Augustus wrote:Shalom Sheryl! We agree our reality is awareness and not the ego and not the body. I agree Revelation is misunderstood, but it's such a divisive and confusing book I don't see it as useful or true. I would call it The Nightmare of John. Some Christians still don't believe the Book of Revelation and it was greatly debated about whether to include it in the canon. I think Christianity would be much better off to remove that one book. The New Testament without the Apocalypse would be a Holy Book indeed.
your OP clearly exclaims that Revelation is a "false book"....i think i know what is actually divisive and confusing here....hmmm?
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
Augustus wrote:Shalom Sheryl! We agree our reality is awareness and not the ego and not the body. I agree Revelation is misunderstood, but it's such a divisive and confusing book I don't see it as useful or true. I would call it The Nightmare of John. Some Christians still don't believe the Book of Revelation and it was greatly debated about whether to include it in the canon. I think Christianity would be much better off to remove that one book. The New Testament without the Apocalypse would be a Holy Book indeed.
Hi Augustus!
Revelation along side other Gnostic texts that were kept out of the canon makes sense. It is a story of alchemy or transformation. It also makes sense in conjunction with many of our Eastern traditions.
Alone though, without any other presentation of the mysteries, presents a dark side resulting in the arising of fear of and for those on the outside of the authority of the church. Which is probably why it was included in the canon, don't you think?
Revelation can only be understand along with Kabbalah and alchemy, for it is a vision of alchemy. And so I recommend a study of these for anyone who is interested in the meanings of the symbolism found in this writing.
If you read the wikipedia article you linked you'll see that it's talking about how SOME Hindus view Buddha. Just like Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet. Buddhism and Hinduism are two very different religions.
Read up. Your ignorance is showing.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
If you read the wikipedia article you linked you'll see that it's talking about how SOME Hindus view Buddha. Just like Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet. Buddhism and Hinduism are two very different religions.
Read up. Your ignorance is showing.
Not really. My statement that everyone knows that Buddha was an avatar of Vishnu was facetious. That obviously isn't true. But, I am finding your humorless replies interesting. You certainly take your Buddhism very seriously.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote:Not really. My statement that everyone knows that Buddha was an avatar of Vishnu was facetious. That obviously isn't true. But, I am finding your humorless replies interesting. You certainly take your Buddhism very seriously.
I take my humor very seriously. I have no vested interest in Buddhism (I do think it has some things to offer). I have a love of history, anthropology and archaeology. I claim no religion and none claims me. No self respecting religion would have me.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
LittleNipper wrote:But did Buddha have Christ as his personal savior? Enlightenment is nice; however, being enlightened and full of knowledge isn't a saving grace. It didn't make Adam and Eve happy...
Buddha lived about 500 years before Christ, silly. And Buddha certainly went to heaven before waiting 500 years.
Samantabhadra wrote:hi Augustus, welcome to the board! I'm glad to see someone who holds Buddhism in high regard and also apparently understands a thing or two about Buddhism.
just me, the point is not (exactly) to destroy the ego, but as Augustus says, to tame it. From a tantric Buddhist point of view, there is an irreducible element of individuality that everyone possesses; we are all unique, fundamentally-always-already-enlightened beings. But we are obscured both cognitively and emotionally, and you can consider the ego to be the sum total of those obscurations. So, basically, our ego and our deepest self are not in any way, shape, or form the same thing.
Thanks for the welcome! And yes, I very much hold Buddhism in high regard. Among other sects of Buddhism, I like Lotus Land Buddhism, also called Pure Land Buddhism. Yeah, I don't see a need to destroy the ego, but to recognize it for what it is and not identify with it. It's not what we really are.
Augustus wrote:Shalom Sheryl! We agree our reality is awareness and not the ego and not the body. I agree Revelation is misunderstood, but it's such a divisive and confusing book I don't see it as useful or true. I would call it The Nightmare of John. Some Christians still don't believe the Book of Revelation and it was greatly debated about whether to include it in the canon. I think Christianity would be much better off to remove that one book. The New Testament without the Apocalypse would be a Holy Book indeed.
Hi Augustus!
Revelation along side other Gnostic texts that were kept out of the canon makes sense. It is a story of alchemy or transformation. It also makes sense in conjunction with many of our Eastern traditions.
Alone though, without any other presentation of the mysteries, presents a dark side resulting in the arising of fear of and for those on the outside of the authority of the church. Which is probably why it was included in the canon, don't you think?
Revelation can only be understand along with Kabbalah and alchemy, for it is a vision of alchemy. And so I recommend a study of these for anyone who is interested in the meanings of the symbolism found in this writing.
Shalom!
Sheryl
Shalom! I agree that taking it alone it presents a dark side... to me it was a nightmare that he recorded as a revelation.
Quasimodo wrote::biggrin: I take my humor very seriously....
it doesn't show.....the humor or the serious....
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
I take my humor very seriously. I have no vested interest in Buddhism (I do think it has some things to offer). I have a love of history, anthropology and archaeology. I claim no religion and none claims me. No self respecting religion would have me.