Buddhism and Hegel

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

Looking forward to that but meantime I find that in practice many things simultaneously are giving rise to many more things - in addition to what remains all along. The kind of dialectic described is no way to make decisions in my opinion.

At one time harnessing the arithmetical portion of my brain I thought that reincarnation can only ever have happened to a few people due to increasing population, therefore it is no use as a general rule. That was just me at the time!

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

… he sustains the rage of a murderer, and the sick feelings of the envious.

Those are feelings not substances and those people themselves sustain them.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

It is helpful to remember the Nicene Creed and that the Son and the Holy Spirit eternally exist. This is inexpressibly true before the historical Jesus walked the earth. … Jesus is and is not walking the earth in the present moment as surely as the sound of one hand clapping.

Depite not much catechesis I keep coming back to a Christian faith because people that are to do with Jesus Christ (mostly lay people) keep coming into my life. It’s a kind of three-cornered relationship. They give me what He gives and sometimes I can give them it. We ask Him for needed help in troubles (and on behalf of others). This is all personal and not easy to talk about and often looks like coincidence because it seems we have to train to discern a laconic, self-effacingGod.

I think that, originally, philosophy was coded or metaphorical talk and that eventually sight was lost of what realities it was a metaphor for.

 

[Thomas_White]

I think that, originally, philosophy was coded or metaphorical talk and that eventually sight was lost of what realities it was a metaphor for.

I think so too, and this was a theme of Heidegger’s with respect to Being and the way pre-Socratic thinkers originally saw the concept. I will get back about experience though.

p.s.–One might perhaps see the diversion I became caught up in as the beginning of a dialectical process. These things are notorious occurrences on forums, I think, and often go on for quite awhile and too often become contentious.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

… If your God acts then your God changes, from “I will act” to “I am acting” to “I have acted”. …

All those statements are true of Him at all “times” (the concept “change” implying “time”). Seen from within time, a series of His actions is described as nearing “completion” or “fulfilment” but within His own mind the end is seen as well as the beginning. That’s how big God’s consciousness is.

The scheme often described of Buddhism is a bit like a piece of string: there apparently isn’t much room in it for dimensions and hence paradox.

Does nihsvabhava mean something like non-disjointedness or mutual non-irrelevance?

 

[annem]

Thomas White The Catholic Church teaches that salvation is possible outside the Church.

Yes, for the invincibly ignorant. But seriously, why isn’t your first thought to see that as many people as possible know the truth of the Catholic church?

why would you think comments on a forum, discussing philosophy and religion, would lead anyone away from the Church? It didn’t happen to me

I am sorry, but because something didn’t happen to you your argument is that there is not a chance in the world that it might happen to someone else?? Sorry, but that’s a very feeble argument.

why would you think comments on a forum, discussing philosophy and religion, would lead anyone away from the Church?

Are you kidding?

With all due respect, and really with charity, I would suggest any narrow perspective ought not be quite so judgmental of others.

My “narrow perspective” is just basic Catholic. Vanilla Catholic. And what has being judgmental got to do with not wanting other people to stray from the Catholic church? And why haven’t you noticed how judgmental you are about my opinions? (But of course I forgive you)

God bless, Annem

 

[thinkandmull]

God’s truth can be found everywhere, including all the other religions. But only partial truth; the full truth exists only in the Catholic church.

For two thousand years, from the apostles and Paul, to the all the nameless and countless missionaries who traveled to other cities and other countries to teach the truth of the Catholic church, Catholics have given their lives to convert others. That’s how important it is to teach Christ to the rest of the world. We have been claiming to have the full truth and refuting the claims of other religions for two thousand years. You never noticed?

There is only one great harm you can do to anyone on this earth, and that is to lead them to hell. Nothing else in any way compares. Surely you would agree. So why don’t you think it’s necessary to refute ideas that could lead people away from the Catholic church? Perhaps you should pray about this.

And so yes, I, poor idiot housewife that I am, will do my best to refute Buddhism and Hinduism, if no one else does.

God bless Annem

hey I’m interested in the refutation

 

[thinkandmull]

Those are feelings not substances and those people themselves sustain them.

Are you saying feelings don’t have existence?

 

[thinkandmull]

Feelings perhaps aren’t substance, but the warped nature of a murderers brain during the killing is, as is the knife and hand involved. How could a God hold that in existence in those moments? He must withdraw his sustainence and the Devil takes over

 

[Thomas_White]

Yes, for the invincibly ignorant. But seriously, why isn’t your first thought to see that as many people as possible know the truth of the Catholic church?

That this applies only to the “invincibly ignorant” has not been the teaching of the Catholic Church since Vatican II. I cite paragraphs 846-848 of the CCC. The current teaching was promulgated by John Paul II and concerns a change in dogma, as is provided by the Dogmatic Constitution ‘Dei Verbum’.

I am sorry, but because something didn’t happen to you your argument is that there is not a chance in the world that it might happen to someone else?? Sorry, but that’s a very feeble argument.

It was a question and not an argument. You did not answer the question.

Are you kidding?

No, I am not kidding. I do not understand what a discussion of philosophy and religion on a discussion forum would have to do with driving people away from the Catholic Church.

My “narrow perspective” is just basic Catholic. Vanilla Catholic. And what has being judgmental got to do with not wanting other people to stray from the Catholic church? And why haven’t you noticed how judgmental you are about my opinions? (But of course I forgive you)

God bless, Annem

What is judgmental is the very dubious proposition that a discussion of philosophy and religion on a discussion forum would drive people away from the Catholic Church. I don’t believe that at all, and this needs to be explained. I am not judging anything but simply asking a question.

Beyond that, should philosophy and comparative religion no longer be taught and should the library book mentioned in the OP be burned?

 

[Bahman]

People from India believe in multi-universe so its, for them, hypothetically possible that the number of consciousness’ has not increased or decreased

That is not my point. If being human is the only way to get enlivenment then most of conscious beings are in unavoidable cycle of death and birth.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

Feelings perhaps aren’t substance, but the warped nature of a murderers brain during the killing is, as is the knife and hand involved. How could a God hold that in existence in those moments? He must withdraw his sustainence and the Devil takes over

Existence and substance are different degrees of thing. As for actions those are our prerogative and our pidgin as human beings, the dignity of our state and status. Feelings are what we are made capable of feeling because what we live in the midst of is reality (our body being part of reality as the vehicle for living in reality), and reactions may be over-hasty under-thought-out actions. A bad act is a misuse of the brain as part of the body just like the hand.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

Buddha did at least believe in sin. Interesting. He also said:

“Work out your salvation with diligence”

Is it possible that St. Paul knew of this phrase from Buddha, and changed it to “fear and trembling” for his own Christian audience?

…

My Shorter Oxford gives under “diligence” steadfastness and heedfulness.

Working out one’s salvation will have been a universal preoccupation from time immemorial. St Paul having studied under Gamaliel will have been aware of the philosophical treasures of nations and millennia and I am sure different overlapping rather than contrasting nuances have been applied time without number.

No doubt a kind of awe that seems to impinge physically as a kind of trepidation is well within the traditional range of variants on the theme. It will have been a kind of proverb to the hearers. New and Old Testaments have many allusions from general human discourse which don’t obscure the new or renewed message of God through the prophets and Apostles.

I haven’t yet looked at Huston Smith. The only things I know about Hegel, Hegelian, Buddha and Buddhist thought is from other secondary sources.

It strikes me there are many strands in Buddhist thinking, some going back far before the last of the Buddhas and some coming in much more recently. Much of it will possibly have been the common “property” of many nations though each school may for weaker or stronger reasons held that they were following some non-overlapping important details.

As per CCC it is my obligation and right to spread the Gospel. I find that I individually am as yet ill prepared to do so very much at present but meantime I find this forum a wholesome place to get pointers to further my exploration of Buddha-related and Hegelian-related thinking.

 

[Thomas_White]

Existence and substance are different degrees of thing. As for actions those are our prerogative and our pidgin as human beings, the dignity of our state and status. Feelings are what we are made capable of feeling because what we live in the midst of is reality (our body being part of reality as the vehicle for living in reality), and reactions may be over-hasty under-thought-out actions. A bad act is a misuse of the brain as part of the body just like the hand.

In the Nicene Creed, there is now the phrase “consubstantial with the Father” in reference to Christ. The word “consubstantial” is a translation of the Latin word “consubstantialis”. Before this revision the phrase read “One in Being with the Father”. “Being” was a translation of the earlier Greek word the root of which is “ouisa”, which means simply “being”. “Consubstantialis”, however, connotes both being and substance. This was was a result of Latin having no word for “being” for the usage required by the phrase.

 

[thinkandmull]

That is not my point. If being human is the only way to get enlivenment then most of conscious beings are in unavoidable cycle of death and birth.

Indians say they were once human and will be human again

 

[thinkandmull]

Existence and substance are different degrees of thing. As for actions those are our prerogative and our pidgin as human beings, the dignity of our state and status. Feelings are what we are made capable of feeling because what we live in the midst of is reality (our body being part of reality as the vehicle for living in reality), and reactions may be over-hasty under-thought-out actions. A bad act is a misuse of the brain as part of the body just like the hand.

The structure and change in the brain during a murder is still evil

 

[Aloysium]

The structure and change in the brain during a murder is still evil

“The brain” is part of the conceptual framwork we use to understand and describe our physical nature.
We are persons - a unity of matter and spirit.
Persons are evil. Matter is matter, having no moral properties.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

… By introducing a logical fallacy I attempt to get people to see the mismatch between their internal models and the external world.

I should think it would only confuse us further as I believe it has. How does it help us understand a comparison between Hegel and any of the varieties of Buddhism?

The underlying fallacy is the assumption that our internal models are the external world. They are not. …

This is a different fallacy from yours, if it exists in certain instances which it may do, but not necessarily so.

Does your variety of Buddhism say what is real isn’t real when convenient, and is real when convenient, and how does that help you live?

As for the quotations by the OP re the kind of mysticism the last Buddha advised people not to actively seek, that was wise advice because a true version of it would only come through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ (it would hurt one otherwise) and even then the vast majority of us (such as me) have a very simple “everyday” seeming experience of God.

Simple prayer is occasionally loosely described as a kind of “mysticism” but it is altogether ordinary.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

The structure and change in the brain during a murder is still evil

It is with trepidation that I respond to this serious subject but I think it doesn’t alter the various arguments.

It probably depends how one defines “God”.

Can you think of a more everyday illustration from your or my experience?

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

Over the years I’ve come across some witty and penetrating sayings attribued to Buddha or Buddhists.

When they are talking about what they are talking about, they often make sense.

But when they try to generalise or theorise they show weak ability to do so. Does this have any connection with why Hegel’s “framework” does harm when people attempt to apply it to human situations?