05-16-2011, 12:00 AM
Gonzo wrote:I can say I have a belief in Zen, for example. My belief is not in traditional or formal Zen (that which is promoted and practiced in monasteries under the guidance of an acknowledged enlightened master), but rather in what I like to call "Essential Zen", that Zen which denies its own existence and which points whole-heartedly to full experience of the moment. Essential Zen may be experienced in the same manner aspects of Toltecism may be experienced - by reading about other's experiences, then trying them for oneself. Lucid dreaming comes to mind. Is it valid to cherry pick?
Alien wrote:Not sure I understand your point here. If you have "experienced" essential Zen, then your experience is your own, and obviously valid to you. No problem. Yes, we can read about stuff and then try it. Again, the experience itself is valid to those who have the experience. No problem. As for reincarnation... I think some of the so-called "experiences" may be valid, but I challenge the conclusions people have formed around the experience, just as I challenge the conclusions many have reached regarding the so-called "near death experience". The thing itself exists and is valid, but leeches really don't cure epilepsy and flies don't cause garbage. The conclusions may be erroneous even if the experience isn't.
My point is obscure, however it has to do with the difference between a belief in the continuance of the laws of the universe versus a belief in a philosophical point of view. That is, primarily an opinion of the purpose of human existence. In my opinion, in regard the latter, it is all a matter of faith since the ultimate proof of any philosophical point of view must come after death. The "proofs" offered ("...leeches don't really cure epilepsy...", etc) have only to do with the physical world (i.e. the laws of the universe) - they do not deal with philosophical proofs, if any such are available.
In this regard:Nu Lang wrote:To me what is most important is to examine what you believe and only keep those beliefs that 'feel' right to you. That's as good as can be hoped for.
In regard reincarnation, if it cannot be experienced, and therefore remains information rather than knowledge, how can any conclusions concerning it be challenged? It seems to me any opinion has potential validity and disagreements are bound to occur. We all can agree concerning the laws of the universe - philosophy (including spirituality) is another matter.
Alien wrote:Not sure I understand your point here. If you have "experienced" essential Zen, then your experience is your own, and obviously valid to you. No problem. Yes, we can read about stuff and then try it. Again, the experience itself is valid to those who have the experience. No problem. As for reincarnation... I think some of the so-called "experiences" may be valid, but I challenge the conclusions people have formed around the experience, just as I challenge the conclusions many have reached regarding the so-called "near death experience". The thing itself exists and is valid, but leeches really don't cure epilepsy and flies don't cause garbage. The conclusions may be erroneous even if the experience isn't.
My point is obscure, however it has to do with the difference between a belief in the continuance of the laws of the universe versus a belief in a philosophical point of view. That is, primarily an opinion of the purpose of human existence. In my opinion, in regard the latter, it is all a matter of faith since the ultimate proof of any philosophical point of view must come after death. The "proofs" offered ("...leeches don't really cure epilepsy...", etc) have only to do with the physical world (i.e. the laws of the universe) - they do not deal with philosophical proofs, if any such are available.
In this regard:Nu Lang wrote:To me what is most important is to examine what you believe and only keep those beliefs that 'feel' right to you. That's as good as can be hoped for.
In regard reincarnation, if it cannot be experienced, and therefore remains information rather than knowledge, how can any conclusions concerning it be challenged? It seems to me any opinion has potential validity and disagreements are bound to occur. We all can agree concerning the laws of the universe - philosophy (including spirituality) is another matter.