Quote: And Peter answered him, "Lord, if it is you, bid me come to you on the water." He said, "Come." So Peter got out of the boat and walked on the water and came to Jesus; but when he saw the wind, he was afraid, and beginning to sink he cried out, "Lord, save me." Jesus immediately reached out his hand and caught him, saying to him, "O man of little faith, why did you doubt?" And when they got into the boat, the wind ceased.
Comment: Just as doubt is not OK when you walk on water but (according to Jesus) it even causes you to sink, doubt is not OK in any situation in daily life but doubt is always serious and conditions yourself and others increasingly to doubt.
Just as restlessness is not inevitable but it is what regularly happens involuntarily to people as a result of their unwittingly practicing constant (forceful) changes in speed and forcefulness in whatever they perceive, think, do and say (in order to please, impress, intimidate and dominate others); in the same way fear is not inevitable in life nor blameless and therefore fear is not a reason to experience doubt but it is an excuse to justify doubt. People blame fear for their doubting when they are equally to blame for their fear and their doubting.
Fear requires mental force to power it and only occurs in forceful or emotional people who are attached to their lives here. Fear is an emotion that seizes minds applying force on the mind that stresses and conditions it increasingly to fear more easily, more intensely and harder to shake off and anyone whose mind is seized by fear is not in control of his self and faculties and must therefore become uncertain or hesitant or doubting.
If there is reason for Peter to doubt then Jesus is wrong to ask him “Why did you doubt?” but it is because there is no reason to doubt that Jesus is right to ask Peter “Why did you doubt?”
It was because Peter started to entertain doubt as a result of being intimidated by the wind (that may have been stirred up by evil spirits) that he began to sink. Faith is the opposite of doubt and a man of doubts is a man of little faith. Just as it is deleterious to experience doubt whilst you walk on water it is equally deleterious for anyone to experience any doubt in daily life because this doubt is forceful and can grow in strength and spread like a cancer to engulf the entire being that not only detains them in this world but as the Buddha said, will send them to future states of woe.
(The ‘O’ is said unnecessarily and may have been added by unscrupulous scholars who are actors to make what Jesus said more dramatic. It is not possible Jesus said ‘truly, truly, truly I say to you’ as rendered in some versions of the bible whilst he said ‘truly I say to you’ in others but either one version must have been tampered. Jesus may have just said, “Man of little faith, why do you doubt?”)
If you observe carefully, people do not speak or move smoothly at constant speed and force but there are forceful spurts in speed and loudness/forcefulness interspersed with abrupt stops that is in part intended to be stylish and in part reflects the doubt and uncertainty in their minds that they cannot speak or move smoothly without changing speed or forcefulness. To constantly rapidly accelerate and decelerate in speed and loudness/forcefulness reflects a hesitant or uncertain mental state.
DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY IS MANDATORY AND UNAVOIDABLE AND IT IS FRUITLESS VEXATION CREATING FURTHER STRESS TO STRIVE TO ELIMINATE THEM SO LONG AS ONE HARBOR MENTAL FORCE, ONE IS EMOTIONAL, ONE CONTINUE TO HARM ONESELF TO FALSELY ACT BY STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CONSTANTLY CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS IN WHATEVER ONE SAYS IN THE NAME OF DECEIVING, PLEASING, IMPRESSING, INTIMIDATING AND DOMINATING OTHERS.
DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY PERMANENTLY EFFORTLESSLY DISAPPEAR WITHOUT NEED FOR MAINTENANCE IN MINDS THAT DO NOT HARBOR FORCE OR EMOTIONS, WHO DO NOT GO AGAINST SELF TO ACT TO DECEIVE, PLEASE, IMPRESS, INTIMIDATE OR DOMINATE OTHERS.
IF YOU CONTINUE TO DWELL IN FALSITY AND SELF HARM THEN YOU ARE RIGHT TO SAY SURELY YOU MUST DOUBT AND BE UNCERTAIN AND YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND HOW IT IS POSSIBLE FOR ANYONE TO EXIST WITHOUT DOUBT OR UNCERTAINTY.
Facile Doubting Is Even More Dangerous:
Just as people are often unaware they are being sarcastic, they also are often unaware they are expressing doubt and rather than trivial such facile doubting is even more deadly because what are doubted are essentially true.
For instance, when told minor things like “Your hair is ruffled” or “your shoe laces are undone”, they say without thinking “Is it??” or “Oh yeah?” to question or doubt what they have been told not realizing they are mindlessly conditioning themselves to doubt each time they do so. Because what they are questioning are essentially true they are practicing controlled false forceful doubt to reflect indiscriminate antagonism not realizing that they are heading for mad doubt of everything.
By retorting “Is that so” you are exerting pressure on the other person to doubt what he has just said that should not be subject to doubt eg “Your hair is ruffled” and therefore anyone who doubts also persecutes others.
PEOPLE ARE LULLED INTO COMPLACENCY AND ARE OFTEN UNAWARE THEY ARE DOUBTING LET ALONE THAT THEY THINK NOTHING OF THEIR FACILE DOUBTING OF WHAT ARE ESSENTIALLY TRUE THINGS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT BELIEVE IN THEIR FACILE DOUBTING AS THEY DO NOT TOTALLY BELIEVE IN ANYTHING THEY COME INTO CONTACT WITH (THEY ARE CYNICAL). WHAT THEY DO NOT REALIZE IS THAT INEXORABLY THEY ARE FORCED BY CONSTANT PRACTICE TO HELPLESSLY DOUBT AND A DAY WILL ARRIVE WHEN THEY WILL TOTALLY DOUBT EVEN WHAT ARE SIMPLE TRUTHS LIKE BLACK IS BLACK.
Why There Is No Reason In Doubt:
There is no reason in asking three times whether the lab boy will collect the blood today or keep asking a hawker whether the fruit purchased is sweet except that it reflects nagging doubt that cannot be quelled by reassurances. By doing so you are also raising the shadow of doubt in the other person because you keep on doubting what he has said that the lab boy will come and the fruit is sweet.
What reason can there be to keep asking the person the same question when he has already given an answer? It is not just in this advance state of doubt that cannot be quelled that there is no reason but even in every instance where doubt occurs, no matter how softly spoken, there is no reason in it.
There is no reason to say, “I gravely doubt your high standing” because if you make up your mind whether he is high standing or not you then say to him either he is high standing or he is low standing. It is because you cannot make up your mind, you dillydally that you must indulge in doubt, you doubt another person’s high standing.
Doubting Not Exotic:
Ordinary people are often unaware they are doubting others or themselves. Whatever doubting and uncertainty they are aware in themselves may be like the tip of the iceberg.
For instance they might read what I say that nowadays I am effortlessly free of doubt and uncertainty and they instantly mentally express ‘huh!’ or ‘ho, ho, ho’ or ‘really?’ not realizing they are scoffing and doubting, not that they can help it because such scoffing or skepticism are now automatic, they have long graduated from having to force themselves to doubt others to helplessly being driven by a doubting attitude to doubt others. Just because you do not know what I say is true or not does not give you the right or reason to doubt what I say and you are presumptuous to doubt not realizing that every time you do so, you are conditioning your mind increasingly to doubt until it will become uncontrollable and you will be madly doubting.
Being cynical, skeptical, suspicious, sneering, laughing at others, looking down at others are actually forms of doubting or not accepting others as they are.
Speaking For Others Without Permission:
Quote: “He wouldn't know Gucci from Smoochi,'' said Marjorie Weeke, a former official at the Vatican.
Comment: Unless she interviewed the pope to establish whether he knew the difference between Gucci and Smoochi, she is speaking presumptuously or falsely not without motive but to defend the pope and mislead those who read that the pope is that otherworldly. Even if she interviewed the pope and the pope said so, it is wise for her to say ‘the pope said he cannot tell the difference between Gucci and Smoochi’ rather than say the pope cannot tell the difference because she has no direct access to the pope’s mind.
She is saying that the pope will not know the difference between Gucci and Smoochi. How did she establish that? If she did not and cannot establish that she is indulging in presumption, a defilement of her mind.
It is the force or emotion in her to uphold the pope’s office (as a result of self identity views) that has forced her without even her realizing to go against herself, to indulge in falsity by saying without right what she said.
As a result of forcing herself to (hastily) indulge in falsity perhaps because of emotional self-identity views linked to the church, she must experience doubt and uncertainty in herself and each time she does so, she is conditioning herself to nagging doubt and because she is a actress, she has done similar things all her life, her tendency to and intensity of doubt (that she must counter by forceful fabricated certainty before others and herself) is very strong so that doubt can infect trivial matters or issues (eg what clothes to wear for an occasion) and even matters of simple truth.
Buddhist suttas often begin with ‘thus have I heard’ that makes it clear what follows is what has been heard that may be wrongly heard or wrongly told to them.
IN HER PARTISAN HASTE TO DEFEND THE POPE AND CHURCH SHE HAS UNRIGHTEOUSLY SPOKEN ON BEHALF OF THE POPE BY SAYING THAT HE WOULDN’T BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GUCCI AND SMOOCHIE. EVEN IF SHE HAS ASCERTAINED FROM THE POPE, SHE WOULD BE WISE TO SAY ‘ACCORDING TO THE POPE, HE WOULDN’T BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE’ UNLESS YOU BELIEVE WHAT THE POPE SAID MUST BE TRUE. IF SHE HAD NOT INTERVIEWED THE POPE TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER HE CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE, THEN SHE IS PRESUMPTUOUS, NOT A PERSON OF TRUTH NOT JUST IN THIS INSTANCE BUT EVERYTHING ELSE.
YOU ARE PRESUMPTUOUS IF YOU THINK OTHERS WILL NOT MIND YOU SPEAKING ON THEIR BEHALF EVEN IF IT IS TO PAINT THEM IN BETTER LIGHT THAN THEY ARE AND YOUR LISTENERS WILL NOT MIND BELIEVING WHAT YOU MAY NOT HAVE ESTABLISHED OBJECTIVELY.
Victims Of Their Intellectual Achievements:
Which is more emotional describing people as ‘victims of their intellectual achievements’ or ‘People should not be completely devoted to their intellectual achievements’?
Whether there is accompanying ridicule or disparagement in describing people as victims of their intellectual achievements can be objectively known and if such sentiments accompany, then the person is heading for suffering.
Why pick on people’s devotion to intellectual achievement when it is merely one of many vices that can afflict ordinary people like gambling, materialism, various pursuits (stock market punting or ‘investments’), hobbies & sports? Is it because devotion to intellectual achievement is seen as secularism that is irreconcilable to spiritualism that the church stands for? If that is the case, it is not calling a spade and spade but secretly instead of directly canvassing for oneself. Is organized religions’ brand of spiritualism any more meaningful to the individual than the dead end devotion to intellectual achievement or is it a case of the pot calling the kettle black?
THOSE WHO ARE ‘VICTIMS OF THEIR INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENTS’ MAY BE VICTIMS OF A SOCIETY THAT WORSHIPS ACHIEVEMENTS COMPELLING THEM TO TRY TO IMPRESS OTHERS WITH THEIR INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENTS (ELITISM, OF WHICH THE CHURCH ITSELF MAY BE GUILTY), THEY MAY BE BURYING OR DROWNING THEMSELVES IN INTELLECTUAL PURSUITS AS A FORM OF ESCAPISM FROM THE STRESSFUL HYPOCRISY OF SOCIETY OR THEY ARE DELUDED (EG THEY BELIEVE ASTRONOMY AND SCIENCE HOLD THE KEYS TO THE ANSWERS OF LIFE WHEN IT IS AS THE BUDDHA SAID STRESS, THE CAUSES OF STRESS AND THE ENDING OF ALL STRESS).
PEOPLE WHO INTELLECTUALLY ACHIEVE ARE DRIVEN BY EMOTIONS (EVEN SUPPOSEDLY OBJECTIVE OR RATIONAL SCIENTISTS ARE FOR ONE WHO DISCERNS, VERY EMOTIONAL, PROUD AND AGGRESSIVE OPINIONATED PEOPLE) EG TO PROVE THEMSELVES OR BECOME FAMOUS AND THESE DRIVES & DELUSIONS DRIVEN BY EMOTION WILL NOT RESPOND TO MERE APPEALS. INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENTS ARE MERELY ONE OF MANY POSSIBLE FOCI FOR THEIR EMOTIONS AND DELUSIONS AND EVEN IF THEY CAN STOP THEMSELVES FROM BEING VICTIMS OF THEIR INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENTS, THEIR EMOTIONAL DRIVES THAT STILL REMAIN ARE LIKELY TO BE DISPLACED ELSEWHERE. IN ANY EVENT, DOES THE BRAND OF SPIRITUALISM OFFERED BY ORGANIZED RELIGION OFFER A MORE MEANINGFUL OR ASSUAGING ALTERNATIVE, WILL NOT DISAPPOINT AS DEVOTION TO INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENTS WILL?
DEVOTION TO INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENTS IS MERELY A SYMPTOM OF A MUCH LARGER DISEASE NAMELY FALSE EMOTIONAL LIVES ENMESHED IN INSOLUBLE STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT COMPELS THOSE SEIZED TO BECOME OBSESSED WITH SUBJECTS THAT PROVIDE A CHANNEL OF EXPRESSION FOR THEIR FRUSTRATIONS THAT IN THIS CASE IS INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENTS. WITHOUT ADDRESSING, WITHOUT PERMANENTLY EXITING STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION, SOMETHING THAT MAY SEEM INCREDIBLE TO ORDINARY PEOPLE BUT IS POSSIBLE, THERE IS NO MEANINGFUL ANSWER TO BEING VICTIMS OF THEIR INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENTS AND WHAT ORGANIZED RELIGION HAS TO OFFER IS NOT A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE.
Even those who are supposed to be good and intelligent cannot see and continue to practice the stretching of syllables, constant changes in speed and loudness even when not to do so is the only way to the hitherto unbelievable permanent cessation of stress, restlessness and distraction, what more that mere labeling of people as victims of their intellectual achievements will achieve any meaningful effect except that it is a delusion to think it is speaking meaningfully. It seems people will not be denied their stress, restlessness and distractibility, not because they are so good or intelligent but they still want to manipulate others, cannot give up manipulating others and so long as they still emotionally desire to manipulate others by falsely acting, being victims of their intellectual achievements is merely the specific poison that they have chosen for themselves.
How many people are victims of their intellectual achievements, have achieved anything if at all intellectually? Very few amongst the masses are intellectually inclined but instead they are given to their inane petty lives and pursuits and so the pope may be addressing a restricted audience.
Doubt Is Mad Perception:
Doubt is actually mad perception, the emotional false perception that there is something more or something else in a situation that the doubter has failed to take into account when there is nothing. Because he does not believe or trust himself or others or this world, he emotionally feels there is something missing or extra in a situation when there is none. It is the shadow of falsity or paranoia or distrust.
Doubt and uncertainty is never something intermittent but like a rubber band wrapped around a roll of paper, it is constantly tightly wound around the minds of all ordinary people, only the degree of tightness varies because as actors in all they perceive, think, say or do, they are dwelling in constant falsity and make believe.
BECAUSE ORDINARY PEOPLE ARE DRIVEN BY FORCE, THEY ALWAYS DOUBT WITH FORCE TO GREATER OR LESSER EXTENT. WHENEVER YOU EXPRESS OR EXPERIENCE DOUBT, YOU ARE FORCEFULLY QUESTIONING THAT THERE IS SOMETHING ELSE IN A SITUATION OR YOU FORCEFULLY DO NOT BELIEVE. THIS IS A FORCEFUL MENTAL ATTITUDE INDEPENDENT OF THE SITUATION THAT CAUSED YOU TO DOUBT AND THEREFORE EVERY TIME YOU EXPERIENCE OR EXPRESS DOUBT YOU ARE CONDITIONING THIS INDEPENDENT FORCEFUL ATTITUDE THAT THERE IS SOMETHING ELSE IN A SITUATION THAT YOU MAY NOT QUITE BE ABLE TO PINPOINT OR YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT CAN BECOME INVOLUNTARY, YOU SOON CANNOT HELP DOUBTING WHAT YOU HAVE DOUBTED FREQUENTLY IN THE PAST, YOU START TO DOUBT EVEN TRIVIAL THINGS THAT SHOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO DOUBT (IS THE LAB BOY COMING TODAY) AND FINALLY YOU EVEN DOUBT SIMPLE TRUTHS LIKE BREAD IS FOOD (MAYBE BAKERS PUT CARCINOGENS IN).
IF WHAT YOU ARE DOING ALL THE TIME EG SMILING AND STRETCHING YOURS SYLLABLES ARE STRESSFUL, CREATES RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION BUT YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE BEING GOOD TO YOURSELF AND OTHERS, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAT YOU SHOULD NOT DOUBT YOURSELF, SHOULD NOT BE SOMETHING OTHER APART FROM WHAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE TRUE AND GOOD AND BECAUSE PEOPLE SMILE AND STRETCH THEIR SYLLABLES ALL THE TIME, THEY HAVE NOW CULTIVATED VERY STRONG EASILY ACTIVATED DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY IN THEMSELVES AND OTHERS THAT IS IN DANGER OF MADNESS OR DOUBTING FUNDAMENTAL OR SIMPLE TRUTHS.
Indulging In Falsity:
Jesus did not sit for a portrait so nobody knows how he looked like yet many Christians will accept the depiction above as accurate in an emotional way that they are attached to and will (foolishly) resent if anyone suggests that Jesus may not look anything like that.
They are presumptuous if they think Jesus should look like this. If you let your yes be yes only since you have not seen Jesus you do not attempt to create an image of him according to what you think he should look like that may sinfully mislead others to think that this is how Jesus looks like nor do you accept any artist’s image as valid.
The image above is of an emotional person in a daze or with vacant staring eyes that are hesitant or uncertain, mouth that are not let your yes be yes passively closed but slightly opened as if trying but not saying anything. A person who let his yes be yes only sees focused on a subject, does not stare with slightly upturned eyes as if in a daze nor keep his mouth half opened as if neither here nor there.
IT IS DANGEROUS TO PRETEND YOU KNOW WHAT YOU CANNOT KNOW, TO UNCONSCIOUSLY, FORCEFULLY ACCEPT THIS IS HOW JESUS LOOKS LIKE BECAUSE YOU ARE ONLY PRESUMING AND IMAGINING THAT IS NEVER HARMLESS BECAUSE PRESUMPTION AND IMAGINING ARE FALSE OR INDULGING IN FALSITY THAT LEADS TO FALSE LOGIC, DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY.
The Dangers In Forcing To Believe:
Every religion has its own sets of rites or customs eg Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Taoism and Islam for various occasions like death or marriage.
People who have adopted their religions have long forced themselves to adopt those rites that they now largely do not question but believe are efficacious to certain extent.
Confronted with friends of different religions with religious rites that differ from theirs, they are forced to pretend they appreciate or respect their differing customs whilst inside they may harbor even disparaging opinions of the rites or customs they fake they appreciate.
What they do not realize is that because what their faking is backed by force, they try to tell themselves and their friends of a different religion repeatedly that they truly appreciate or respect those customs, in time they are forced to believe that they indeed appreciate or respect those customs and this generate conflict with another part of them that does not believe and can lead to intense conflict that because of intense denial, the feckless actor may soon be unable to make head or tail of or he has lost sight of the connection between his opposing opinions and the conflict he regularly experiences, he is wracked by doubt and uncertainty.
A person who sees the truth does not subscribe to any rites or customs whether of his own religions or others, doesn’t pretend to himself or others he appreciates and therefore he is never in conflict or in doubt.
PEOPLE THINK THEY ARE BEING GOOD WHEN THEY FORCE THEMSELVES TO EXPRESS AS IF THEY APPRECIATE THE RELIGIOUS CUSTOMS AND RITES OF OTHER RELIGIONS NOT REALIZING THEY ARE ENGAGING IN SELF AND OTHER DECEIT THAT BECOMES INCREASINGLY REAL THEY ARE FORCED TO APPRECIATE AGAINST THEIR TRUE INNER RESISTANCE. FURTHER ALL RITES AND CUSTOMS ARE FALSE AND TO BELIEVE THEY ARE EFFICACIOUS IS FALSE LOGIC THAT LEADS TO MADNESS.
WHY ANGER IS DEADLY:
EVERY TIME A PERSON IS ANGRY HE IS CONDITIONING HIMSELF TO ANGER SO EVERY TIME YOU PROVOKE ANOTHER TO BE ANGRY, YOU ARE CONDITIONING HIM TO ANGER AND THE MORE ANGRY YOU FOOLISHLY MAKE ANOTHER PERSON (MAKING HIM SEETHE OR TREMBLE), THE MORE INTENSELY ARE YOU CONDITIONING HIM TO ANGER THAT HE MAY NEVER EXIT AND YOU HAVE GRAVE DEBTS THAT EVEN SENDS YOU TO HELL FOR SETTING ANOTHER PERSON ON THE PATH TO FUTURE MENTAL TORMENT FROM ANGER.
ON THE OTHER HAND, PEOPLE HAVE MAD PERCEPTION, THEIR ANGER CAN EASILY BE AROUSED SUCH WHAT ANOTHER PERSON SAYS MAY BE PERCEIVED AS PROVOCATIVE WHEN IT ISN’T BUT THE PERSON BROOKS LITTLE CRITICISM AND IN THAT CASE THE PERSON IS NOT TO BE BLAMED THE OTHER PERSON’S ANGER.
IN THE SAME WAY, STRESS AND RESTLESSNESS ARE CONDITIONING AND THEREFORE ANYONE WHOSE BEHAVIOR INCITES ANOTHER TO BE STRESSED OR RESTLESS IS CONDITIONING THAT PERSON TO STRESS AND RESTLESSNESS THAT BECOME INCREASINGLY INTENSE AND HARD TO SHAKE OFF AND THEREFORE HE HAS GRAVE DEBTS FOR SETTING OTHERS ON THE PATH TO MENTAL TORMENT THAT MAY BE EVERLASTING. IF I SPEAK WITHOUT FORCEFULLY STRETCHING SYLLABLES, WITHOUT CONSTANT FORCEFUL CHANGES IN SPEED AND LOUDNESS I DO NOT INCITE YOU TO BE STRESSED OR RESTLESS AND I AM NOT TO BE BLAMED SHOULD YOU SUFFER FROM STRESS OR RESTLESSNESS.
The Difference Between Brahmas & Devas:
The Buddha said a noble disciple of consummate view has at most more seven lifetimes:
"In the same way, monks, for a noble disciple who is consummate in view, the suffering & stress that is totally ended is far greater. That which remains in the state of having at most seven remaining lifetimes is next to nothing: it's not a hundredth, a thousandth, a one hundred-thousandth, when compared with the previous mass of suffering. That's how great the benefit is of breaking through to the Dhamma. That's how great the benefit is of obtaining the Dhamma eye."
Yet he has said in apparent contradiction that for seven eons he had been the All Powerful One apart from many lifetimes as rulers of the Gods:
This was said by the Blessed One: "Monks, don't be afraid of acts of merit. This is another way of saying what is blissful, desirable, pleasing, endearing, charming -- i.e., acts of merit. I am cognizant that, having long performed meritorious deeds, I long experienced desirable, pleasing, endearing, charming results. Having developed a mind of good will for seven years then for seven aeons of contraction & expansion I didn't return to this world. Whenever the aeon was contracting, I went to the realm of Streaming Radiance. Whenever the aeon was expanding, I reappeared in an empty Brahma-abode. There I was the Great Brahman, the Unconquered Conqueror, All-seeing & Wielder of Power. For thirty-six times I was Sakka, the ruler of the gods. For many hundreds of times I was a king, a wheel-turning emperor, a righteous king of Dhamma, conqueror of the four corners of the earth, maintaining stable control over the countryside, endowed with the seven treasures* -- to say nothing of the times I was a local king. The thought occurred to me: 'Of what action of mine is this the fruit, of what action the result, that I now have such great power & might?' Then the thought occurred to me: 'This is the fruit of my three [types of] action, the result of three types of action, that I now have such great power & might: i.e. generosity, self-control (a life in tune or virtue or heedfulness)& goodwill.'"
Train in acts of meritthat bring long-lasting bliss --develop generosity, a life in tune,a mind of good-will.Developing these three thingsthat bring about bliss, the wise reappearin a world of bliss unalloyed.
The contradiction may be apparent than real.
Not everyone can be the Buddha or rightly self awakened one for this eon, there is one self awakened one per eon and even noble beings like his deputies Sariputta and Moggalana had to await for his awakening so that they can be guided to their own enlightenments. It may be impossible that it could happen the other way around that Sariputta should become enlightened and lead the Buddha to enlightenment.
Not everyone will have the opportunity to be the Father or the Son of man because there is only one Father and Son of man in the infinitude of beings per eon. There are two classes of beings in heaven; the devas or angels and the brahmas who are formless and higher.
Again the Buddha said the person who practices universal loving kindness to everyone as to himself is reborn to the retinue of a high divinity (a formed abode) where he spends an eon after which one who listens to the Buddha comes to the extinction of lust, hate and delusion whist the ordinary person can descend even to hell for past deeds. This indicates that ordinary beings can attain formed existence in the high heavens and not the formless existence of the higher brahmas.
What the Buddha said may be reconciled if there are different classes of beings. For ordinary beings, they have no chance of ever being the Father and once they have been set on the path of awakening what remains for them is at most seven more lifetimes. However for brahmas, beings with more exalted minds who can escape the paths that lead to suffering, they may exist in bliss in heaven for far more than seven more lifetimes. Even for brahmas not everyone can be the Father and not everyone can be enlightened by their own and it needs the guidance of the Buddha to lead them to enlightenment.
BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY ONE FATHER, ONE SELF AWAKENED BUDDHA PER EON, NOT EVERYONE IS DESTINED TO BE SELF AWAKENED (BUT MUST BE WAKENED BY OTHERS) OR LORD OF THE HEAVENS; THERE ARE MORE EXALTED BEINGS WHO CAN DWELL FORMLESS FOR MANY EONS OR AGES BUT FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO HAS ENTERED THE STREAM, WHAT REMAINS FOR THEM IS AT MOST SEVEN MORE LIFETIMES WITH FORMED EXISTENCE IN HEAVEN FOR AN EON THEIR HIGHEST DESTINY AFTER WHICH THEY BECOME ENLIGHTENED AND NO LONGER DESIRE EXISTENCE.
ALL BEINGS ARE EQUAL IN THE SENSE THAT THEY ALL COME FROM ‘SUCH’ AND TO ‘SUCH’ THEY MUST ALL ULTIMATELY RETURN BUT ALL BEINGS ARE NOT EQUAL IN THE SENSE THAT SOME ARE DESTINED FOR EXISTENCE IN EXALTED STATES FOR MANY EONS WHILST OTHERS WILL MAKE AN END TO BEING AFTER SPENDING AN EON AS A FORMED BEING IN HEAVEN. WHAT DIFFERENTIATES THE HIGHER FORMLESS BRAHMAS FROM THE FORMED DEVAS OR ANGELS MAY BE THE LEVEL OF CONCENTRATION, VIRTUE, DISCERNMENT AND SELFLESSNESS THEY ARE CAPABLE.
Again what the Buddha said below indicates that for a person who is undeveloped in [contemplating] the body, in virtue, in mind, in discernment: restricted, small-hearted, a trifling evil deed takes him to hell.
Lonaphala Sutta: The Salt Crystal
"There is the case where a trifling evil deed done takes one to hell. The very same trifling deed done by another is experienced in the here & now, and barely appears for a moment.
" There is the case where a person is undeveloped in [contemplating] the body, in virtue, in mind, in discernment: restricted, small-hearted. A trifling evil deed takes him to hell.
" There is the case where a certain individual is developed in [contemplating] the body, in virtue, in mind, in discernment: unrestricted, large-hearted. A trifling evil deed is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.
"Suppose that a man were to drop a salt crystal into a small amount of water. Would the water in the cup become salty and unfit to drink?"
"Yes, lord. There being only a small amount of water in the cup, it would become salty."
"Now suppose a man were to drop a salt crystal into the River Ganges. Would the water in the River Ganges become salty?"
"It's just as when a goat butcher is empowered to beat or bind or slay a person is of little wealth when he has stolen a goat. But he is not empowered to beat or bind or slay a person is wealthy, with many possessions; a king or a king's minister.
"Monks, for anyone who says, 'In whatever way a person makes kamma, that is how it is experienced,' there is no living of the holy life. But for anyone who says, 'When a person makes kamma to be felt in such & such a way, that is how its result is experienced,' there is the opportunity for the right ending of stress."
Quote: Tan Sri Lee LT is chairman of the National Service Training Council. Since his appointment six months ago he has worked tirelessly to understand the whole set up, paying special attention to the problems that have cropped up in the first two years. (Sounds like he did an impeccable job but did you verify it or just empty rhetoric?)
Comment: It is physically impossible for anyone to work on something over six months without being tired at some stage and without having observed him for every moment over the six months for signs of tiredness, you are not exaggerating but saying something that cannot be true that is not without consequence because it is a lie that promotes lying if others accept it and because you obviously believe you are saying something meaningful, you have an appointment with madness for believing what is false is true.
The statement has the hallmarks of a standard statement and if you substituted the names involved, it is likely the writer would have said the same in the past. Because the statement is false and regurgitated by rote from memory, the person is heading for mad rote behavior.
IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE OR ACTORS TO WORK TIRELESSLY BECAUSE THERE IS ADDED FORCE IN WHATEVER PHYSICAL OR MENTAL TASK THEY DO THAT IS LIKE A HAVERSACK OF BRICKS THAT HANDICAP THEIR WORK AND THEY MUST EXPERIENCE TIREDNESS AT SOME STAGE.
No comments:
Post a Comment