--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Can't comment on that. I'm a Buddhist who doesn't > > > even believe that God exists. :-) > > > > Really? If Buddha-->Buddhism-->Buddhist exists, how can God not > > exist? I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha. > > Just a normal, everyday guy, who realized what it > really is to be a normal, everyday guy. Buddha > would have laughed himself silly at the notion > that he was anything else. > > What I don't believe in is God as a being with > sentience of his/her/its own or the universe > having a will or design/direction of its own. > I have no problem with the concept of the Absolute, > merely with it having a will or sentience other > than that made up of the combination of all the > will and sentience of its separate "parts."
These terms (like "God") are open to such wide intepretation, it is challenging to discuss them sometimes. Having said that, I can agree that God is not separate from His/Her creation, and that the intelligence and beauty imbued within His/Her creation is not less than the totality of Him/Her. The way I look at it is that God's love for His/Her creation is so great that he allows it to have complete and total freedom (from the Chrstian perspective, resting on the 7th day and all that...). Having said that, I can see your statement that God doesn't exist as compatible with mine. It makes no real difference our beliefs, only what works for each of us. > > > > In other words, there were things I wanted to achieve for myself > > > > that were unobtainable at the lesser state of consciousness... > > > > > > I would say instead that you *assumed* they were not > > > available to you. Therefore they weren't. > > > > Hang on-- Broadening the discussion beyond human form, would you > > also say that a chimpanzee doesn't speak English because of some > > self-imposed limitation? Where do you draw the line between self- > > imposed limitations and physiologically based limitations? > > I limit myself in these discussions to discussing humans. > They have no limitations as far as I am concerned except > those that they impose upon themselves. :-) > > In other words, I do not believe in the "stress keeps us > from realizing enlightenment" theory. Not for a minute. I would agree that stress doesn't keep us from realizing enlightenment, but that it prevents us from sustaining it. I also believe that once we become aware of this, it is up to us and no one else to do something about it. This is based on my direct experience.
