Jan F. Brouwer containment thread

[uke_master]

Originally Posted by Jan F. Brouwer

This 'I am' we accept as true, presupposes a higher truth: my 'I am' must be rooted in Being. I cannot be without there being Life, without there being 'Being' (in a general sense). To Descartes Life/Being was God.

But -this must be the conclusion of Descartes' reasoning- such a God is totally abstract, without qualities, not defined by our thoughts and beliefs. One might even say that such a God is beyond Being and Non-being.

Can we at some point move on from this insidious tactic of capitalizing words and acting as if this makes them somehow more meaningful? What on earth would this "Being" mean? Especially if it not defined by any quality.

[Jan F. Brouwer]

capitilizing of words means that a word takes on a slightly different meaning than in ordinary usage. In my texts it means: the words now take on a spiritual meaning. You may see this as Wittgensteinian change in 'language game'. But you are also invited to really connect with the spiritual reality the words try to reveal.

[Jan F. Brouwer]

Being without a capital is mostly used for immanent being (see: Heidegger). Being with a capital is used for transcendent (divine) being, being free of all dualities.

[asdfasdf32]

Originally Posted by Jan F. Brouwer

capitilizing of words means that a word takes on a slightly different meaning than in ordinary usage. In my texts it means: the words now take on a spiritual meaning. You may see this as Wittgensteinian change in 'language game'. But you are also invited to really connect with the spiritual reality the words try to reveal.

This is a bit of a grunch, so you may of been explicit before, but how are you using the word "spiritual"? Are you using it to mean biological mechanisms expressed in a certain way (i.e. feeling spiritual), or are you using it to mean 'actual' spirits, i.e. a magical God (not patronizing, just trying to be specific), or what exactly?

A slight corollary, do you believe in miracles, i.e. a bending of the laws of physics?

(The above question goes hand in hand with the "Ditching the Woo" thread, as I'm having to have him clarify, since the word 'spiritual' can be so nebulous)

[Gordias]

Has there ever been any tangible, documented, verifiable evidence of the human "I am" making a connection with the divine consciousness? Having a prayer answered, a profound miracle or spiritual vision/epiphany witnessed, etc., and not just a feeling or a personal anecdote? (Perhaps the Amazing Randy should expand his “proof of psychic abilities” challenge to include a “proof of epiphany” component. Most of us know how that one’s going.)

Part of me has a profound sense that there is some deeper meaning to our earthly existence, while another part feels like this tendency toward a belief in the supernatural is an evolutionary coping mechanism to help ease the rigors of life and death. Sure would be nice to have more than just “stories” to go on; human beings are masters at making up stories about our mysterious, vibrant world and its inhabitants.

[RoundGuy]

Originally Posted by Splendour

I'm posting towards Jan. A genuine spiritual seeker. Jan's book review says he loves The Divine.

He and I aren't going to argue like a couple of combative kids we're having a mature conversation.

Originally Posted by Splendour

I don't think Jan intended this as a debate thread it's got too scholarly a tone.

Refuse the Kool-Aid, Splendour. Just sayin'.

[Jan F. Brouwer]

Originally Posted by asdfasdf32

How are you using the word "spiritual"? Are you using it to mean biological mechanisms expressed in a certain way (i.e. feeling spiritual), or are you using it to mean 'actual' spirits, i.e. a magical God (not patronizing, just trying to be specific), or what exactly?

I believe there is an unknown Source to our lives that we can trust and that makes us very happy, blissful and ecstatic when we sink back into at and let It steer our lives How this Source looks like, what It does (is It intelligent? Does It have a purpose?), I do not know. Part of my blissfulness comes from being perfectly content with this ignorance about the deeper parts of me.

A slight corollary, do you believe in miracles, i.e. a bending of the laws of physics?

I have a feeling the paranormal exists, but we must investigate it in a scientific manner, without becoming fearful or superstitious. Let's not forget that what we are doing now (the Internet) would be a terrific miracle for someone living only a century ago. Or think about sending the Curiosity to Mars. These are miracles. We only know how to explain them scientifically.

When someone says he can walk through a wall, I will always be skeptical, but I will not laugh at him, but will ask him eto show it to me.

[Splendour]

Don't you think your Buddhist education might be interfering with your Christian destiny?

"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose" quote by Jim Elliott.

C. T. Studd, "Only one life, 'twill soon be past; only what's done for Christ will last."

From C. T. Studd's poem Only One Life, Twill Soon Be Past:


“Two little lines I heard one day,
Traveling along life’s busy way;
Bringing conviction to my heart,
And from my mind would not depart;
Only one life, ’twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.

Only one life, yes only one,
Soon will its fleeting hours be done;
Then, in ‘that day’ my Lord to meet,
And stand before His Judgement seat;
Only one life,’twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.

Only one life, the still small voice,
Gently pleads for a better choice
Bidding me selfish aims to leave,
And to God’s holy will to cleave;
Only one life, ’twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.

Only one life, a few brief years,
Each with its burdens, hopes, and fears;
Each with its clays I must fulfill,
living for self or in His will;
Only one life, ’twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.

When this bright world would tempt me sore,
When Satan would a victory score;
When self would seek to have its way,
Then help me Lord with joy to say;
Only one life, ’twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.

Give me Father, a purpose deep,
In joy or sorrow Thy word to keep;
Faithful and true what e’er the strife,
Pleasing Thee in my daily life;
Only one life, ’twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.

Oh let my love with fervor burn,
And from the world now let me turn;
Living for Thee, and Thee alone,
Bringing Thee pleasure on Thy throne;
Only one life, “twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.

Only one life, yes only one,
Now let me say,”Thy will be done”;
And when at last I’ll hear the call,
I know I’ll say “twas worth it all”;
Only one life,’twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last. ”

— extra stanza —

Only one life, ’twill soon be past,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.
And when I am dying, how happy I’ll be,
If the lamp of my life has been burned out for Thee.”

[Jan F. Brouwer]

Spirituality is the ability of consciousness to see its own fundamental Oneness with life and the universe

[Splendour]

Sometimes I think Buddhism is the mommy side of spirituality. She tried to prevent you from making the wrong friends and forming the wrong attachments. The beginning of spirituality or early human spirituality while Christianity is the daddy side.

Doesn't daddy step in and take over the training after a while?

There's nothing wrong with attaching. Just make sure you attach to the right Daddy.

Everyone needs a mommy just like everyone needs a daddy in this world.

Snakes don't fly.

But spirits do.

[Splendour]

Why does Buddha have a big belly?

I found this answer online:

In Chinese culture, they say "A big stomach can accept all the things under heaven that are hard to accept." In fact, they call close-minded people "small-stomached chicken guts."

Isn't that profound?

Still it doesn't keep the Buddha from looking like he's pregnant.

Of course, I also believe it's possible for heaven to send people strange signs and messages.

[Jan F. Brouwer]

Originally Posted by Splendour

Why does Buddha have a big belly?
.

You'll find many a big belly with enlightened masters. See eg. Pictures of Sri Muktananda and many others.

It has to do with the effects of deep relaxation of meditation on the body. With some this results in the loosening of the grip on the belly and the protusion of the intestines because of the gravitational pull.

Compare it to the feeling when you become very afraid and start to panic: your belly tightens up. Meditation is the reverse. You are never afraid anymore. So the belly loosens up. That's what happened to the Buddha. He overcame fear.

[Splendour]

I haven't studied the Buddha enough to be an expert but I'm a bit simpatico with him. I think he could have been a disciple of Jesus if they'd known each other.

He said a lot of things similar to Jesus but I think resurrection is a more desirable human goal than reincarnation.

He was probably doing the best he could living in a pre-Christ era.

An early name for the God of the Bible was El Shaddai. It's feminine in origin.

[Jan F. Brouwer]

There might have been a connection between Christ and India. You'll may find this article interesting. Google also 'the missing years of Jesus', 'Jesus in Kashmir' etc.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-d..._b_179513.html

[Splendour]

Women in Buddhism is interesting. If nothing else it ought to give pause to the idea that the monotheistic religions are exclusively responsible for discrimination against women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Buddhism

It seems a lot easier for a woman to be resurrected than to reach Buddhist enlightenment. At least according to the ancients.

This would be an interesting book to read if I didn't already have dozens ahead of it:

Ties That Bind:
Maternal Imagery and Discourse in Indian Buddhism by Reiko Ohnuma

from the book synopsis:

"In this wonderfully balanced book, Reiko Ohnuma insightfully explores the complex ways in which motherhood is both valued and undermined in the Indian Buddhist tradition. By masterfully comparing and contrasting traditions about the Buddhas's two mothers - his birth mother Maya and his foster mother Mahaprajapata - she shows how the trope of motherhood led both to a feminization of Buddhist ideals, but also a cooptation of motherhood in a male dominated world. A must read for all students of Buddhsm and of women and gender studies." Prof. John S. Strong.