Buddhism teach you not what to believe, but how to experience things so you can know them, not just believe in them.
From my perspective, you can say that Buddhism teach that God is within us all, althought they never say it like that; it is my interpretation. They teach you not to seek for God in something external from you, but inside you. By knowing the part of you that is connected to God, you become a Buddha, your suffering cease to exist; because you no longer identify yourself with your physical body, but with the part of yourself that is unmoving, eternal (energy)...

well I understand this and agree to it 100% wholeheartedly...but how do I implement this in real life?

Interesting question...

Buddhism teach you not what to believe, but how to experience things so you can know them, not just believe in them.
From my perspective, you can say that Buddhism teach that God is within us all, althought they never say it like that; it is my interpretation. They teach you not to seek for God in something external from you, but inside you. By knowing the part of you that is connected to God, you become a Buddha, your suffering cease to exist; because you no longer identify yourself with your physical body, but with the part of yourself that is unmoving, eternal (energy)...



Interesting question...

well....what is the answer?were can I find the answer?

well....what is the answer?were can I find the answer?

I’m thinking of a way to address this, but I honestly don’t feel as a "master" in the subject, because I think maybe only yourself, or a Buddha can honestly help you there. To become a Buddha/Christ is the purpose of everybody, we are all involved in this, want it or not. If you fail to do so in this life, you will learn from this, and reincarnate until you manage to obtain this. Although I can give you my understanding, so we can take it from there...

See it like this, God is everything, and it is everyone. If you put everything into One, you get the definition of God. I understand it like this: there is division, and there are infinite manifestations so God can understand himself better. Can you believe that? God is doing right now the exact same thing that ALL the teachers & masters have told you to do for thousands of years: “Know thyself”.
Taking in consideration that there really is no time, there is past, but it is gone, there is future, but is uncertain, and there is present, which is eternity. Everything will eventually go to its source, because there is no time, so everyone is a Buddha/Christ, because that is the goal we are all going to obtain ultimately. Even if someone crystallizes the Buddha in this life, or they are going to do so in 3 more lifetimes, if you think as there is no time, then everyone is a Buddha right now, because everybody will obtain this after many lessons (lives).

You can get better advice from actual Buddhas/Christs on this one, Yeshua and Gautam were amazing teachers of this subject:

Yeshua says: The person old in days will not hesitate to ask a little child of seven days concerning the place of life— and he shall live. For many who are first shall become last, {and the last first}. And they shall become a single unity. (Gospel of Thomas, Vs 4)

And whoever among you will be the first, he shall be your servant. (Matthew 20:27)

And one of the most significant parts of the NT about this is the part right alter Jesus washed all of his disciples feet:

“When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them. "You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am. Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.” (John 13:12-17)

The meaning of this is quite simple, it is a similarity to one of the teachings of the Buddha:

Gautam Buddha once told this story:

When Buddha became enlightened, he was able to see his past lives. And it dazzled him. He said that in a past life, he was a common man and he didn’t have such a high estimate of himself, he thought himself to be a “sinner”, lets call him "B". So "B" once went to see a guru that everyone seemed to worship as God, an enlightened man. When "B" went to see the guru, and spoke to him, the guru got on his knees and kissed his feet. "B" was shocked, he did not understand why a guru would kiss his feet; so the guru replied: “You don’t understand this right now, but you will understand it one day…”. The day the Buddha because enlightened (a couple of lives later), he finally understood what the guru had said to him in that past life; time is an illusion…

See the extraordinary similarity in the following:

"Jesus poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded. Then He came to Simon Peter. And Peter said to Him, “Lord, are You washing my feet?”
Jesus answered and said to him, “What I am doing you do not understand now, but you will know after this.” (John 13:5-7)

Buddhism teach you not what to believe, but how to experience things so you can know them, not just believe in them.
From my perspective, you can say that Buddhism teach that God is within us all, althought they never say it like that; it is my interpretation. They teach you not to seek for God in something external from you, but inside you. By knowing the part of you that is connected to God, you become a Buddha, your suffering cease to exist; because you no longer identify yourself with your physical body, but with the part of yourself that is unmoving, eternal (energy)...



Interesting question...

In one way Buddhism does (indirectly) teach that God (or the cause of all causes) is within us:

"From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness.
From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.
From name-and-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media.
From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact.
From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.
From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving.
From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance.
From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming.
From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth.
From birth as a requisite condition, then old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play.
Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress and suffering" (Udana 1.1)

There is something within you that causes all of existence...

Similarly Yeswah says:
"If they ask you, 'What is the evidence of your Father in you?' say to them, 'It is motion and rest.'" (Gospel of Thomas, 50)

What Jesus is talking about of course is superposition (motion) and the collapsed state (rest) which only in modern QM is known in the double-slit experiment.....

well....what is the answer?were can I find the answer?

The answer is in the destruction of the defiling impulses, which cause you fear, anger, sorrow, doubt, boredom, and ALL other forms of suffering...

"One who has conquered all defilements, cannot be defeated. Such a one is The Buddha, who has attained unlimited power" (Dhammapada, 179)

Therefore to become a Buddha just destroy all insecurities, defiling impulses, etc....after that there is just unlimited enjoyment, power, freedom, happiness, etc...finally at last freed from all of this...

Yeap, in other words: get rid of attachments of any kind, because they lead to clinging and that leads to unacceptance of the innevitable change.

Yeap, in other words: get rid of attachments of any kind, because they lead to clinging and that leads to unacceptance of the innevitable change.

Yes, but getting rid of the attachment is only the first step, if you experience any unpleasant feeling of any kind even to the slightest extent it's an indication that there's something wrong with in you still...if you destroy all defiling impulses, then there can no longer be any unpleasant feelings, and thus you can never be defeated, never experience any anger, fear, sorrow, or suffering of any kind...then you will be a Buddha, a perfectly self-awakened one...

Yes, but getting rid of the attachment is only the first step, if you experience any unpleasant feeling of any kind even to the slightest extent it's an indication that there's something wrong with in you still...if you destroy all defiling impulses, then there can no longer be any unpleasant feelings, and thus you can never be defeated, never experience any anger, fear, sorrow, or suffering of any kind...then you will be a Buddha, a perfectly self-awakened one...

I would choose that the control of your emotions is the first step, not last; but then again, what the hell do I know he!

I would choose that the control of your emotions is the first step, not last; but then again, what the hell do I know he!

Well yeah...controlling your emotions and giving up attachment are like the samething...I would call it the first step...

Buddhism teach you not what to believe, but how to experience things so you can know them, not just believe in them.
...

Buddhists, especially Western ones, often say Buddhism does not teach beliefs, but this is not the case. You are taught all sorts of metaphysical beliefs, ethical beliefs and methodolgical ones. Internal states are named and predicted. Certain kinds of behavior are virtues, others are not. There are beliefs about the expression of emotions, who we really are, the nature of reality and so on.

The conscious focus is on technique, but implicit and open beliefs are continuously being aimed at initiates.

Western religions often focus on belief as an end in itself: faith you could argue is one form of this. So coming from Western religions it can seem like Buddism does not have an equivalent set of beliefs, but it does.

The answer is in the destruction of the defiling impulses, which cause you fear, anger, sorrow, doubt, boredom, and ALL other forms of suffering...


Beliefs and value judgements. This is exactly what I mean.

Yeap, in other words: get rid of attachments of any kind, because they lead to clinging and that leads to unacceptance of the innevitable change.

Belief stated with implicit value judgements of 'attachments'.

[QUOTE]Yes, but getting rid of the attachment is only the first step, if you experience any unpleasant feeling of any kind even to the slightest extent it's an indication that there's something wrong with in you still...

Beliefs and value judgements. And not minor ones either. We are talking about value judgements and beliefs that encompass everyone.


if you destroy all defiling impulses, then there can no longer be any unpleasant feelings, and thus you can never be defeated, never experience any anger, fear, sorrow, or suffering of any kind...then you will be a Buddha, a perfectly self-awakened one...

Gotta love that word 'defiling'. I have to tell you that while I experience those emotions and many impulses I am not defiled by them. I think it is sad that you judge portions of yourself and others so harshly.

I would choose that the control of your emotions is the first step, not last; but then again, what the hell do I know he!

So you have a belief - emotions should be controlled - and you are not sure of it.

A belief with an implicit value judgement.

On other threads you encourage people to accept what is outside them - other people, things that happen - but emotions, things that are inside you, these you feel must be controlled.

Dualism.

And a belief system that you are advocating.

Buddhists, especially Western ones, often say Buddhism does not teach beliefs, but this is not the case. You are taught all sorts of metaphysical beliefs, ethical beliefs and methodolgical ones. Internal states are named and predicted. Certain kinds of behavior are virtues, others are not. There are beliefs about the expression of emotions, who we really are, the nature of reality and so on.

The conscious focus is on technique, but implicit and open beliefs are continuously being aimed at initiates.

Western religions often focus on belief as an end in itself: faith you could argue is one form of this. So coming from Western religions it can seem like Buddism does not have an equivalent set of beliefs, but it does.

Actually, you are told all these things, but you are also told that language is inneficient, and that you shouldn´t "believe" anything you are told; it is all illusions. You can only trust what you have experienced yourself, then comes the Buddhist practice to experience it yourself...

So you have a belief - emotions should be controlled - and you are not sure of it.

A belief with an implicit value judgement.

On other threads you encourage people to accept what is outside them - other people, things that happen - but emotions, things that are inside you, these you feel must be controlled.

Dualism.

And a belief system that you are advocating.

It is not just a belief, I actually trust that; I´m not sure if its the first or last step, I don´t know the significance of "steps" to follow here. I just know that there are levels of consciousness, and that the control of our emotions is a significant factor in this equation.
All of us experience anger in one way or another, on any given time of a regular day; but what does anger do to us? Anger only damages your liver, causes stress disorders, and it clouds your mind to act responsably.
So why do we experience anger, even if the only damage is done to the person who experience anger? The only thing is, the anger is born within us, it doesn´t come from something or someone external to us; we, ourselves generate this anger inside of us.
For me, this is just a level of consciousness that needs to be overcomed in order for us to live a healthier and happier life; instead of living in this ignorant state of mind.

Buddhists, especially Western ones, often say Buddhism does not teach beliefs, but this is not the case. You are taught all sorts of metaphysical beliefs, ethical beliefs and methodolgical ones. Internal states are named and predicted. Certain kinds of behavior are virtues, others are not. There are beliefs about the expression of emotions, who we really are, the nature of reality and so on.

The conscious focus is on technique, but implicit and open beliefs are continuously being aimed at initiates.

Western religions often focus on belief as an end in itself: faith you could argue is one form of this. So coming from Western religions it can seem like Buddism does not have an equivalent set of beliefs, but it does.

I agree completely, Buddhism DOES teach beliefs...

I agree completely, Buddhism DOES teach beliefs...

Well yeah, I agree, but you can be a Buddhist, and chose not to believe those.

Buddhism teach you not what to believe...
Buddhism doesnt ask for faith, but it does present a hypothesis...and a set of constraints.

Your physical life is constrained in order to liberate the spirit.

Yes, but getting rid of the attachment is only the first step, if you experience any unpleasant feeling of any kind even to the slightest extent it's an indication that there's something wrong with in you still...if you destroy all defiling impulses, then there can no longer be any unpleasant feelings, and thus you can never be defeated, never experience any anger, fear, sorrow, or suffering of any kind...then you will be a Buddha, a perfectly self-awakened one...
I think it can just as easily work in reverse though, the person who remains unmoved by anything negative around him could quite easily be utterally out of touch with himself/herself and those around him/her.
Enlightenment is a slippery fish and a very personal aspiration to have imo, my own take on it is that over-concern with self-suffering probably isnt go to lead you anywhere beneficial or even anywhere particularly interesting.

I think it can just as easily work in reverse though, the person who remains unmoved by anything negative around him could quite easily be utterally out of touch with himself/herself and those around him/her.
You still don't understand what I'm saying, if you are "utterally out of touch with himself/herself and those around him/her" then that constitutes as some degree of suffering, unpleasantness, so it cannot be what I'm talking about, which is no suffering to even the slighest most remote extent...

It is not just a belief, I actually trust that

The fact that you trust it does not make it any less a belief. Anger can cause problems for some people, especially people who use their anger to keep them from facing other emotions. Or to put this another way, when they deal with stress by getting angry rather than feeling (and doing other things). But none of that shows that anger is bad. Eating can be bad and abused and done unhealthily. But eating is not bad.

Actually, you are told all these things, but you are also told that language is inneficient, and that you shouldn´t "believe" anything you are told; it is all illusions. You can only trust what you have experienced yourself, then comes the Buddhist practice to experience it yourself...


Try expressing strong emotions in any Buddhist setting whatsoever in any culture on earth and you will found out exactly how Buddhists, masters and novices, BELIEVE about emotions.

I agree completely, Buddhism DOES teach beliefs...

Thank you.

Well yeah, I agree, but you can be a Buddhist, and chose not to believe those.

Sure and someone can call themselves a Christian and not believe in Christ. But then why say you are a Buddhist?

There is nothing wrong with emotions.

Sure and someone can call themselves a Christian and not believe in Christ. But then why say you are a Buddhist?

I never said I was a Buddhist, but one can be a Buddhist just by practicing the precepts; or by the mere purpose of trusting in the Buddha.
I agree with you guys on the part that says that Buddhism teaches beliefs, but they teach that because those are the truths according to Buddha and the wise men of ages. If you choose not to believe what you are told, it is ok, because you haven´t experience it yourself, so don´t believe if you don´t want to. The fact is, you will only experience it yourself if you believe that it is possible. Just by believing that something outside your understanding is possible, you will open the doors of possibilities.
They tell you those things in order for you to think outside the box, but they don´t tell you to believe them, there is a big difference.
You are told what Buddha said, but they don´t tell you to actually believe them, they just point in the right direction, they don´t tell you to go, they just point it.

There is nothing wrong with emotions.

I never said there is something wrong with emotions. Emotions are just something to be understood; most of us just sit there and let ourselves be carried away (controlled) by emotions; the path of Buddhahood is just the understanding/awareness of your own emotions.

In my understanding, Buddhism does not require the existence of God. Becoming a Buddha in my understanding, means attaining the state of Buddhahood or Buddha-mind, or enlightenment, or nirvana. In each case the transcendent is reached by direct, immediate experience, though speculation about what it is is pointless as the experience cannot be directly described in words or concepts.

I have read some accounts of Eastern or Buddhist philosophy say Nirvana means uniting to God or the Absolute without distinction, though within Buddhism itself the achievement of enlightenment seems to be a state beyond concepts and words, and can only be understood by direct experience and awareness.

I have been thinking on our main obstacle in order to become Buddhas; it is very difficult to let go of that which you think you are, and identify you.

No need to worry, its all figured out:

Kundalini illumination video (Youtube) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Zk8uEOUdDs)

You still don't understand what I'm saying, if you are "utterally out of touch with himself/herself and those around him/her" then that constitutes as some degree of suffering, unpleasantness, so it cannot be what I'm talking about, which is no suffering to even the slighest most remote extent...
I really dont think youre going to ever achieve this form of non-suffering within the human form, but good luck. Worth a try i suppose.

I really dont think youre going to ever achieve this form of non-suffering within the human form, but good luck. Worth a try i suppose.

I think it's possible...all these feelings of suffering are caused insecurities or defiling impulses...that feeling of being out of touch with yourself is also caused by a defiling impulse...what you're talking about being out of touch with yourself is like deep relaxation, deep sleep, where you ignore all your emotions...but suppression is not the way, suppression is suffering...

To become enlightened about yourself not about others is a teaching of the Budddha.

I never said there is something wrong with emotions. Emotions are just something to be understood; most of us just sit there and let ourselves be carried away (controlled) by emotions; the path of Buddhahood is just the understanding/awareness of your own emotions.

No, it is more than that. People are trained to sever the connection between emotions and their expression.

No, it is more than that. People are trained to sever the connection between emotions and their expression.

Some things just vanish in the light of awareness, of understanding; like the shadow of suppresive and negative emotions...

Some things just vanish in the light of awareness, of understanding; like the shadow of suppresive and negative emotions...

Just for a second consider the possibility that you do in fact think there is something wrong with emotions, at least some of them. Look at the quote above. This is a regular recurring experience I have with Buddhists and other inspired by eastern religions. They judge openly and indirectly emotions or certain emotions. If this is pointed out they deny that they think there is anything wrong with emotions and after the discussion or the day moves on the judgements about emotions or certain emotions being bad start coming out again. Why not take an open and consistant stand?

As a general rule there is nothing wrong with anger. It is often a natural, context appropriate response. Just like the so-called positive emotions. And so it is with the other emotions called negative. Note that even this judgement - negative - is dualistic and should come under the baliwick of likes and dislikes, but it is holy turf in Buddhism and is allowed an exception.

Hypocrisy.

Just for a second consider the possibility that you do in fact think there is something wrong with emotions, at least some of them. Look at the quote above. This is a regular recurring experience I have with Buddhists and other inspired by eastern religions. They judge openly and indirectly emotions or certain emotions. If this is pointed out they deny that they think there is anything wrong with emotions and after the discussion or the day moves on the judgements about emotions or certain emotions being bad start coming out again. Why not take an open and consistant stand?

As a general rule there is nothing wrong with anger. It is often a natural, context appropriate response. Just like the so-called positive emotions. And so it is with the other emotions called negative. Note that even this judgement - negative - is dualistic and should come under the baliwick of likes and dislikes, but it is holy turf in Buddhism and is allowed an exception.

Hypocrisy.

I disagree, there is much WRONG WRONG WRONG with emotions, but in another way there is nothing wrong with emotions. In one way emotions are natural, so there's nothing wrong with experiencing them, but in another way emotions cause suffering so there is much wrong with them. The same people who say there's nothing wrong with emotions are the same people who go on whining "why do bad things happen?" "why does God allow evil?" "why does everything bad happen to me?" and all that BS...

What isn't wrong is destroying insecurities and defiling impulses that cause fear, anger, sorrow, pain, misery, boredom, uncomfortableness, nervousness, etc...this isn't wrong because it causes actual enjoyment, pleasure, happiness, where in you enjoy every infinitesmal moment...

I disagree, there is much WRONG WRONG WRONG with emotions, but in another way there is nothing wrong with emotions. In one way emotions are natural, so there's nothing wrong with experiencing them, but in another way emotions cause suffering so there is much wrong with them. The same people who say there's nothing wrong with emotions are the same people who go on whining "why do bad things happen?" "why does God allow evil?" "why does everything bad happen to me?" and all that BS...

What isn't wrong is destroying insecurities and defiling impulses that cause fear, anger, sorrow, pain, misery, boredom, uncomfortableness, nervousness, etc...this isn't wrong because it causes actual enjoyment, pleasure, happiness, where in you enjoy every infinitesmal moment...

1) I am one exception to your theory. I do not whine about why bad things happen and I have finally an understanding of the problem of evil. I also know a good number of people who do not fit the generalization you made. This judgement - which seems to have quite a bit of anger behind it, I did notice - is wrong. Perhaps you have been making assumptions about what happens when you really embrace your emotions. You assume it turns out badly and have found examples in your life that seem to confirm your judgement.

2) So you are admitting there is a dualism in Buddhism. Things outside you, INCLUDING THE EMOTIONS OF OTHERS, are to be accepted and not treated as things to be changed, just go with the flow, man. But phenomena inside us, for example emotions, should be controlled and expelled. As well as 'defiling impulses'. God you are judgemental. 'Defiling', indeed. I can almost see you pursing your lips in disgust.

3) You're just like Bush. What is outside him that bothers him, gets in his way, he destroys. What is inside you that bothers you, that gets in your way, you destroy. He is a mirror that you are not noticing is reflecting you. And you are generalizing wildly about emotions. If someone is raping my sister and I get angry and toss the guy into a wall, my anger was just fine. The child who is sexually abused who later feels anger or scared in relation to the abuser is not exhibiting defiling urges or emotions. You generalize and keep things on an abstract level, which becomes a tool to judge and eventually eliminate emotions. A loving approach is to find the real roots of the emotions rather than just cutting them out and judging them as defiling. And before you go into a lecture about how Buddhism does go to the roots, I am well versed in Buddhist ideas and practices. They assume out of fear that you cannot express emotions at the deep levels necessary to bring them relief. They observe them after cutting them off from expression. They assume that emotions need to be controlled and suppressed. And then they find their emotions disturbing. What a surprise that their heavily judged and hated emotions have a tough time in them.

But they can and you can of course do whatever you want to yourselves. Cut yourselves up. Fine. But when you seek to teach others that their emotions are bad (and then quickly add some sleight of hand about them being fine, also) you are doing people a disservice. You have no idea if there is a way to total self-acceptance and joy through the expression of emotions and through their freedom, yet you go on repeating old ideas about what has to be, making Buddhas into the Bible and being fundamentalists where the hate gets aimed inward and where it teaches others to aim their hate at themselves. You assume they have to be controlled and yet, if you look honestly at yourself, you will have to admit that you do not know this. That you are simply following a tradition and authority. more assumptions about what is possible.

Be a bonzai tree if you want to be. but what possible justification is there for proselytizing? where isn't the Buddha?

1) I am one exception to your theory. I do not whine about why bad things happen and I have finally an understanding of the problem of evil. I also know a good number of people who do not fit the generalization you made. This judgement - which seems to have quite a bit of anger behind it, I did notice - is wrong. Perhaps you have been making assumptions about what happens when you really embrace your emotions. You assume it turns out badly and have found examples in your life that seem to confirm your judgement.
So what is your stance? Let bad things happen and stand back and watch? Tell people to embrace fear, anger, and sorrow? That is what is wrong, that's what is irrational....tell people to lash out in anger and go out be violent and kill others...that's your stance?


2) So you are admitting there is a dualism in Buddhism. Things outside you, INCLUDING THE EMOTIONS OF OTHERS, are to be accepted and not treated as things to be changed, just go with the flow, man. But phenomena inside us, for example emotions, should be controlled and expelled. As well as 'defiling impulses'. God you are judgemental. 'Defiling', indeed. I can almost see you pursing your lips in disgust.
Emotions, positive, negative, and neutral are disgusting to me. They are all under this material nature. They cause people to suffer endlessly, which is why they are considered digusting to me. They are like coverings, veils, hidings, shadows, hiding your own true self from coming out.


3) You're just like Bush. What is outside him that bothers him, gets in his way, he destroys. What is inside you that bothers you, that gets in your way, you destroy. He is a mirror that you are not noticing is reflecting you. And you are generalizing wildly about emotions. If someone is raping my sister and I get angry and toss the guy into a wall, my anger was just fine. The child who is sexually abused who later feels anger or scared in relation to the abuser is not exhibiting defiling urges or emotions. You generalize and keep things on an abstract level, which becomes a tool to judge and eventually eliminate emotions. A loving approach is to find the real roots of the emotions rather than just cutting them out and judging them as defiling. And before you go into a lecture about how Buddhism does go to the roots, I am well versed in Buddhist ideas and practices. They assume out of fear that you cannot express emotions at the deep levels necessary to bring them relief. They observe them after cutting them off from expression. They assume that emotions need to be controlled and suppressed. And then they find their emotions disturbing. What a surprise that their heavily judged and hated emotions have a tough time in them.
Just like Bush? More like the opposite, I'm for internal, not external. About lashing out anger against someone raping your sister, did you not know you could've stopped the rapist effortlessly without anger?


But they can and you can of course do whatever you want to yourselves. Cut yourselves up. Fine. But when you seek to teach others that their emotions are bad (and then quickly add some sleight of hand about them being fine, also) you are doing people a disservice.
No one's cutting themselves up. How is teaching people that the feelings of sorrow, anger, fear, etc... is suffering bad? Rather, telling people to embrace these things is dangerous. Telling people on other hand to get rid of these deep-rooted insecurities within them is great advice in any way you look at it.


You have no idea if there is a way to total self-acceptance and joy through the expression of emotions and through their freedom, yet you go on repeating old ideas about what has to be, making Buddhas into the Bible and being fundamentalists where the hate gets aimed inward and where it teaches others to aim their hate at themselves. You assume they have to be controlled and yet, if you look honestly at yourself, you will have to admit that you do not know this. That you are simply following a tradition and authority. more assumptions about what is possible.
No this is false...I am speaking from purely personal experiences...the freedom, high-energy, sense of fulfillment, etc...from the destruction of insecurities is faar greater than anything experienced. The deep-relaxation state is lame, the state of happiness in the crown chakra still feels like something is missing, like you're only pretending to be happy, but there is another state where you are freed from all these forms of suffering, all these defiencies, that is highest....

I am not following tradition at all, I don't know what gives you that impression...my own personal religion differs slightly from those of the past, although it has many similarities....


Be a bonzai tree if you want to be. but what possible justification is there for proselytizing? where isn't the Buddha?
You should tell this to yourself...

Want to quote the Buddha on this one:

"Let us live in joy, never falling sick like those who hate us. Let us live in freedom, without hatred even among those who hate."

"Those who are free of resentful thoughts surely find peace."

"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one getting burned."

Gautam Buddha

I guess what I´m trying to say is that emotions are not bad, but negative emotions need to be overcomed in order to live a healthy life. If you don´t think hatred and fear needs to be overcomed, then you probably have given up fighting them; but fighting emotions is not what I´m talking about at all. Emotions cannot be fought, they become repressions; emotions need to be understood from within.

Some say an emotion like hate is not damaging, but it is surely stressfull and it generates much discease; I don´t see how hate can be productive.

well....what is the answer?were can I find the answer?

When you realize there is no question so there is no need for an answer: then you will be far more awake than even Buddha or Jesus could have imagined, not even in their most wildest dreams.

-- Really, Reality.

I actually think religious disciplines/ideas should be studied for scientific benefits. Knowledge should never stay static. I would argue that buddhism was essentially the ancient worlds psychology, their attempt to expalin the human mind.

When you realize there is no question so there is no need for an answer: then you will be far more awake than even Buddha or Jesus could have imagined, not even in their most wildest dreams.

-- Really, Reality.

But how can become more awake than The Buddha or The Christ?

So what is your stance? Let bad things happen and stand back and watch? Tell people to embrace fear, anger, and sorrow? That is what is wrong, that's what is irrational....tell people to lash out in anger and go out be violent and kill others...that's your stance?

More assumptions. I have told no one to lash out. You assume that accepting and not weeding out emotions means certain things. This is how you respond to something new for you.


Emotions, positive, negative, and neutral are disgusting to me. They are all under this material nature. They cause people to suffer endlessly, which is why they are considered digusting to me. They are like coverings, veils, hidings, shadows, hiding your own true self from coming out.

It sounds like you hate emotions. I leave you to sort out the contradictions.


Just like Bush? More like the opposite, I'm for internal, not external.

Exactly what I meant. Your hate goes toward parts of yourself. And you instruct other people to hate parts of themnselves.

About lashing out anger against someone raping your sister, did you not know you could've stopped the rapist effortlessly without anger?
Why don't you go out and stop all the rapists since you have worked out this power and stop being smug in relation to people who are not as magical as you.


No one's cutting themselves up. How is teaching people that the feelings of sorrow, anger, fear, etc... is suffering bad? Rather, telling people to embrace these things is dangerous. Telling people on other hand to get rid of these deep-rooted insecurities within them is great advice in any way you look at it. 1) I never said suffering is good or said that anyone should embrace suffering. 2) Accepting emotions leads to healing these insecurities.




I am not following tradition at all, I don't know what gives you that impression...my own personal religion differs slightly from those of the past, although it has many similarities.... You're not quite sure here are you?


You should tell this to yourself I am not telling people to hate portions of themselves or that disgust in relation to parts of them is some sort of healthy spiritual advice. There is nothing wrong with converting someone to loving themselves. Look at your metaphors and you will see that you are at war.

When you realize there is no question so there is no need for an answer: then you will be far more awake than even Buddha or Jesus could have imagined, not even in their most wildest dreams.

-- Really, Reality.

and you would know this because you are truly awake?

and you would know this because you are truly awake?

Actually, he is right. Language is inefficient for matters of the spirit, and a question is nothing but a craving of the Ego for knowledge.

What I’m trying to say is that no matter how many or which questions you ask; you are the only one who can ever know who you truly are. You are the one who needs to search deep into yourself so you can find the real inexpressible answers.
Any answer that comes from an external source, only serves to teach you that the answer is not important, the real importance is in the silence…