January 19, 2009
-
Abraham, Horse shit, and Evolution
Caveat
This is a hyper critical look at the Abrahamatic religions and please do not read on if you are easily offended by such an inquiry.We live in such a fractured state of mind and reality. That the double think that Orwell spoke of is not forced upon us but we have partaken of it of our own free will. That is why I think that the Abrahamatic religions have survived, and even thrived, in this modern era-they are children of a fractured psyche.
When I speak to people of their belief, and it seems to happen quite often actually, I am often quiet and let the implied slight, "you are going to hell" slide on by. I assuage the small tinge of irritation with the thought of the Manjushri's via Shanti Deva's teaching that it is our duty, if we strive to the teachings of the Buddha, to 'soar down to the depths of hell like a swan pouring rose scented waters upon the suffering masses in all the hells'-so, we are taught to go to hell when we are able. I change their implied slight into a compliment and I let it rise to my face as I listen to their childish exposition and arguments on a religion that has passed its time.
I would not say this aloud, not to any who are of the flesh, no, I would not care to harm them-but I am thinking, that this should not be a blanket statement. Their faith is now dangerous-it has become a pox on the world, because, strangely, it has become enmeshed in the secular aspects of ruling-and has all the markings of a fascist hegemony. If I look deep into the teachings it is there though, there is no understanding and belief of the natural workings of the world: they posit that everything is supernatural and this leaks into their world view e.g. that a great and cataclysmic 'judgement' will come and sort out the losers and winners-the buddhist posit ignorance, of the self, that causes 'winds' of karma that move one on the ocean of rebirth-rebirth is not supernatural-it is the 'natural' way of a strictly material existence i.e. a self posited existence. Perhaps I should say something? The Jews don't necessarily believe in the Judgement, nor the Christian view of heaven and hell unless they look heavily onto the book of Daniel: but their exalted position, unnatural and illogical, as the Chosen People suffices as a danger (how can you have a democracy, Israel, and posit a Jewish State?)
When I speak to these people, and the few I have debated lightly, they crawl ever further away from the realm of reason. They then explain that Buddhism also must point to the absurd and I agree, and mostly I let it go because I do not want to harm, but I fail to say that Buddhism finds a logical and non contradictory path toward this absurd leap-that, in fact, the leap is a purely logical one that leaves one without being able to argue the validity of each and every step and even the leap. The absurd can be 'understood' through logic but not validly cognized e.g. an orgasm can be explained and understood but not validly realized until it has been experienced. This logic is not apparent nor existing in the Abrahamatic religions and they must adhere to a fractured view of their beliefs in order to still believe e.g.
Judean's are urged to avenge themselves against the Babylonians, "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth the little ones against the rock"
"Islam prohibits a man from beating his wife unless he uses a sewak [a stick used to brush teeth about the size of an electric toothbrush-but it does not say you cannot clench your fist about it, stab, etc-but Islam does say you cannot hit a person in the face in anger: gut shots seem to be in the realm of god's favor]"
Yet those 'progressive's of this group turn a cold eye on this, they do not acknowledge it or try to say that there are deeper, more mysterious meanings in this-they say Buddhism is like this, they believe even though they still think the fat guy with all the coins being tossed to him is The Buddha, and I say, but do not say, Buddhism is explicitly placed into two categories in regards to the Tathagata's teaching: expedient and non expedient-one being used to gather one on the path and one the Ultimate uncontradictory teachings e.g. a man came to ask the Buddha if there was a soul and he said, "no". Another came to ask and he said, "yes". Shariputra asked the Lord why he contradicted himself and he said, "the first was a materialist, the second a nihilist, I gave them that which they needed in order to see that which is unseeable". This is expedient means. But, this is not what the previous excerpts of the Abrahamatic teachings: those were explicit rules one from the Psalms and the other from the Sunnah. So they practice their double think. They believe as windows and not landscapes. Fractured.
This is a bunch of horse shit. Perhaps it was expedient means for a bunch of savages in the desert. These savages had no culture but that of rape, murder, and more of it-they were violent and weren't at the time (later the education rose e.g. Timbuktu etc) and thus they needed a wrathful, demon like god that scared them shitless and told them to do awful things. Perhaps. We believe this is so-that the Christ was a Buddha that came to give the teachings again so that they didn't destroy themselves with the teachings of this angry earth spirit. This creature that is so bent on vengeance and terror that it does not need to make sense, nor be logical, when have we seen logic in a mind filled with anger, jealousy, and wrath? This is not a god of love-it is not. There can be no love when one places themselves higher e.g. that dint of real superiority is only measured by how much of those with less you are able to be the foundation for; the term, "chosen" does not give license to steal, take, murder, kill first borns (why the hell is this seen as a sign of god's correctness?) it would, in the Buddhist sense, rise responsibility to die yourself, to give everything away (camel, eye of the needle parable), to caste yourself to the winds-and then go to hell, forsake heaven, forsake even god, for one single person. The Buddhist cannon tells this: the only violence I have been able to witness is that which one inflicts on themselves in order to get to the truth e.g. the Buddha in one of his previous incarnations suffered thousands of stab wounds, with candles lit into them, for one page of the Dharma. Where the other texts say they come with a sword, the Buddhist say use the sword to shave your head, to cut your self clinging.
Even the teachings of the Sixth Level Boddhisatva Jesus-is now gone in this Dharma ending age. Who knows that God is Love? I say here with full conviction that it was an expedient means that has run its course. That, that God, the god of Abraham that wanted Isaac's foreskin for some reason (but not Abraham's which I find odd that to prove his dedication he chopped his son's genitals and not his own) is dead. There is no room anymore for such savagery. This self clinging is killing the world from Sudan to Israel, from Babylon to the Americas. It is time to evolve. With mentality of a beginning and an end, with ideas of a reward system that requires no responsibility after e.g. when I get to heaven I can piss on the heads of the burning masses and sit and watch television all day-maybe the 700 club is on. Then we get people who chant for the world to end the pre and post millenialists:crazed, insane people whose minds are so fractured they believe what they want to believe not what they have been taught, and this is a type of heresy, no?
Yes. I am saying it. It is time for a Buddhist age. It too is an expedient means to the great absurd but it matches with what the world needs. Yes, it has its mysteries and its seemingly contradictory teachings, but, these contradictions are in astronomy e.g. Mt. Meru is the center of the universe or that Mr. Meru is the belly button of Brahma which, only would mean, he has an outie. The Dalai Lama has said these are fine to do away with-that these are accessories to the real teaching, and I, as a believer am okay with this sort of belief. It does not require me to believe in a loving god that tells me to bash kids brains out-that is explicitly contradictory at the very roots of a belief system. It is time to evolve-this other mess is horseshit, and we have seen a world that such a belief has arisen: poisoned, fractured, groaning.
I do not say it will not be so with a Buddhist world view, it will be less though, and the mind can be whole: that good is good, that one is one, that my brother's wants are my own and my duty is to give what I have to them. The Abrahamatic teachings have this, but it is also surrounded with so much horseshit that it is hard to witness it-it also demands a level of incredulity that is a breeder and keeper of nut jobs. We live in a time where we have a savant like ability to grasp material truths and a powerful ability to reject what these findings tell us in the religious aspects of our mind: Buddhism does not do this, it combines the intellect, the material and the immaterial, in a way that I find irrefutable: and I have tried for years to do so, for, the teachings say to do that: not to believe without experimentation but to believe when there is no other recourse due to the evidence unearthed. That is refreshing.
God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are Dead and have become Siddartha and Shariputra and Maudgalyayana-but I wonder if we have the strength of spirit to study, to listen, to practice what the Dharma demands on a large scope?
Be well
g
Comments (5)
Ahh, I wholly agree. Western religions have such an emphasis on the supernatural and DEMAND it's place in a natural world. It just bleeds illogical leaps. And sure, you've said it before, and I'm in the same camp-- we've an affinity for mysticism; almost a romantic flair to the emotions of ancients, but the events in the bible pertain to activities that happened in THAT time (Armageddon was an actual battle on Mt. Megiddo, etc) and to instill control by fear, the Church used these metaphors to make their believers see them as literal prophecies. Ridiculous.
When I was younger, I was discussing religion at work (I didn't know better back then), and one middle-aged Christian woman who lost her teenage son to some sort of death, told me she couldn't believe in Buddhism because of reincarnation. I thought, "Really? Because Heaven is SO much more believable?" I didn't say anything, because there is no real rewarding effort in brow-beating; just smug satisfaction. My silence was also out of sympathy for her loss. I did find it amusing that reincarnation was the one thing that blocked her from true happiness-- the beauty of letting go of the self. She could have a mountain of fulfillment and closure, but that one thing prevented her. What?
I've heard about, and recently a friend sent me, Dawkin's The God Delusion, and began reading it. It's definitly "preaching to the choir" for me, but he articulates some ideas in interesting, and undeniable, ways.
Unfortunately, the problem with religion (and its discourse) is that it's colorblind. Each religion "sees" the sky as a different "color", so when practioners of other faiths intermingle, they each claim to know over the other's. But Buddhism is so grounded in reality, and obvious towards harmony, that I can't understand why we are not in a Buddhist Age already. The sky changes color over an orbit's course, or better yet, There Is No Sky. People herald the times as such Modern and Progressive, tehcnologically and socially, but the crimes and rulers of the Christian world are still stuck in this medieval mindset. If people are so enlightened and educated, why does morality suffer from the top, down? It all points back to their value system, one which is corrupt and outdated.
Interestingly, but off-topic, you're probably aware of the actor Steven Segal. He's a man who studied martial arts in Japan, married his Sensei's daughter, started a family, and then left them (without proper divorce) to America to start a career in Hollywood. He became popular (sorta), and starting donating heavily to the Tibetian church. In turn, a number of years ago, they declared him a some-level Bodhisattva. I doubt H.H. had a say in this, but doesn't this strike you as odd? Shouldn't bodhisattvahood be recognized, not awarded as a prize? I guess it doesn't really matter in the bigger picture, but it still bothers me.
Akasanantyayatana, Vijnananantyayatana, Akincanyayatana, Naivasamjnanasanjna-yatana.
@monkegeist - Yes. I heard of that about Seagal. It is not new either, in Tibet Tulku, Rinpoche, etc. have been given throughout time to aristocratic families. It is interesting that the Buddha forsaw this too and most explicitly via Patrul Rinpoche via Guru Rinpoche he gives out a very percise study guide on finding a real 'Guru' for yourself. If adhered too you see the charlatans.
I posed this question to a particular Tibetan fellow who quoted a rinpoche who was answering the very same question: in The Land of the Snows (what they call TIbet) there are 4 million Tibetans that call themselves Buddhists, 400,000 heard of the Dharma, 40,000 know a few words, 4,000 know more, 400 know of the Dharma, 40 know the dharma and 4 practice. This is a very good rate in our modern age.
So much is placed on the individual in the Buddhist practice, placed on them to find their Guru and to give themselves to him, however, this must be done with great intelligence, insight, and wisdom. It must be done with a huge amount of research and one's own study-also, once in the hands of a proper teacher, the willingness to study diligently and consistently-these are reasons why I think that a Buddhist age has not dawned for we live in a glib culture that works so hard at being banal. If only, as HH says, we put as much effort into enlightenment as we do into business-then, he said, you would be a Buddha in one lifetime.
I think though, to be honest about my hunches, that an age is coming upon us that will force a new review of our belief structure and I believe only one will suffice. Not in some exo-cataclysmic event e.g. judgement, but in some Human driven calamity where God does not rain down on us his manna-or that armageddon to some degree happens and no return. THere will only be bald monks and a few of us pale Sangha left to gather up those that hate us and tell them that we love them, that we love them so much we would suffer this, all fo this, for them-their hell, everything. And in turn we would then set them free by Truthful words without contradictions. We have nothing to offer except this teaching, not treasures or otherwise, they must earn those-and no sense that we are the great washed and they the unwashed for Emptiness-the logical conclusion you know, is irrefutable in its absurd equality.
I wonder though, that in many ways, despite what many well meaning western buddhist believe, there is an intrinsic difference in the belief structures: one believes in first causes and the other believes it is an ignorance to believe so. One believes in a structure that is top down and the other believes that (even though there are realized beings) that inherently god is in ignorance too-positing any subject/object is a reification of this-in fact, I read a year or so ago about how the Buddha went to heaven and spoke to a very God like entity, Indra I believe, and they debated: Indra toward the end took the Buddha to the side and whispered-because they had come to the error of inherency or permanence, "uhh, you're right dear Buddha, but, you know, I have a reputation to uphold here, so, uh, could you take it easy?"
My christian friends are all amazed at the depth of the philosophy and how it all supports the entire Sutras etc. That it is not contradictory in the end middle or beginning, that, unlike the Abrhamatic religions, it is structured like a manual: that each tenet is logically supported, that it is not needed to be supported by a 'blind' faith. That each logical step then moves the meditator, journeyman, toward the Great Leap of Emptiness, and then progresses further, and further, all of it supported. I think it is like this because India had a long tradition of debate amongst the differing sects and differing religions. That they all had to try to prove their tenets and premises in an arena of debate. Of course, I am biased, but the only one that was never vanquished was our Dear Nagarjuna-which they tried by saying he wasn't positing anything in the end, only wrecking their dear facades: which it is said, is because once stating one is opening the can of self reifying rules, which is only circular, and leads to more and deeper ignorance.
The tide is changing even here in the states. I can see the rejection of the teaching of Abraham and the fractured acceptance of their teachings shows me the facade is about to collapse. Any teaching that takes one away from their own responsibility i.e. positing omnipotence, leads to nihilism-thus the Buddha has said and logic shows.
Let us, you and me, both rejoice with glad hearts that we were able to be born in a lit Kalpa with the Buddha, his teachings, and all of our physical traits to be able to study them. Almost all other kalpas are dark-scary. Let us be sad for all those that have not pondered or looked into the teachings-for, truly, it is the only way out. I think. Anything that does not have emptiness, is still trapped.
Be well my friend
Oh, was the entire pararaph you wrote following the paragraph about reading Dawkin's book, from his book or was that your statements? Either way, very astute.
g
Thank you, those were my words on the subject. I thought of it a few days ago. I'm only about 20 pages into his book, so he might say something similar, but I turned my phrase towards Buddhism, whereas he's just concerned with Judeo-Christian belief.
I think there are only less than 100 years left in this astrologic age, the Age of Pisces (hence "Jesus-fish" magnets on cars). Next is Aquarius, which the Christ allegorically alludes to in the Bible, telling someone who asked, "Who will come after you?", that it will be the water-bearer. This is also why jews blow the horn, honoring their past age, B.C. I think something will happen in the meantime, or time between, that changes this antiquated system. Perhaps the globalization of knowledge and wisdom will allow more receptivity to Vedic thought in the west (more than the superficial commercial fad seen today).
The Tao te Ching and I-Ching cryptically warns and promises when Things his their extreme, they tend to revert. And surely the times are extreme enough.
But yes, wow, I never thought of it that way-- it is lucky to be in a kalpa where we're able to appreciate such wisdom. I like how you put that, very much.
Have a good evening.
@monkegeist - Hmm, I have always been encouraged by that statement, "The water bearer next" because, well, I am a water bearer-Aquarius-although, Ptolemy was incorrect in his astronomy so I have a skeptical view on his astrology.
Be well
G
ryc i am hopeful too g you dog you off to watch a speech blessings beck