Ask A Buddhist

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bakmoon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Then all souls are permanently good, since God is good?

Yet these not-evil souls, which are in the image of God, spend eternity in hell. How can that which is permanently good, and in the image of God deserve hell from a loving and just God? “Be permanently good and go to hell” does not sound very useful to me.

Then surely the person who is doing the evil should go to hell, and the permanently good soul should go to heaven.

Your theology sounds very confusing here.

rossum
By the way I have never met a person who was permanently good, Only the Blessed Mother and Jesus of course.

Adam and Eve were created without original sin, and sinned! Do you think because they betrayed God and did evil they should not be forgiven and go to hell forever?

The reason souls that are made in the image of God spend time in eternal hell is because they reject the goodness that is given to them.

Why do you think hell is eternal suffering. How could a evil soul suffer in hell? Should they not be right a home and happy in hell.

The reason souls suffer in hell is they cannot have happiness because the soul cannot be contented without God because it is made up of God.

Look at this world. If the soul can be happy without God, explain this to me. If I cheat you say out of something that should truly be yours. And I get away with it, why is it deep down in my heart I cannot be contented. Why is it, it will always haunt me?

Simple, because when you are made in the image of God you are made up of his goodness. When you go against it, you will not find rest.

That is why souls in hell cannot find rest, Because only God and his goodness can give them rest.

Again why are they suffering in hell? Should they not be celebrating?
 
Well, Buddhist meditation is aimed at reaching Nibbana, but you could use it just to attain ordinary happiness as well. This is what I am saying would be okay, not that a Catholic could try to attain Nibbana.

That is true, but a Catholic using Buddhist meditation wouldn’t be trying to attain Nibbana. There are three types of happiness in Buddhism: Wordly happiness, the happiness that comes from mental concentration, and the happiness that comes from Nibbana. I am advocating that a Catholic could use Buddhist meditation to develop the second kind of happiness here, happiness that comes from concentration, rather than trying to attain Nibbana.
Okay wordly happiness, to a Catholic, there is no happiness without God period. Nibanna is impossible for us to reach without God, we agree with that.

Now here is where we disagree, alot. You said a Catholic could use Buddhist meditation to develop happiness that comes from concentration. But Buddhist meditation is not meditation ON God, That is what is called Prayer.

Where does any Buddhist meditation state that you can acquire happiness if you meditate on God?

Now if you say you can meditate on God and attain much happiness, I can agree with that. But that is not what Buddhist meditation is. It is not constant meditation on God Only.

I guess what I am asking is this, Show me where ANY BUDDHIST meditation meditates on God the One and Only Father Almighty. If you can show me that, then I agree with you. But I have not found any Buddhist Meditation that states you Must meditate on God.

You are saying you can meditate the way we do, but use God as your center of meditation. I am saying that is not what Buddhist meditation is, Meditation on God and God only has nothing to do with Buddhism it has to do with God,
 
Well, Buddhist meditation is aimed at reaching Nibbana, but you could use it just to attain ordinary happiness as well. This is what I am saying would be okay, not that a Catholic could try to attain Nibbana.

That is true, but a Catholic using Buddhist meditation wouldn’t be trying to attain Nibbana. There are three types of happiness in Buddhism: Wordly happiness, the happiness that comes from mental concentration, and the happiness that comes from Nibbana. I am advocating that a Catholic could use Buddhist meditation to develop the second kind of happiness here, happiness that comes from concentration, rather than trying to attain Nibbana.
Another quick question, how can you promise us that we can acquire a happiness that comes from mental concentration? Do you see what I am saying?

You can’t. If we are to achieve happiness from mental concentration, it comes from the Grace of God not from our effort of mental concentration. You are claiming we can acquire happiness from mental concentration.

I am claiming not if it is not by the Grace of God. Thats where we are so separated in this.
 
I have edited your post (hope you don’t mind) and I think you will see that you are making two statements. The first is about the difference in purpose between Buddhist and Christian meditation and the second is there is no difference in technique, a hammer is a hammer.
Oh no worries, you did a good job cleaning up my stream of consciousness 😉

But i think some of the disagreements that revolve around the usage of meditation techniques from other cultures/religions/etc were well highlighted by your summary.
The purpose of Christian meditation is to allow the meditator to feel closer to their God.
^That above - has lead some members of the Christian community toward rather…provocative statements regarding the metaphysical outcomes of meditational techniques coming from Asian religions.

The most extreme cases fall back on a tried and true rhetorical style reminiscent of Augustine of Hippo in his City of God.

ie: That Hammer is Demonic.

More moderated voices seem to point out that Christian theology/beliefs can adopt Socratic, Platonic, Existential, and yes even Buddhist insights and practices so long as they are in accordance with their core belief system.

ie: No, the Hammer is really just a Hammer.
So Christianity and Buddhism have hammers in common, but Buddhism also uses chisels and healing ointment among other tools.
^And this is a perfect example of the other trend - namely that there tends to be a bit of a subtle downgrading of Christian meditational techniques coming from the other end of things.

Perhaps downgrading is the wrong word … Incompleteness?

I don’t write this to sound confrontational (remember, i’m not invested in any way toward any of your professed metaphysics) and I know this is an outcome of the specific doctrines your belief system upholds (after all, if i understand my Buddhist colleagues correctly, “one-upsmanship” is a rather old game played between Buddhist, Sikhs, and even Daoists and Shinto adherents).

But it does play right into “Reaction 1” back over in the Christian camp.

Incidentally, there do seem to be some rather strong exceptions to this.

When confronting the mystical practices exposed by the Orthodox Church, most non-Christian meditators often pause in consideration. I’ve even met a number of Tibetan gurus who wonder if this evidence of their belief that Jesus of Nazareth was a Bodhisattva and if Hesychasm may be equated somehow to Dzogchen.

The same can be said of a number of Soto Zen monks when confronted with Hasidic Judaism own spiritual pathways. They’ve felt something “more than” just a resonance…
 
Regarding that particular statement, my understanding of Nagarjuna is rather that there is no ultimate truth expressible in words. Whether you put it that way or the way rossum does determines whether the statement is potentially compatible with Christianity, I think.
That actually is a valid interpretation, or so sayeth my Tibetan, Tendai, and Shingon contacts.

From what i understand, a split occurred somewhere in the receiving of both Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka philosophy and Asanga/Vasubhandu’s Yogacara philosophy.

Two Yogacara’s show up due to regional differences/preferences between the Yogacara tha developed in India and the on accepted in East Asia - namely centering on Xuanzang’s failure to get Chinese Buddhism to accept the epistemological-oriented version of Yogacara popular in India.

Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka philosophy has been interpreted every which way. While some salient features might be agreed upon, there is a very strong difference between those who accept Tantric practice as valid, Zen practice, or your “run of the mill” Mahayana Buddhist.

I suspect however that the portrayal that has been seen on these boards (and i’ll take correction on this) comes from rather “Do it Yourself” versions of Buddhism - with folks mixing and matching practices as doctrines between Mahayana, Theravada, and Varjyana Buddhism.

This tends to follow a very Western “a la carte” version of Buddhism as opposed to the er…more stricter versions I’ve often bumped into while traveling to Asia.
 
And this is a perfect example of the other trend - namely that there tends to be a bit of a subtle downgrading of Christian meditational techniques coming from the other end of things.

Perhaps downgrading is the wrong word … Incompleteness?
And yet of all the Christian mystics - is it not Meister Eckhart, one of the most prominent Western mystics, who has been viewed by Zen Buddhists such as Suzuki and many other Buddhist commentators of other schools, as the closest to Buddhist thought that the Christian religion has produced?

In my own knowledge, it does not seem to be the West’s mysticism itself whether Catholic or Protestant that is downgraded - just look at the (:rolleyes:) New Age movement where our mystics are sadly exploited to promote everything from Gaia to tarot cards to non-dualism - rather it is our perceived “deficit” or lack of established techniques, that is of a system which is so important to other Eastern religions - and yes even Eastern Catholicism - but not so much to Western Catholicism and Protestantism, because of our Augustianian emphasis upon grace.

Catholicism has always maintained, both East and West that “infused contemplation is a state that can be prepared for, but cannot in any way be produced by the will or desire of a person through methods or ascetical practices”.

The difference is that in the East, Christians still focus A LOT on the “preparation” aspect - hence why an incredible system such as Hesychasm has developed, whereas in the West it has not because of our emphasis upon grace.

In other words, Buddhist and Hindu practioners laud Western mystics such as Eckhart, John of the Cross, Angelus Silesius and (the Lutheran) Jackob Boehme but are then puzzled as to why they don’t spell out any “techniques” or practices on how to attain that supreme state of awareness.

Nevertheless we should not “generalize”.

Some prominent Western mystics have suggested techniques and practices.

For example, the anonymous author of the 14th century book “The Cloud of Unknowing” - one of the most influential of all medeival Catholic mystical texts, perhaps the most after Thomas A Kempis’ ‘Imitation of Christ’ in terms of lay appeal and popularity - presents contemplative meditation - or ‘preparation’ - as a teachable, spiritual process enabling the ordinary person to enter and receive a direct experience of union with God. The Cloud was written, not in Latin but in Middle English - which means that it was intended primarily for laymen rather than for priests and monks.

The Cloud of Unknowing elucidates a number of cultivation exercises by which spiritual practitioners can learn to mentally empty themselves, and this is described as “putting other thoughts away.”

The Cloud of Unknowing calls these “special ways, tricks, private techniques, and spiritual devices”.

The Cloud of Unknowing, advises the aspirant to concentrate on a single syllable such as “God”:
Choose whichever one [word] you prefer, or if you like, chose another that suits your tastes, provided that it is of one syllable. And clasp this word tightly in your heart so that it never leaves it no matter what may happen. This word shall be your shield and your spear whether you ride in peace or in war. With this word you shall beat upon the cloud and the darkness, which are above you. With this word you shall strike down thoughts of every kind and drive them beneath the cloud of forgetting.
Read:
"…The Cloud of Unknowing also talks of various methods for entering samadhi that are framed, as to be expected, in traditional Christian attire. “Think of nothing but God himself so that nothing will work in your mind or in your will but only God himself. You must then do whatever will help you to forget all the beings [external forms] whom God has created, and all their works”:
"See to it that there is nothing at work in your mind or will but only God. Try to suppress all knowledge and feeling of anything less than God, and trample it down deep under the cloud of forgetting. You must understand that in this business you are to forget not only all other things than yourself (and their doings-and your own!) but to forget also yourself, and even the things you have done for the sake of God."
…In the Cloud of Unknowing you are also told to “surrender yourself to God, so that you do not admit even a single selfish thought which is your own,” whereas Dionysius the Areopagite instructed us on the way to cultivate as follows:
Exercise yourself unceasingly in mystical contemplation; abandon feelings; renounce intellectual activities; reject all that belongs to the perceptible and the intelligible; strip yourself totally of non-being and being and lift yourself as far as you are able to the point of being united in unknowing with him who is beyond all being and all knowledge. For it is by passing beyond everything, yourself included, irresistibly and completely, that you will be exalted in pure ecstasy right up to the dark splendour of the divine Superessence, after having abandoned all, and stripped yourself of everything.”…"
The Cloud emphasises experience above all:

“And so I urge you, go after experience rather than knowledge. On account of pride, knowledge may often deceive you, but this gentle, loving affection will not deceive you. Knowledge tends to breed conceit, but love builds. Knowledge is full of labor, but love, full of rest.”
** —The Cloud of Unknowing (14th Century, Anonymous)**

Read:
The author [of the Cloud] quickly advises that in contemplation, in what he calls “the darkness of the cloud of unknowing, the beginner must not let ideas about God, his wonderful gifts, his kindness or his works distract us from attentiveness to God himself… They have no place here.” At first that seems surprising that we should let go of even our noble thoughts and images of God if we are to travel this path. To our ‘awake’ thinking mind this is a paradox.
To keep oneself focussed when distractions come (including “holy” thoughts), the author of The Cloud suggests centring attention on a short word:
“**Choose a short word. Fix it in your mind so that it will remain there come what may. This word will be your defence in conflict and in peace… Should some thought go on annoying you, demanding to know what you are doing, answer with this one word alone.” **(5)
The author of The Cloud constantly advises the beginner to strongly associate with this ‘word’ your faith in God and his providence and goodness:
Let this little word represent to you God in all His fullness and nothing less than the fullness of God. Let nothing except God hold sway in your mind and heart.” (6)
This is the experience of those who practice contemplative prayer whether they be saints of ages past or the saints of today who are choosing this path again. The author of The Cloud says:
“**In the contemplative work itself, he does not distinguish between friend and enemy, brother and stranger. I do not mean, however, that he will cease to feel a spontaneous affection toward a few others who are especially close to him. … The point I am making is that during the work of contemplation everyone is equally dear to him since it is God alone who stirs him to love. He loves all plainly and nakedly for God; and he loves them all as he loves himself.” **(8)
Indeed, the ideal presented by John the Baptist when he says “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30) is the ideal of contemplative prayer:
And so reject the thought and experience of all created things but most especially learn to forget yourself, for all your knowledge and experience depends upon the knowledge and feeling of yourself. All else is easily forgotten in comparison with one’s own self. See if experience does not prove me right. Long after you have successfully forgotten every creature and its works, you will find that a naked knowing and feeling of your own being still remains between you and your God. And believe me, you will not be perfect in love until this, too, is destroyed.” (9)
Contemplative prayer then according to the author of The Cloud cannot be considered as self-serving or focussed on self. He says unequivocally “do not think what you are but that you are” (10). Indeed this path is surely what the world needs now, for all to reflect on not “what” we are but just “that” we are.
This denial of the self however comes at a cost - detachment.
As time passes in the practice of contemplation, the author of The Cloud tells us our prayer will gather its own momentum and continue day and night beyond conscious control:
"In the midst of all, you will be offering to God continually each day the most precious gift you can make. This work will be at the heart of everything you do, whether active or contemplative and bring deep spiritual strength and nourishment to renew both your body and your spirit." (12)
 
The
Atheist;9651497]
^And this is a perfect example of the other trend - namely that there tends to be a bit of a subtle downgrading of Christian meditational techniques coming from the other end of things.
Perhaps downgrading is the wrong word … Incompleteness?
I don’t write this to sound confrontational (remember, i’m not invested in any way toward any of your professed metaphysics) and I know this is an outcome of the specific doctrines your belief system upholds (after all, if i understand my Buddhist colleagues correctly, “one-upsmanship” is a rather old game played between Buddhist, Sikhs, and even Daoists and Shinto adherents).
But it does play right into “Reaction 1” back over in the Christian camp.
It was not my intention to engage in one upmanship. I don’t feel that hammers are inferior to chisels. They are just different tools for different uses. Perhaps by attempting to continue in your metaphor, I caused confusion.

The type of mediation described so beautifully by Vouthon in his post is samatha(concentration) which develops tranquility and calm and the rapture, equanimity and pure bright awareness (the jhanas). This type of mindfulness is the very core of Buddhist technique.

Samatha can be practice by itself or one can move in tandem with insight meditation (vipassana). Samatha with jhana is very close to the Cloud of Unknowing described by Vouthon with its exclusion of discursive thought and focus on an object. The development of samadhi does lead to a sense of detached calm that can continue throughout one’s day. Vipassana has a different emphasis although it flows from samatha. Vipassana is observational monitoring rather than focus on an object.

Vipassana is mindfulness of the mental and physical sensations as they are experienced in moment to moment in the present. This use of meditation is different from the Cloud of Unknowing although nothing in the process of this type of concentration would preclude vipassana. At the point of vipassana the difference in the goal of Christianity v the goal of Buddhism would be apparent. In the stage of vipassana, one would observe thoughts, sensation, and feeling as they occurred. One would see that these are impermanent (anicca), not self (anatta), unsatisfactory (dukkha). These are the three characteristics of existence.
 
Hell is eternal separation from God from ones own choosing.
I thought God was omnipresent, and hence it is imposible to be separated from Him?
Do you feel that a person has to be bad to do evil?
People are neither good nor evil. Their actions may be good, evil or neutral. One person will usually perform a mixture of all three different types of actions. Their evil actions will result in suffering. Their good actions will result in happiness.

Mind precedes all conditions,
mind is their chief, they are mind-made.
If you speak or act with an evil mind then suffering will follow you,
as the wheel follows the draught ox.

Mind precedes all conditions,
mind is their chief, they are mind-made.
If you speak or act with a pure mind then happiness will follow you,
as a shadow that never leaves.

– Dhammapada 1:1-2
Or do you agree that a person can be good, and get lost in this world, and do evil, but repent and be the person they were born to be?
Repentance has no effect on the results of past actions. Repentance may affect future actions.
Or do you feel is a person does evil they are born evil and thats that?
No.

rossum
 
Sister Notself, there is actually a scholarly book on Insight (Visspassaba) meditation and John of the Cross that you might like:

Christian Insight Meditation:

Following in the Footsteps of John of the Cross

amazon.com/Christian-Insight-Meditation-Following-Footsteps/dp/0861715268

Apparently the authors, “hold that the mystical union described by John of the Cross and the nirvana of the vipassana tradition are the same destination in different words…”.

I don’t know but I’d like to give them the benefit of the doubt 😃
 
That actually is a valid interpretation, or so sayeth my Tibetan, Tendai, and Shingon contacts.

From what i understand, a split occurred somewhere in the receiving of both Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka philosophy and Asanga/Vasubhandu’s Yogacara philosophy.

Two Yogacara’s show up due to regional differences/preferences between the Yogacara tha developed in India and the on accepted in East Asia - namely centering on Xuanzang’s failure to get Chinese Buddhism to accept the epistemological-oriented version of Yogacara popular in India.

Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka philosophy has been interpreted every which way. While some salient features might be agreed upon, there is a very strong difference between those who accept Tantric practice as valid, Zen practice, or your “run of the mill” Mahayana Buddhist.
A correct, albeit brief, summary of a great deal of Mahayana philosophical discussion.
I suspect however that the portrayal that has been seen on these boards (and i’ll take correction on this) comes from rather “Do it Yourself” versions of Buddhism - with folks mixing and matching practices as doctrines between Mahayana, Theravada, and Varjyana Buddhism.
This tends to follow a very Western “a la carte” version of Buddhism as opposed to the er…more stricter versions I’ve often bumped into while traveling to Asia.
Also correct. Buddhism took around 200 years to develop its distinctly Chinese schools after it arrived in China. Before then, there were copies of the then existing Indian schools. A similar thing is happening in the West, with some pretty faithful imports, and a lot of “try it and see” work on developing something to suit conditions in the modern West. That “try it and see” approach is well in accord with Buddhism; see the much quoted Kalama sutta. Buddhism emphasises practice over faith, and within practice it emphasises practices that work for the particular individual.

rossum
 
I suspect however that the portrayal that has been seen on these boards (and i’ll take correction on this) comes from rather “Do it Yourself” versions of Buddhism - with folks mixing and matching practices as doctrines between Mahayana, Theravada, and Varjyana Buddhism.

This tends to follow a very Western “a la carte” version of Buddhism as opposed to the er…more stricter versions I’ve often bumped into while traveling to Asia.
Of course, Buddhism is all about “Do it yourself”.
By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure. Purity and impurity depend on oneself; no one can purify another. -Dhp 165
Can you expand on the stricter versions of Buddhism that you have run into?

Bakmoon and I follow Theravada and I was a moderator on an international Buddhist forum. I consider both of us to be standard Theravada.
 
I thought God was omnipresent, and hence it is imposible to be separated from Him?

People are neither good nor evil. Their actions may be good, evil or neutral. One person will usually perform a mixture of all three different types of actions. Their evil actions will result in suffering. Their good actions will result in happiness.

Mind precedes all conditions,
mind is their chief, they are mind-made.
If you speak or act with an evil mind then suffering will follow you,
as the wheel follows the draught ox.

Mind precedes all conditions,
mind is their chief, they are mind-made.
If you speak or act with a pure mind then happiness will follow you,
as a shadow that never leaves.

– Dhammapada 1:1-2

Repentance has no effect on the results of past actions. Repentance may affect future actions.

No.

rossum
Good actions do not always end in happiness. Many of times you think you are doing something good and it backfires on you. Your only reward is that you know what your intent was and God knows and that is all the truly counts.

Hell is total separation from God because you yourself choose to not be with him. What good would free will be if you cannot exercise it?

What does giving the person to choose God or reject God and having God accept their decision change God being omnipresent? If you reject God it is you who have separated yourself from God, not God from you. He accepted your decision.

People can be good or evil It is their choice. You can either follow your own desires and put yourself above others and God, Or you can choose to follow God and put him and others over yourself. Its called free will.

To be good it to put God first and follow him and his commands. To be evil is to reject God and his commands and put yourself above God. Its quite simple.
 
Of course, Buddhism is all about “Do it yourself”.

Can you expand on the stricter versions of Buddhism that you have run into?

Bakmoon and I follow Theravada and I was a moderator on an international Buddhist forum. I consider both of us to be standard Theravada.
Then how can a person who is Catholic possibly follow the do it yourself plan over God?

If a person follows the do it yourself plan, you have made yourself a god and don’t need the one true God.

You tell us we can follow Buddhism meditation which as you yourself admit its a do it yourself, but yet say you find room for God.

Christ himself told us you can only serve one Master. It is God or yourself.
 
You tell us we can follow Buddhism meditation which as you yourself admit its a do it yourself, but yet say you find room for God.
One can follow this meditation technique presented by Vouthon in his post #1005. It is the same technique as samatha meditation but from a Catholic mystic and aimed towards God.
Some prominent Western mystics have suggested techniques and practices.
For example, the anonymous author of the 14th century book “The Cloud of Unknowing” - one of the most influential of all medeival Catholic mystical texts, perhaps the most after Thomas A Kempis’ ‘Imitation of Christ’ in terms of lay appeal and popularity - presents contemplative meditation - or ‘preparation’ - as a teachable, spiritual process enabling the ordinary person to enter and receive a direct experience of union with God. The Cloud was written, not in Latin but in Middle English - which means that it was intended primarily for laymen rather than for priests and monks.
The Cloud of Unknowing elucidates a number of cultivation exercises by which spiritual practitioners can learn to mentally empty themselves, and this is described as “putting other thoughts away.”
The Cloud of Unknowing calls these **“special ways, tricks, private techniques, and spiritual devices”. **
The Cloud of Unknowing, advises the aspirant to concentrate on a single syllable such as “God”:
Quote:
Choose whichever one [word] you prefer, or if you like, chose another that suits your tastes, provided that it is of one syllable. And clasp this word tightly in your heart so that it never leaves it no matter what may happen. This word shall be your shield and your spear whether you ride in peace or in war. With this word you shall beat upon the cloud and the darkness, which are above you. With this word you shall strike down thoughts of every kind and drive them beneath the cloud of forgetting.
Quote:
"…The Cloud of Unknowing also talks of various methods for entering samadhi that are framed, as to be expected, in traditional Christian attire. “Think of nothing but God himself so that nothing will work in your mind or in your will but only God himself. You must then do whatever will help you to forget all the beings [external forms] whom God has created, and all their works”:
“See to it that there is nothing at work in your mind or will but only God. Try to suppress all knowledge and feeling of anything less than God, and trample it down deep under the cloud of forgetting. You must understand that in this business you are to forget not only all other things than yourself (and their doings-and your own!) but to forget also yourself, and even the things you have done for the sake of God.”
…In the Cloud of Unknowing you are also told to “surrender yourself to God, so that you do not admit even a single selfish thought which is your own,” whereas Dionysius the Areopagite instructed us on the way to cultivate as follows:
“Exercise yourself unceasingly in mystical contemplation; abandon feelings; renounce intellectual activities; reject all that belongs to the perceptible and the intelligible; strip yourself totally of non-being and being and lift yourself as far as you are able to the point of being united in unknowing with him who is beyond all being and all knowledge. For it is by passing beyond everything, yourself included, irresistibly and completely, that you will be exalted in pure ecstasy right up to the dark splendour of the divine Superessence, after having abandoned all, and stripped yourself of everything.”…"
The Cloud emphasises experience above all:
“And so I urge you, go after experience rather than knowledge. On account of pride, knowledge may often deceive you, but this gentle, loving affection will not deceive you. Knowledge tends to breed conceit, but love builds. Knowledge is full of labor, but love, full of rest.”
—The Cloud of Unknowing (14th Century, Anonymous)
Quote:
The author [of the Cloud] quickly advises that in contemplation, in what he calls “the darkness of the cloud of unknowing, the beginner must not let ideas about God, his wonderful gifts, his kindness or his works distract us from attentiveness to God himself… They have no place here.” At first that seems surprising that we should let go of even our noble thoughts and images of God if we are to travel this path. To our ‘awake’ thinking mind this is a paradox.
To keep oneself focussed when distractions come (including “holy” thoughts), the author of The Cloud suggests centring attention on a short word:
“Choose a short word. Fix it in your mind so that it will remain there come what may. This word will be your defence in conflict and in peace… Should some thought go on annoying you, demanding to know what you are doing, answer with this one word alone.” (5)
The author of The Cloud constantly advises the beginner to strongly associate with this ‘word’ your faith in God and his providence and goodness:
“Let this little word represent to you God in all His fullness and nothing less than the fullness of God. Let nothing except God hold sway in your mind and heart.” (6)
This is the experience of those who practice contemplative prayer whether they be saints of ages past or the saints of today who are choosing this path again. The author of The Cloud says:
“In the contemplative work itself, he does not distinguish between friend and enemy, brother and stranger. I do not mean, however, that he will cease to feel a spontaneous affection toward a few others who are especially close to him. … The point I am making is that during the work of contemplation everyone is equally dear to him since it is God alone who stirs him to love. He loves all plainly and nakedly for God; and he loves them all as he loves himself.” (8)
Indeed, the ideal presented by John the Baptist when he says “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30) is the ideal of contemplative prayer:
“And so reject the thought and experience of all created things but most especially learn to forget yourself, for all your knowledge and experience depends upon the knowledge and feeling of yourself. All else is easily forgotten in comparison with one’s own self. See if experience does not prove me right. Long after you have successfully forgotten every creature and its works, you will find that a naked knowing and feeling of your own being still remains between you and your God. And believe me, you will not be perfect in love until this, too, is destroyed.” (9)
Contemplative prayer then according to the author of The Cloud cannot be considered as self-serving or focussed on self. He says unequivocally “do not think what you are but that you are” (10). Indeed this path is surely what the world needs now, for all to reflect on not “what” we are but just “that” we are.
This denial of the self however comes at a cost - detachment.
As time passes in the practice of contemplation, the author of The Cloud tells us our prayer will gather its own momentum and continue day and night beyond conscious control:
“In the midst of all, you will be offering to God continually each day the most precious gift you can make. This work will be at the heart of everything you do, whether active or contemplative and bring deep spiritual strength and nourishment to renew both your body and your spirit.” (12)
 
One can follow this meditation technique presented by Vouthon in his post #1005. It is the same technique as samatha meditation but from a Catholic mystic and aimed towards God.
But as I have asked earlier is this the true technique of Buddhism.

Where does any teaching of Buddhism teach to include Jesus Christ at the center of the meditation?

As I stated earlier Lectio Divina is Meditative Prayer. Not Buddhism. It has nothing to do with Buddhism meditation.

Why then would you not just say a Catholic could do Meditative Prayer Lectio Divina to try to get closer to God. But is not recommended for everyone or even necessary.:confused:

Why do you continue to say the Buddhism meditation?
 
For many years I have been interested in Hinduism. The Buddha, as I understand, was originally a Hindu. What would you say are the central differences between these two faiths? I’ll be interested in your reply.

Thank you
 
But as I have asked earlier is this the true technique of Buddhism.

Where does any teaching of Buddhism teach to include Jesus Christ at the center of the meditation?

As I stated earlier Lectio Divina is Meditative Prayer. Not Buddhism. It has nothing to do with Buddhism meditation.

Why then would you not just say a Catholic could do Meditative Prayer Lectio Divina to try to get closer to God. But is not recommended for everyone or even necessary.:confused:

Why do you continue to say the Buddhism meditation?
Samatha meditation is a true technique of Buddhist meditation, however it is not unique to Buddhism. Samatha is used by Catholic mystics as described in Vouthon’s post; it isn’t called samatha though.

You seem to be confusing the object that is the focus of meditation with the technique for meditation. Jesus would be the object of Lectio Divina. Metta could be the object of Buddhist meditation. Samatha is a technique.

Some people become very anxious when they meditate regardless of the subject of mediation. People who become anxious or depressed during or after meditation should stop. People suffering from scrupulosity probably shouldn’t meditate except in the presence of a priest who could help with anxiety.

I never said that Lectio Divina wasn’t necessary. It seems that it would be very useful for Catholics.

rinnie,
I think I have covered this as clearly as I am able.
 
For many years I have been interested in Hinduism. The Buddha, as I understand, was originally a Hindu. What would you say are the central differences between these two faiths? I’ll be interested in your reply.

Thank you
I don’t know what religion the Buddha would have identified with before he set off on his journey. He may have considered himself to follow the Brahmin religion of the times, or maybe something else. The term Hinduism is a bit anachronistic to use when talking about the time of the Buddha because Hinduism itself was still developing quite a bit.

The biggest difference in my opinion would be that Buddhism is an atheistic religion, whereas almost all forms of Hinduism are theistic.
 
Another quick question, how can you promise us that we can acquire a happiness that comes from mental concentration? Do you see what I am saying?

You can’t. If we are to achieve happiness from mental concentration, it comes from the Grace of God not from our effort of mental concentration. You are claiming we can acquire happiness from mental concentration.

I am claiming not if it is not by the Grace of God. Thats where we are so separated in this.
Are you claiming that all happiness is directly caused by God, even natural happiness? So when someone sees something beautiful and happiness arises in their heart, this happiness was not caused by the sight but was the direct result of God’s grace? Is that what you are saying?
 
Sister Notself, there is actually a scholarly book on Insight (Visspassaba) meditation and John of the Cross that you might like:

Christian Insight Meditation:

Following in the Footsteps of John of the Cross

amazon.com/Christian-Insight-Meditation-Following-Footsteps/dp/0861715268

Apparently the authors, “hold that the mystical union described by John of the Cross and the nirvana of the vipassana tradition are the same destination in different words…”.

I don’t know but I’d like to give them the benefit of the doubt 😃
This book looks interesting. Certainly the references for insight meditation are numerous and sophisticated. Some of the references such as the Visuddhimagga (The Path to Purification) are on line. Here is a link. accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf

The retreat mentioned in the book is similar to a vipassana retreat except for the fact that in a vipassana retreat there is more time to be alone and one meets with an instructor several times during the 10 day retreat. The Catholic version is a bit decadent since the attendees get to eat supper. In a Theravada retreat there is no eating after midday. 😉

I think there is enough substance in the book that I’m going to put it on my Amazon list. I’d like to see more reviews of the book before I buy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top