in a Western Taoist institution / temple that qualifies me as a lay Taoist minister, able to perform religious functions such as weddings, funerals and holy day celebrations, but it's been many years since I've done so. Still, when I teach my students about Taoist philosophy I can at least give them an insight into how those philosophies came about, and let them decide whether they want to pursue the religious aspects or not. 

Here in the West, as AS said, many of these essential points have been corrupted or, worse yet, entirely lost. It becomes a hollow pursuit wherein enlightenment, nirvana or whatever the goal is becomes unattainable.


----------



## AprilT (Nov 7, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> LOL - the Buddha would be proud of you!



Namaste.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> I think this has happened to every religion, philosophy and belief system extant.
> 
> We - Westerners - have developed the habit of picking and choosing what we want from these full-blown systems, and it raises both good and bad points. Good in the sense that we divest ourselves of some of the more occult or folk-lorish beliefs and practices, but bad in the sense that in doing so we blindly discard some very important points.
> 
> ...



I've read quite a lot about Buddhism, but will admit to not being able to practice a lot of it.  I like Thich Nhat Hanh's Buddhism.  http://plumvillage.org/

Thailand practices Theraveda Buddhism which is different.  Monks are very highly respected there - I loved how on the trains in the city the preferred seats were labeled Elderly, Disabled, Monks.  I would love to go to some of their talks, but all are in Thai and I've been unable to find any in English.  Our rental house there is very near one of the temples and we walk through it often.


----------



## AZ Jim (Nov 7, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> Bookstores often put books in the wrong category.
> 
> http://www.everystudent.com/features/connecting.html



As evidenced by the Bible which should be listed as fiction.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> As evidenced by the Bible which should be listed as fiction.



True.  Or at least in Mythology.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 7, 2015)

I have an online friend who lives in Thailand and has even tried to talk me into moving there. He's told me about the respect that the monks are held in and I think that's a great thing. 

He also told me I could live like a king for $500/month, which TOTALLY blanked out any considerations of religion.


----------



## Cookie (Nov 7, 2015)

There are many expat communities all over the place.  I know of one in particular in northern India where the group is part of an 'organization' that is listed with the Indian consultate (bribes) as being a spiritual educational institute. The American and Canadian expats get student visas for up to 5 years and live for cheap cheap cheap having servants and some even own their own houses there.  One thing that bothers me about this is that they are collecting their Old Age Pensions and Canada Pension Plan benefits although they don't live in Canada.  I hope the government cracks down on this practice, although it is not a gigantic amount of money, it still is unfair. Its hard to say if they are real students or just living there for almost nothing.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> I have an online friend who lives in Thailand and has even tried to talk me into moving there. He's told me about the respect that the monks are held in and I think that's a great thing.
> 
> He also told me I could live like a king for $500/month, which TOTALLY blanked out any considerations of religion.



Thailand can be inexpensive, but you would not be able to live on $500 a month.  Maybe in some rural areas, but not on an island.  Food in Thai restaurants is very cheap and very good.  But there are plenty of homes for sale that would easily cost you $300K or more.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

Cookie said:


> There are many expat communities all over the place.  I know of one in particular in northern India where the group is part of an 'organization' that is listed with the Indian consultate (bribes) as being a spiritual educational institute. The American and Canadian expats get student visas for up to 5 years and live for cheap cheap cheap having servants and some even own their own houses there.  One thing that bothers me about this is that they are collecting their Old Age Pensions and Canada Pension Plan benefits although they don't live in Canada.  I hope the government cracks down on this practice, although it is not a gigantic amount of money, it still is unfair. Its hard to say if they are real students or just living there for almost nothing.



I get my SS living abroad but I paid into that while working in the US.  However, British who live abroad get their OAP pensions.  I believe the government stopped giving them their COL raises.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 7, 2015)

Wow.

I think he lives on the outskirts of the major cities. Photos he's sent me look like he's in the middle of the jungle. His words to me were that I could rent a small 2-bedroom house, complete with maid, gardener and unlimited food, for around $500USD.

It's probably at _least_ a 2-elephant ride to town, though. Looking at Craigslist I see you're right - apartments (the modern ones) in town are a small fortune.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Wow.
> 
> I think he lives on the outskirts of the major cities. Photos he's sent me look like he's in the middle of the jungle. His words to me were that I could rent a small 2-bedroom house, complete with maid, gardener and unlimited food, for around $500USD.
> 
> It's probably at _least_ a 2-elephant ride to town, though. Looking at Craigslist I see you're right - apartments (the modern ones) in town are a small fortune.



I can believe that.  I wouldn't fancy living in a jungle!  

If we wanted to we could buy or rent a home on Koh Samui and easily get a retirement visa.  But we don't want to live there all year.  The healthcare is good.


----------



## Cookie (Nov 7, 2015)

Here Old Age Pension (usually get at 65) is something every Canadian Citizen gets, even if not paid into it and unemployed their whole lives, but there are stipulations about time spent not living in the country

Canada Pension Plan is paid into through salary deductions while employed and how much one receives monthly depends on how much and for how long one pays into it.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 7, 2015)

Ah, but think of how spiritual it would be living in that jungle - communing with nature every day, fighting off the crazy monkeys ...


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 7, 2015)

Philly, Hmmm. From a feminine perspective, we deal with that on a regular basis. All those guys still stuck in the trees. Baboom. The primate council is out tonight! Lolololol.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 7, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Philly, Hmmm. From a feminine perspective, we deal with that on a regular basis. All those guys still stuck in the trees. Baboom. The primate council is out tonight! Lolololol.



Hey, now!

I resent the implication that I'm up in a tree on a Saturday night flinging dung at OOOhOOOHOOOOOHHHHH!!!! 

*Jumps down to ground on all fours and trots away*


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 7, 2015)

Hahahahahhahahahaha.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

Cookie said:


> Here Old Age Pension (usually get at 65) is something every Canadian Citizen gets, even if not paid into it and unemployed their whole lives, but there are stipulations about time spent not living in the country
> 
> Canada Pension Plan is paid into through salary deductions while employed and how much one receives monthly depends on how much and for how long one pays into it.



SS in the US is linked to your salary and how much you paid into it via tax.  So you could get $400 a month or $3,000 a month depending on income.  UK is a set rate.  I only worked here for 6 years so my pension on my own would be small.  However, I get a larger amount because hubby worked the full amount.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Ah, but think of how spiritual it would be living in that jungle - communing with nature every day, fighting off the crazy monkeys ...



No thanks.  I commune with nature with a sea nearby.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 7, 2015)

Phil, here's a beachfront villa for you.  Had trouble counting all the zeros so it's either $1.7 million or 17 million.  It's either 650 or 65 million baht. 

http://www.samuisunsetinvestments.com/property/baan-pulay-house-lipa-noi-beach


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 7, 2015)

I make it as around $18 million.

Let me check my pockets ... 

Beautiful, yes. Didn't realize they had places on that level. I guess they're over-developed just like everyplace else ...


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 8, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> I make it as around $18 million.
> 
> Let me check my pockets ...
> 
> Beautiful, yes. Didn't realize they had places on that level. I guess they're over-developed just like everyplace else ...



There had to be a typo on that house.  No way it would sell for $17 million.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 8, 2015)

Phil, there are lots of 5 star resorts in Thailand, and also lots of cheap hostels, and everything in between.  

We stayed at this one the first time we went which was for a wedding.  We spent the first 4 nights at the resort where the beach wedding was held, the bride and groom picking up the tab for 2 of the nights because we were close family (aunt and uncle).  We spent the two weeks after the wedding at a cheaper resort.  

http://www.rockyresort.com/en


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 8, 2015)

Hmmm ... the cheapest is still $300/night. Too rich for my blood. I'm not a hostel-kinda guy - I was looking for private apartments.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 8, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Hmmm ... the cheapest is still $300/night. Too rich for my blood. I'm not a hostel-kinda guy - I was looking for private apartments.



It wasn't that much when we stayed.  The breakfasts with a view over the beach were amazing!!!  Anyway, this is NOT where we stay on our winters there.  We stay just down the road from it, across the road from the beach so it's just a short walk.  We rent a bungalow at a monthly rate and the price is no where near that which is why we can stay for 3 months.  

Anyway, where we stay is about 1/3 the price of renting a condo in Florida in the winter.  The car rental is also about 1/3 the price and the meals are a tiny fraction of the cost of eating out.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 8, 2015)

Ah, now THAT makes sense - thanks! I was starting to wonder if Thailand was the New York City of the East!


----------



## IKE (Nov 8, 2015)

I spent ten days on R & R in Bangkok back in 1972 and afterwards headed back to Vietnam......I spent a total of five years and nine months in VN between the military and as a civilian. 

I went by myself and was fortunate enough to meet a really lovely Thai gal on my second day there and she showed me around inner Bangkok and a couple towns on the outskirts for my remaining eight days there.

I recall we stayed in a place called the Nana Hotel in Bangkok......it was or probably still is a zero star hotel but back then it served the purpose.

I liked what little I saw of Thailand and as a whole the Thais were very friendly........I'd like to go back but that would involve flying and I don't do 'big silver birds' anymore.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 8, 2015)

IKE said:


> I spent ten days on R & R in Bangkok back in 1972 and afterwards headed back to Vietnam......I spent a total of five years and nine months in VN between the military and as a civilian.
> 
> I went by myself and was fortunate enough to meet a really nice Thai gal on my second day there and she showed me around inner Bangkok and a couple towns on the outskirts for my remaining eight days there.
> 
> ...



On our last trip we spent 3 days in Bangkok at the airport hotel before heading to our island.  I wanted to see the palace and the emerald Buddha temple as well as some others.  Unfortunately, it was about 100F, and there were tens of thousands of tourists - mostly Chinese or Thai visiting the palace and temple at the same time.  It was such torture we headed back to our hotel and stayed there until it was time to catch our flight to the island. I really wanted to see the rest of the temples, take a boat taxi in the canal, the shopping, etc and was really disappointed.  Not trying to see Bangkok this time.


----------



## Butterfly (Nov 8, 2015)

Cookie said:


> There are many expat communities all over the place.  I know of one in particular in northern India where the group is part of an 'organization' that is listed with the Indian consultate (bribes) as being a spiritual educational institute. The American and Canadian expats get student visas for up to 5 years and live for cheap cheap cheap having servants and some even own their own houses there.  One thing that bothers me about this is that they are collecting their Old Age Pensions and Canada Pension Plan benefits although they don't live in Canada.  I hope the government cracks down on this practice, although it is not a gigantic amount of money, it still is unfair. Its hard to say if they are real students or just living there for almost nothing.



If they've paid into their pensions in Canada, why does it matter where they live when they get it?


----------



## Uncontrolable (Aug 6, 2017)

Warrigal said:


> I just read this elsewhere and I'm pasting it verbatim. It is vey philosophical and although there is a Christian thread running through it, it does not mention Jesus or God and is something that people of all faiths and none might resonate with.
> 
> 
> 
> I was particularly struck by this sentence: "Every human person desires to love and to be loved, to belong to another, because we come from another."



It was a beautiful sentiment, aligning matters of universal creation with the universal creator.  There does seem to be a gap however.  Where does evolution begin?  I submit that evolution was born with the big bang.  The potential for every created thing was born in that instant.  Would God do anything less?  We will find that living things had been evolving several billion years before our planet had even formed from space rocks.  The theory of panspermia is accepted by many theorists.  So what is the next question?  What is evolution up to?  Theorists note that evolution appears to be random except for one thing.  Evolution intends survival and chooses the random path to move inexorably on.  What can the ultimate goal of survival be?  How about immortality.  What do our spirits desire?  Communion with God in heaven where immortality is the order of the day.   What is the current problem we may not survive as a race.


----------



## Warrigal (Aug 6, 2017)

I think you would be interested to read a book by Charles Birch titled "On Purpose". Birch is a scientist in the field of biology and he discusses randomness and the possibility that there is a "hand" guiding the outcomes of some seemingly random possibilities. It is a long time since I read this book but this link gives some indication of the areas covered.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/18093294?selectedversion=NBD7149760

If you can get hold of a copy I would recommend it as an interesting read.


----------

