Do to a crazy computer error, most of my archives have disappeared. However crazy enough, the present blog repeats itself underneath and under that is part 3 and part 2. How ever part 1 and 4 has dissappeared to bitty land. If you would like to read them send me an e-mail below and I will be glad to send you copies. Complicated huh, well read on!
On To: Part 5
The Interview With Boris on The Subject of G-d continued from Part 4; where Bernard was saying to Boris that seemed like Boris was contending there was no such thing as a self that there is just action, and if that was really true how can someone be held responsible for their actions.Read on for Boris' answer.
Synopsis:
If you read the synopsis before skip down to Part 5 (blog) for some more of Boris' rap on Being and such!
Boris Dov Lanter, an American, New York Jewish guy, is an internationally known celebrity who had been a professional painter living in Kaasdorp (Lit: Cheese Town) Holland. He became famous not because of his paintings but for inventing, or creating, kind of a kitsch spiritually-material 'teaching' called "The Gift". When marketed "The Gift" outsold pet rocks, cabbage dolls, hula-hoops, and all the other previous worldwide fads and marketing phenomenon. Consequently, many spiritually starving, confused individuals look to Boris as a Guru; that is a notion, which Boris ridicules publicly, time and time again. Boris has "taken refuge" in the Buddha and considers himself a Buddhist. He takes his spirituality seriously: however, because he was born Jewish-is still a culinary Jew-and gets a kick out his Jewish brethren; he answers, "I'm Buddhish!' when asked his religion.
Because of his following, the continuing marketing success of "The Gift", and his outlandishly extroverted performances on celebrity interview shows, a major publisher commissioned Bernard Wisser to write his Biography. Wisser is world renowned for his hip biographies, the most famous being, the official biography of Mick Jagger titled "The Unrolling Rolling Stone." Boris and Bernard, who Boris calls Nardo or Nard, have been friends for years and love to diss each other; therefore, Boris agrees to have his good buddy Nardo write his biography; figuring, anyone reading his life story immediately will shed the notion that he Boris, is a Guru and will perhaps find a legitimate teacher or spiritual path.
The two buddies keep up there kibitzing ways constantly teasing each other and pointing out each others foibles, and flaws all during the course of the interviews, while working on the biography, and their 'raps' becomes interwoven into the writing of the biography.
Bernard has been trying to rein Boris in from the beginning; since, Boris has a tendency to meander, and has many tricky ways of seducing Bernard into spending time listening to his rambling anecdotes. Originally, Nardo had allocated two years time to writing the book but now five years has passed and Boris is only 10 years old in the Biography. It has become obvious they will not be able to cover Boris' whole life, so they are thinking about ending the book when Boris attains manhood with his Bar Mitzvah.
In the Following Chapter Bernard (the biographer) decides to break away from the form "I Do Art.." has taken so far, (if you can call it a form) and conduct an interview with Boris on the subject of his spiritual beliefs and his beliefs about God.
The Interview With Boris on The Subject of G-d
I have decided this Part will be conducted like a magazine interview. In case you have Mad Human's Disease and cannot put it together BW stands for me Bernard Wisser, and BDL stand for Boris Dov Lanter--enjoy :
Part 5 (Blog)
We left off with:
BW:I could dig that Boris. But the fact, that it is almost impossible to become enlightened in one lifetime, doesn’t negate the possibility--that--just may be our human predicament: to hunger for enlightenment and not be able to attain it in the time given to us. You yourself indicated any effort in that direction carries with it some degree of liberation from one’s own conditioning and suffering. Isn't that enough. I mean, what do you have to lose if there is no such thing as reincarnation? Do you have any other reasons for reifying it?
BDL: I never said “any effort”! There is right effort, just as there is right work, right speech, right thought and right action. Right practice is liberating, and wrong practice leads to greater conditioning, hindrances to enlightenment, and more suffering. However, you are right you don’t have to believe in reincarnation, to progress along the path of enlightenment. I don't need to believe in reincarnation--one lifetime is enough for me--I'm already seeing young duplicates of people I knew in the past.
Moreover, although we are practically blind to it, it seems to me that reincarnation is continuing every moment "we"are in a state of existence. You, me, all of us, are blinking on an off every second that ticks away; since, the particles making us up are coming in and out of existence continually. At a macro-level, our bodies are growing, degenerating, and regenerating continually during the course of our lifetimes. Although, I am being reincarnated from one instant to the next one, those who know me, and I myself, totally believe I am the Boris who existed five minutes ago, five months, ago, five years age, and ten time five years ago. It’s because we either forget or never knew language demands an "I," or a name for the subject of a verb. We go on to use those names either for convention, or for pragmatic purposes.
So then, what is this continuing Boris, if not imagination, and some sort of continuity of consciousness? My brain has gone through the same type of changes as the rest of me, so it begs the question to say the continuity of my consciousness is merely a bi-product of brain activity. Obviously, Boris, 1940, is not the same as Boris 1970, or Boris 2000. However, I myself can experience a definite continuity of consciousness (that is correlated with my body and it’s changes) throughout all the periods it has lived through. Continuity of consciousness is the only true continuity we know. Everything else in our life has shown itself to be non-permanent and the only thing that gives people and things a seeming continuity is consciousness itself.
Check it out, try a mind experiment. Try to recall, yourself ten years ago. Then try to recall yourself fifteen years ago, then twenty, continuing going back, and then come back to the present.
Here is what I have learned by doing that. I could feel, recall a bit, and compare the different versions of myself with each other, in all the different periods I chose to recall. Comparing those different versions I saw areas in which my attitudes changed substantially, and I could detect how in different periods I might have perceived similar situations from one period to another quite differently.I also saw ways I have remained almost steadfastly the same. Yet, what stayed the same were certain trends and patterns rather than particular traits and tendencies, although there also was some persevering traits and tendencies; Still, there was and remains something quite familiar about myself when recalling myself during all those periods. Then I put my finger on what it was that was familiar. It was a quality of consciousness a feeling of me, which seemed totally stable throughout my life. Perhaps that feeling of me is nothing more than the feeling of continuity of consciousness itself. The strange thing is however, if I focus my attention on that feeling for even the shortest period, it seems to disappear, and I experience a somewhat fleeting period of emptiness plus my inner and outer environment. Perhaps that quality (me) is just how one feels and instant before appearances are either apperceived or apprehended.
So here it Nardo, the fact we feel intact as a self from one minute to the next seems to be something close to miraculous, that we do so for a lifetime is miraculous. Being that is true I see no reason why the death of the brain or body should necessarily kill that consciousness and its continuity.
BW: So what do you think, is the difference, between personality and continuity of consciousness. You surely don’t think your personality is reincarnated, do you?
BDL: I don’t really know the answer to your question about the relationship between personality and the continuity of consciousness; and if there something akin to reincarnation going on, but I would gladly wager, it is not personality being reincarnated. I can hazard a guess about it, but it would be a guess based on circumstantial evidence combined with a smattering of deduction and intuition. I not sure of my understanding of Buddhist thinking in relationship to that question except that Buddhism, although it has a metaphysics would discourage one from delving into it. From what I do know about Buddhist thinking I would guess personality ends with a particular lifetime, and the continuity of consciousness, continues over and over again until one (that continuity of consciousness) achieves nirvana and is free from karma, and rebirth. But that’s my current story based on what I perceive through my sunglasses, my learning, and all the obscurities, and hindrances of my cognitive system and my conditionings. I guess I will never truly know the answers to those questions until I know them directly. That is, until I just know them! It really isn’t important. I’m very pragmatic. Buddhist’s type practice (as I practice it,) seems to be, what should I say, cleaning me up, purifying me, refining me, bearing fruit, none of those are adequate statements but it’s something like that.
But what the heck, let’s have some fun. I would suspect the continuity of consciousness is something akin to a field in the larger field of Mind, and that field’s appearances are received in the brain in the form of mind with a small “m.” It is mind, which is the seat of personality. Personality itself is a series of patterns of interlaced tendencies, impulses, ideas, thoughts and feeling that have become conditioned in the body in response both to the body and the environment; and, it is related to our concept of self which merely a construction of related events composed of consciousness, physical form, perceptions, feelings, and motives, that we have became aware of, and unconsciously associate with each other. The concept of personality, implies a person tends to respond, think, and feel, in certain patterned and predictable ways. Those conditioned ways represent modifications of different forms of energies, which in turn modify the patterns, and interlaced energies that make up the continuity of consciousness. Whew, did I say that. For me it’s all the interplay of energy, nothing but energy, but wow, what energy--it is energy, which is both lawful and free. The important thing is that neither Mind, mind (mind with a small “m”), consciousness nor continuity of consciousness, are identities nor are they entities. Instead, on each level they are patterns of relationships between interpenetrating and interdependent form of energies and emptiness. They are something like fields within fields. BW: I still don’t understand why you don’t define the continuity of consciousness itself, as a. self.
BDL: Because it is logically, and metaphysically false. What do we mean by self. I think you will agree with the dictionary definition, which is defined as the essence of a person or thing, in short, his or her own individuality. So that involves an identity or oneness, which any way you cut it, is really a continuing awareness and presence of a multitudinous number of events that we or ourselves keep calling by the same name. BW: That really helps me--boy oh boy--can you clarify that?
BDL: Let’s say I get very generous, and tomorrow I surprise you with a gift of a brand new Alpha Romero, parked outside the house. I take you outside to see the auto and give you the keys. For the sake of argument, let’s say you then and there christian that car "Alphie". Now I’m going to present two different scenarios for Alphie.
BW: So far, I like it! BDL: Well, I don’t think you will like this first scenario so much! Let us assume that Alphie turns out to be the lemons of all lemons (I know that’s difficult to conceive when talking about an Alpha Romero) but the result is, in a five-year period sixty percent of Alphie’s mechanical parts has to be replaced. Moreover, let’s just pretend you are an accident-prone shlub, and as a result, of that little by little most every body part on Alphie including the seats has been replaced. Let's further assume, because, I your buddy (whom you love) gave you Alphie, you have become very attached to it and can’t bring yourself to get rid of it. Five years later, after all those changes, our Alphie looks and sounds just like the original Alphie I gave you. However, although we call the car Alphie, how can we justify saying it is the same Alphie I gave you? Once you change one little part, even with a similar part, it is not the same object. Yet, we all call it Alphie because of the continuity of our consciousness. But can you say that continuity of consciousness, belongs to Alphie, or is Alphie's true self?
Here is the second scenario: When it comes to automobiles you are just a shlub, and you really don’t keep up with Alphie's servicing schedule, or keep it well washed and polished. Nor do you keep up with it mechanically. You ride the clutch, so it’s not in great shape. Sometimes you neglect to put the handbrake all the way down so it need to be adjusted and so do your brakes, and it has a couple of broken shocks because sometimes you find it easier climbing the curb when parking. We’ll leave it to your imagination how Alfie looks and sounds. One thing you can be sure of, Alphie neither, looks, sounds, or drives like the Alpha Romero I gave you. Nevertheless, I’ll bet anything we would still say that’s the same car. Why?
BW: Wait! Don’t tell me! It’s because of the continuity of consciousness.
BDL: Right, you are! BW: Let’s see if I understand you. You are saying self is non-existent. In addition, your reason for saying that is in order for there to be a self it would have to be something that is non-changing and that would involve an identity. However what we call “our self” really is a construction composed of our perceptions of a multitude of constantly changing events which are related to each other, and due to those relationships and their continuity in consciousness we always perceive them as the same object or person. Therefore, self is either imagined or is something like an illusion.
BDL: By G-d, you got it!
BW: Well it seems to me according to what you are saying there is just action, there is no you and therefore how can someone be held responsible for their actions.
Gosh oh Golly! How will Boris respond to Bernard's penetrating question. Has Bernard boxed Boris into the perrennial metaphyical problem that ends up in being axiological (an ethical problem) or a problem of values. Click in next week to the Boris' ongoing interview that started on the subject of G-d and has meandered all over the rap unverse. I promise you, sooner or later this will end. .
SUBSCRIBE TO HodpodgeBlog BELOW--
STATE YOUR MIND--OR ASK FOR ADVICE: CLICK BELOW
RATE THIS JOURNAL? COLUMN? BLOG...WHAT EVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT...below... Top Colored button means "great!" Bottom colored button means "Feh!"
I’m going to try make this a weekly column, but I might miss a day now and then. If you are smart or not so smart you will solicit my ADVICE—it’s free…I love to give ADVICE! You are also invited to send me your criticism, or you can contribute your own material for publication. Make this your site also--use the Forum Box above. Click into HodgepodgeBlog every week.Also, you can now click to this website by using my new quick redirect URL: http://clik.to/BernardDovWisser I sure appreciate your interest and would love your participation.
Click Here, for a Great Art Site Worth Checking Out
Volume 1, issue 14, Jan.27, 2003.
IT'S NEW: bernard wisser's Fine Art Weekly Cartoons; It's TOONY ART ...Check it out!
If You Missed Part 1 and Part 2: Part 2 is under part 3 on this page. Part 2 will make more sense if you read part 1 first. You can find Part 1 in the archive (grey column left of the page) in the 12/08--12/14/2002 archive, under Part 2 which also comes first on that page (so scroll down to Part one). Guess what? Part 3 is under Part 4 which is under Part 5 on this very page.
On To: Part 4
The Interview With Boris on The Subject of G-d continued from Part 3; where Bernard was saying to Boris "...you still have to show me why the belief in reincarnationmay be tenable .Read on for Boris' answer.
Synopsis:
If you read the synopsis before skip down to Part 4 (blog) for some more of Boris' rap on Being and such!
Boris Dov Lanter, an American, New York Jewish guy, is an internationally known celebrity who had been a professional painter living in Kaasdorp (Lit: Cheese Town) Holland. He became famous not because of his paintings but for inventing, or creating, kind of a kitsch spiritually-material 'teaching' called "The Gift". When marketed "The Gift" outsold pet rocks, cabbage dolls, hula-hoops, and all the other previous worldwide fads and marketing phenomenon. Consequently, many spiritually starving, confused individuals look to Boris as a Guru; that is a notion, which Boris ridicules publicly, time and time again. Boris has "taken refuge" in the Buddha and considers himself a Buddhist. He takes his spirituality seriously: however, because he was born Jewish-is still a culinary Jew-and gets a kick out his Jewish brethren; he answers, "I'm Buddhish!' when asked his religion.
Because of his following, the continuing marketing success of "The Gift", and his outlandishly extroverted performances on celebrity interview shows, a major publisher commissioned Bernard Wisser to write his Biography. Wisser is world renowned for his hip biographies, the most famous being, the official biography of Mick Jagger titled "The Unrolling Rolling Stone." Boris and Bernard, who Boris calls Nardo or Nard, have been friends for years and love to diss each other; therefore, Boris agrees to have his good buddy Nardo write his biography; figuring, anyone reading his life story immediately will shed the notion that he Boris, is a Guru and will perhaps find a legitimate teacher or spiritual path.
The two buddies keep up there kibitzing ways constantly teasing each other and pointing out each others foibles, and flaws all during the course of the interviews, while working on the biography, and their 'raps' becomes interwoven into the writing of the biography.
Bernard has been trying to rein Boris in from the beginning; since, Boris has a tendency to meander, and has many tricky ways of seducing Bernard into spending time listening to his rambling anecdotes. Originally, Nardo had allocated two years time to writing the book but now five years has passed and Boris is only 10 years old in the Biography. It has become obvious they will not be able to cover Boris' whole life, so they are thinking about ending the book when Boris attains manhood with his Bar Mitzvah.
In the Following Chapter Bernard (the biographer) decides to break away from the form "I Do Art.." has taken so far, (if you can call it a form) and conduct an interview with Boris on the subject of his spiritual beliefs and his beliefs about God.
The Interview With Boris on The Subject of G-d
I have decided this Part will be conducted like a magazine interview. In case you have Mad Human's Disease and cannot put it together BW stands for me Bernard Wisser, and BDL stand for Boris Dov Lanter--enjoy :
Part 4 (Blog)
We left off with:
BW:"... I think the example you gave about music or mathematical ability appearing in one lifetime but not another actually weakens the case for both karma and reincarnation, since karma on one level is an explanatory concept for the continuity of personality throughout life times. So, you still have to show me why the belief in reincarnation may be tenable."
BDL: What can I say Nardo, “When you are right, you are right, except when your being right is wrong.” All kidding aside, I think your critique is valid as far as it goes and I went. However, after having laid the groundwork which is what I have been doing, now I will try to answer your questions more directly, as well as respond to your perceptive observations. First, I have to get out of this philosophical type of rapping and talk more like my everyday self, if Ican.
My teacher always said to me, “In your approach to Buddhist practice be a scientist Boris. Bracket your skepticism and follow the different practices.Then look at the results. If they seem to be effective, keep going, if not, stop practicing. Spirituality is about freeing yourself.” Therefore, that’s what I have been doing and I haven’t been tempted to dropout yet. In fact, it’s my practice that is strengthening my belief in the possibility of Reincarnation. Watching is a very important part of my practice. Watching when a thought arises, and tracing it to its source is difficult to do and learn;moreover, it is clear, that it gets even more difficult while you are involved in your every day activities.
You see, what I meant earlier, by thoughts and feelings going into orbit, is that if I catch them quick enough than I can say to myself (almost instantaneously) “hey that’s a very interesting thought,” or “that’s a heavy feeling.” “Next!" That’s difficult enough to do when sitting and contemplating, but try doing
meditation in action.
Believe me that's more than difficult. For example, the other day I was dealing
with a bureaucratic bank teller who seemed bent on totally treating me like a
non-person. I tried talking to her on a heart to heart basis, but she wasn’t,
hearing me. She made it clear that she wouldn’t tolerate any criticism of the
bank, herself, my frustration, or any displeasure on my part with how I was
being treated. It was obvious (to me) in her book the customer was always
wrong if complaining about the quality of service they were receiving.
I know you are not easy to snow but just in case I’ve succeeded in snowing you
just a little, I want to confess, that more often than not, when I’m not
sitting, I forget to watch my thoughts and feeling as they arise. I hook into
them, and get totally immersed in the story I’m creating. Thank the Source, I
don’t do it as often as I did before I started practicing, but it happens too
often to suit me. And that's also is, a gigantic understatement.
Believe me, in the bank teller situation, I was increasingly but silently tagging labels on the bank teller, such as, "spoiled little bitch,” and
“ball cutter”. Like I said, in those instances, I am completely caught up in my
story unreal or incomplete as it might be. I even forget my “little bitchy bank
teller” is also potentially a Buddha and can arrive at Buddhahood. I didn’t
recall, that at a greater level of reality, her and I are not separate beings.
Heck, it is difficult enough to practice “Do until others as you would have
them do unto you” but try practicing it when dealing with “little spoiled,
snippy female bank teller” like the one I’m telling you about. Well what can I
tell you--that’s when the raging bull--the Boris I know so well, decided to
appear and make his existence known. Oy!
BW: Wow! Where did you go? Reincarnation! Remember?
BDL: Hold your horses Bernard! I’m getting there. Let’s see, where was I--oh
yeah--earlier, I said something about--during experiences like that one--I get
so identified with my names and labels, so caught up in my story about what’s
happening to me, that I forget to practice until some not so nice aspect of my
personality takes center stage--but that’s not quite true for in fact--my
witness is working overtime during those minor ordeals. There is a part of me
that really knows what’s going on: how I want act, what I want to do with my
feelings, and thoughts; how I want to perceive and be with others…a lot of good
that does. That part of me is even giving me a klop on my kop every few
seconds, “Hey!” But, the klops are like when you are in a supermarket, and your
kid keeps tugging on your jacket sleeve, saying “Daddy”. You’re just too
involved in shopping to pay attention; only, this time the kid is trying to
tell you your coat is on fire.
BW: Boris, you are driving me crazy--get to your point about
reincarnation--will you?
BDL: I thought a smart guy like you might have figured it out by now! My point
is that I have been practicing (somewhat) for nineteen years now. On a relative
level I can detect the fruits of my effort--especially in feeling an increasing
sense of compassion, diminishment of expectations and fear, a continuing
experience of inner contentment, and in many other ways--yet, in any absolute
sense, I’m still feel like a pre-schooler. I believe it’s possible to become
fully enlightened, etc, and at my rate it will take umpteen, umpteen lifetimes
to accomplish it. So if achieving Buddhahood is truly the raison d'être for
being human I better hope reincarnation is a real phenomenon.
BW: First you say everybody is a Buddha, and then you talk about lifetimes
trying to achieve Buddhahood--somehow being Buddha and having to achieve
Buddhahood bothers me. Why would a perfectly enlightened being have had to
achieve enlightenment?
BDL: What do you think I’m a guru or something? Seriously, it rather simple if
you don’t ask ‘why that has to be’ or ‘how did it happen that a Buddha can come
into the world deluded.’
How I understand it is, every human has the potential to become fully
enlightened, or to fully understand their true nature, the nature of Reality
and break all attachment to false stories, ideas, and concepts that has
hindered that understanding. In short you can become liberated or saved from
the consequences of samsara, or the world, and the suffering that
denotes--which is the same thing as achieving Buddhahood.
Becoming a Buddha is quite an achievement. That’s probably one of the biggest
understatements ever made or that you will ever read. Maybe that can be a blurb
on the cover of this biography. “The most colossal understatement ever made, is
contained herein”.
It easy to talk about cutting through delusion; however even to a mind that can
contemplate Samsara, which in the delusion class, is truly the heavy weight
champion of the world--with its concomitant adamantine projections of a
separate self, and separate phenomena, and their substantiality. All but the
most liberated perceive its projections as even more solidly real and
substantial than the most formidably hard rock. Surely, you can see where it
takes a diamond-like will to ultimately cut through those perceptions.
In every endeavor, practice increases ones strength and skill--and so it does
in the pursuit of liberation from the delusion that any one of us is separated
from Reality, the Source, or from each other, and all that stuff.
Although being a Buddhist means taking refuge in the Buddha as a guide, a map,
a trainer, and a supreme teacher he is also worshiped by many for the diamond
like will he demonstrated, both materially, and spiritually, serving as an
inspiration for all, that suffering can truly be, totally overcome. The fact
that it took him millions of lifetimes and perhaps aeons and aeons to
accomplish it does not diminish the power of that effort, the effort of a
Supreme Spiritual Warrior.
Moreover, even the tiniest effort to achieve that level, pays dividends in the
reduction of your own suffering and that of others. As you become focused on
suffering, your compassion increases and you become even more motivated to
focus. When focused on the shortness and fragility of life, you find you
appreciate, each renewed moment of living as a gift to be cherished and used a
little more wisely than squandering it away. The tragedy of youth is, it cannot
relate to how truly short, and fragile life is; while the tragedy of being old
is the realization, of how stupidly you squandered away your youth especially
when you know death is sitting on your left shoulder and swinging it’s legs
while it is waiting to take you away.
Now you are the one who distracted me, I want to get on with our discussion of
reincarnation…
BW: Hold it Boris! Did you ever consider that all that Buddhist stuff about
reincarnation was meant to be taken symbolically--not literally? Perhaps the
whole concept poetically denotes, the determination and diamond like will,
required to cut through the causes of suffering, a will as hard as a diamond,
so strong that one would think, it takes lifetime and Aeons to develop.
After all, Krishna Murti says it can be done this lifetime, or this very moment
for that matter.
BDL: Oh, Oh, Oh! Whew, you’re right! Suddenly, I’m fully enlightened, thank
you, thank you, for opening my eyes. All kidding aside Bernardo, there is a
degree of truth in your observation, and I too have thought of about it being
too literal of an idea. However, I’m in process of letting go of that
possibility.
Now as far as Krishna Murti--I feel like I’m talking about an ex-lover with
those same pangs of regret I have felt before when thinking about ex-lovers--I
had such a spiritual crush on him. Anyway, his essential message (as I
remember) was, you could become enlightened this very moment. Who’s to argue?
Enlightenment always occurs in some moment. According to Murti, (or Lanter’s
understanding of him) you just have to authentically Be Here Now. Mahayana
Buddhism emphasizes that theoretically Total Enlightenment can be achieved in
this lifetime; However, Mahayana sects offer practices to help you achieve it.
That’s what I felt lacking with Krishna Murti. I read his book, saw movies
about him, etc. but when it came down to it I never felt I was developing in
anyway except I was feeling very hopeful--for a while--before I crashed. I
could never articulate practices in his writings, and I really couldn’t proceed
no matter how much of his teaching I acquainted my self with.
My wisdom compared to Murti’s is as large as a speck of dust. But, for me there
was two problems with his approach: American’s in particular and Westerners in
general love short cuts. However, the Murti shortcut was not shortcut at all
for me. It was like I wanted to travel, to San Francisco, but my plane froze on
the ground, it did not even freeze in mid-air. The second problem--as far as
reincarnation--citing Murti’s ideas, seems to me to be begging the question.
Even if you attain enlightenment this very moment Nardo, does that mean you
haven’t practiced in lifetime after lifetime, all it proves is that
enlightenment does occur. Of course as an American, I like the idea of winning
The Most Valuable Player Award in one lifetime without having to have paid my
dues in the minor leagues. Many “born again” people believe taking refuge in a
Holy Incarnation, results in immediate salvation, without becoming Him (cloning
his ways and practices). I find that hard to believe. It smacks of spiritual
materialism, or foo-foo land magical thinking to me. However, who knows the way
things really work?
BW: I could dig that Boris. Nevertheless, the fact, that it is almost
impossible to become enlightened in one lifetime, doesn’t negate the
possibility that just may be our human predicament: to hunger for enlightenment
and not be able to attain it in the time given to us. You yourself indicated
any effort in that direction carries with it some degree of liberation from
one’s own conditioning and suffering. So, what do you have to lose if there is
no such thing as reincarnation? Why bother with that concept. Do you have any
other reasons for reifying it?
What does Boris have to lose if there is no such thing as reincarnation? Does he
have a problem? Don't give any glib answers to those questions like, "You
can't lose what you don't have!." Check in next week and read what Boris
.
SUBSCRIBE TO HodpodgeBlog BELOW--
STATE YOUR MIND--OR ASK FOR ADVICE: CLICK BELOW
RATE THIS JOURNAL? COLUMN? BLOG...WHAT EVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT...below... Top Colored button means "great!" Bottom colored button means "Feh!"
I’m going to try make this a weekly column, but I might miss a day now and then. If you are smart or not so smart you will solicit my ADVICE—it’s free…I love to give ADVICE! You are also invited to send me your criticism, or you can contribute your own material for publication. Make this your site also--use the Forum Box above. Click into HodgepodgeBlog every week.Also, you can now click to this website by using my new quick redirect URL: http://clik.to/BernardDovWisser I sure appreciate your interest and would love your participation.
Click Here, for a Great Art Site Worth Checking Out
