It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

When does a group belief become a cult and why?

page: 8
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Nichiren
 





I like the way you think. Do you mind if I probe a bit further? You keep saying that:

"This has to be lost because it is completely about physical existence. Ultimately there is no difference between matter (physical existence) and mind (experience). "

I don't subscribe to this dualistic view. Consciousness and form are intertwined. Buddhists believe that even inorganic objects have consciousness.
I think that our "personal agendas" cannot be destroyed. That's why I believe in past life regressions. It's all in our DNA, which in turn is more than just amino acids.


One thing after another


In Buddhism "the eye is what the eye sees". Consciousness is exactly the same as its "contents". "Empty consciousness" exists only as a concept.
Therefore, related to the idea of reincarnation, "what you see in this life" is your consciousness, and when your body dies, your consciousness will be lost with it. That's why it cannot be reborn.

Personal agenda is not personal experience. DNA is an aggregate just like Ego. Both are disintegrated when death occurs.

What is not affected by death, strictly speaking as a Buddhist, is "what is not created". Buddhas famous claim is "sabe sankara annica" - "all creations are impermanent".

What is not created is knowledge, the force, the metaphysical, nirvana, the incomprehensible - our experience. Think of it as of a "quantum package". It is an energy charge, the only thing that cannot be deconstructed and against which we cannot possibly go, because we would be in denial. This energy package is what is always there and you can attach another physical existence to it, for as long as it lasts - another life. When this life passes, what is left is again this energy package, hopefully enlarged by additional experience.

Once this experience becomes the experience of totality of ourselves, the awakened one (Buddha) or Arahat, is no more a subject to involuntary rebirth. It is all up to him now whether he will stay in the state of nirvana (absolutely detached and unaffected by ideas and emotions) or keep existing in present human form within the boundaries of Samsara.

In Buddhism this latter is the concept of Bodhisattva, the enlightened one who refuses to enter into nirvana because he deems to be obliged to help others to reach enlightenment.

The motivation for Bodhisattva, who is detached by definition, must be provided by those who are in need of help, or else he will stay indifferent.

The concept of Bodhisattva clearly indicates the understanding that we are "all one", that we are interconnected (when I say we I mean all sentient beings, even all living beings). So Bodhisattva has to be around until all Universe is delivered from suffering (ignorance).

Please understand that in Buddhism life is the direct result of ignorance. Buddha is not about saving life (life is not sacred in that respect). Buddha is about saving from life, by saving from ignorance.




posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Green
 





You say rejoice while the pain lasts? why?


I say this (this is a verse from a poem) as a paraphrase of Buddha's:

"all creations are impermanent"

Therefore, pain will inevitably pass. And you rejoice because as it happens and passes away, you extract knowledge and experience from this life, in which there is pain, among other things.

Understanding is experienced as joy, and this joy is permanent, as opposed to transient emotions.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Green
 


Being alone is not the same as being lonely


Lonely is a feeling, and guess what, it is a feeling of self pity


We are all alone, and that's why we are One and the Same


We share everything as the Awakened One.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by headlightone
 


If one person believes Jedi is a religeon, they're a nut job
If two people believe Jedi is a religeon, they're crazy
If a Dozen people believe Jedi is a Religeon, that's a cult
If a Million people believe the Jedi thing, it's a religeon

Once you reach the Religeon status the Organisation doesn't have to
pay tax. The problem is going from 12 to a million.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
What is not created is knowledge, the force, the metaphysical, nirvana, the incomprehensible - our experience. Think of it as of a "quantum package". It is an energy charge, the only thing that cannot be deconstructed and against which we cannot possibly go, because we would be in denial. This energy package is what is always there and you can attach another physical existence to it, for as long as it lasts - another life. When this life passes, what is left is again this energy package, hopefully enlarged by additional experience.

Once this experience becomes the experience of totality of ourselves, the awakened one (Buddha) or Arahat, is no more a subject to involuntary rebirth. It is all up to him now whether he will stay in the state of nirvana (absolutely detached and unaffected by ideas and emotions) or keep existing in present human form within the boundaries of Samsara.

In Buddhism this latter is the concept of Bodhisattva, the enlightened one who refuses to enter into nirvana because he deems to be obliged to help others to reach enlightenment.

The motivation for Bodhisattva, who is detached by definition, must be provided by those who are in need of help, or else he will stay indifferent.

The concept of Bodhisattva clearly indicates the understanding that we are "all one", that we are interconnected (when I say we I mean all sentient beings, even all living beings). So Bodhisattva has to be around until all Universe is delivered from suffering (ignorance).

Please understand that in Buddhism life is the direct result of ignorance. Buddha is not about saving life (life is not sacred in that respect). Buddha is about saving from life, by saving from ignorance.





Like headlightone as I read more and more on the ways of Buddhism I find it has some truth for me. However this goes (I think) in direct opposition to what SS,Naga says, he says we should not re incarnate as this only slows down all reaching the one.

I think we are an energy packages, we are not our DNA and we are not our bodies.

Ive read before about the Bodhisattva, and find this concept fascinating. To give up so much to bring on others like that is a truely selfless act.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   
If I am not mistaken...isn't it a goal (so to speak) in Buddhusm to get off the wheel of reincarnation like SS Naga said. To reach the point of NO karma,not bad karma not good karma so you have no reason to reincarnate?

Also to be in the center of the swing in the pendulem.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by Mr Green
 


Being alone is not the same as being lonely


Lonely is a feeling, and guess what, it is a feeling of self pity


We are all alone, and that's why we are One and the Same


We share everything as the Awakened One.


I dont feel lonely, I dont think I put I was lonely did I? Nope re checked post I said I now know Im alone. Gosh my house is so loud most of the day there is no way I could feel lonely in here! No I know spiritualy now I am alone and for me it is just how it should be.
I no longer need the comfort of a group to give me answers.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by cindymars
If I am not mistaken...isn't it a goal (so to speak) in Buddhusm to get off the wheel of reincarnation like SS Naga said. To reach the point of NO karma,not bad karma not good karma so you have no reason to reincarnate?

Also to be in the center of the swing in the pendulem.


Yes I guess it is and maybe this is why the Bodhisattva come down to help as many as possible get off the wheel of incarnation. So maybe these two posters are actually talking about the same thing ?



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Green
 





Like headlightone as I read more and more on the ways of Buddhism I find it has some truth for me. However this goes (I think) in direct opposition to what SS,Naga says, he says we should not re incarnate as this only slows down all reaching the one. I think we are an energy packages, we are not our DNA and we are not our bodies. Ive read before about the Bodhisattva, and find this concept fascinating. To give up so much to bring on others like that is a truely selfless act.


Bodhisattva is giving up absolutely nothing


For the awakened one time/space is something absolutely exhausted and therefore he/she is not affected by it.

Try to understand this:

Where there are ideas and emotions - there is no knowledge.
Where there is knowledge - there are no ideas and emotions.

Ideas, emotions, will - they are one and same: projection (illusion).
This projection burns (our) energy.

Castaneda (who was a master of Buddhism) wrote about "alien shadow beings" (or inorganic beings) who feed on our energy.
He claimed that "our mind" is actually "the alien mind".

Castaneda wrote his holistic philosophy in a form of incredible fiction, and created unforgettable parables which attracted many people who liked his sensibility.

I don't think Naga disagrees with this. Perhaps he wants to emphasize the necessity that one first takes care he is on the right path and collects the energy - that is the mandatory thing.

What Bodhisattva (or Nagual) does is not fantasize about saving people, he acts and by acting he confirms himself within the force. He becomes the active principle, and because of that he is now capable of sharing (and emanating).

Therefore, the proper course of action is that one must, in the first place, accomplish the task of enlightening himself (becoming a Man of knowledge, in Castaneda's terms, or Buddha) and then he is free to act in whichever manner or domain he chooses.

The Awakened one does this as a gesture to spirit, as if "returning" the favor that was previously granted to him. That is my understanding of compassion.




[edit on 4-3-2009 by DangerDeath]



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic_al
reply to post by headlightone
 


If one person believes Jedi is a religeon, they're a nut job
If two people believe Jedi is a religeon, they're crazy
If a Dozen people believe Jedi is a Religeon, that's a cult
If a Million people believe the Jedi thing, it's a religeon





I think you have just answered the OPs questions about when does a group belief become a cult and why.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by cindymars
If I am not mistaken...isn't it a goal (so to speak) in Buddhusm to get off the wheel of reincarnation like SS Naga said. To reach the point of NO karma,not bad karma not good karma so you have no reason to reincarnate?

Also to be in the center of the swing in the pendulem.


I've tried to explain this in my previous post.

When Buddha attained awakening, he went to Varanasi (Benares) to "turn the Wheel of Dharma". This marks the beginning of his teaching. He was able to do this after he eliminated all bad karma effects, thus he was able to attain "reaction" to his acting immediately - an awakened one receives the "fruit of his actions" immediately. He doesn't wait for reaction, as projected in time and place, to happen.

This is why Buddha's position is in one-pointedness (samadhi) of the now. He is no more subject to projection or change.

Interesting enough, Castaneda claimed that his intent was to "move the assembly point of Earth" - the "focus". He claimed that Earth was a sentient being of which we all were part. To move this focus from the present sorrowful and tragic position of human race.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by cindymars
 





not bad karma not good karma so you have no reason to reincarnate?


I will repeat:
Because of this, Bodhisattva must be "provided" the motivation by the one who needs help. He doesn't have a "reason" of his own, really.



[edit on 4-3-2009 by DangerDeath]



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by DangerDeath
 


I politely disagree with you and I'm not sure you understood what I was trying to get at. But that's my failure ...

I'm a Nichiren Buddhist and have stated that we have many different schools of thought in Buddhism. You seem to know a lot of Buddhist jargon, but I'm always a bit sceptic when somebody tries to speak for all of Buddhism. Which Buddhist school do you follow?



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nichiren
reply to post by DangerDeath
 


I politely disagree with you and I'm not sure you understood what I was trying to get at. But that's my failure ...

I'm a Nichiren Buddhist and have stated that we have many different schools of thought in Buddhism. You seem to know a lot of Buddhist jargon, but I'm always a bit sceptic when somebody tries to speak for all of Buddhism. Which Buddhist school do you follow?



Theravada, that is, Orthodox Buddhism relying on original Buddha's Sutras.
I am also familiar with Chan or Zen Buddhism, and especially appreciate Lin Chi and Hui Neng contribution to Buddhism. And Bashoo. And Suzuki. And many others.

You are free to give your own explanation.

Come and see



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath

Originally posted by Nichiren
reply to post by DangerDeath
 


I politely disagree with you and I'm not sure you understood what I was trying to get at. But that's my failure ...

I'm a Nichiren Buddhist and have stated that we have many different schools of thought in Buddhism. You seem to know a lot of Buddhist jargon, but I'm always a bit sceptic when somebody tries to speak for all of Buddhism. Which Buddhist school do you follow?



Theravada, that is, Orthodox Buddhism relying on original Buddha's Sutras.
I am also familiar with Chan or Zen Buddhism, and especially appreciate Lin Chi and Hui Neng contribution to Buddhism. And Bashoo. And Suzuki. And many others.

You are free to give your own explanation.

Come and see


What do you mean by Orthodox Buddhism? I'm interested!



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Nichiren
 


From Wikipedia




Theravada (Pāli: थेरवाद theravāda (cf Sanskrit: स्थविरवाद sthaviravāda); literally, "the Teaching of the Elders" or "the Ancient Teaching", is the oldest surviving Buddhist school. It was founded in India. It is relatively conservative, and generally closest to early Buddhism,[1] and for many centuries has been the predominant religion of Sri Lanka (about 70% of the population[2]) and most of continental Southeast Asia (Cambodia, Laos, Burma, Thailand). It is also practiced by minorities in parts of southwest China (by the Shan and Tai ethnic groups), Vietnam (by the Khmer Krom), Bangladesh (by the ethnic groups of Baruas, Chakma, and Magh), Malaysia and Indonesia, whilst recently gaining popularity in Singapore and the Western World. Today Theravada Buddhists number over 100 million worldwide, and in recent decades Theravada has begun to take root in the West and in the Buddhist revival in India.


en.wikipedia.org...

I've spent 5 months in a monastery in Sri Lanka and that's where I started to study Buddhism (along with Castaneda, and found lots of similarity between these two philosophical systems).

Basically, Buddhism is not a religion. It is existential philosophy, but there is this religious aspect in practice of many people. Personally, I am only interested in philosophy as means of articulating my "mystical" experience of freeing myself from ignorance.

Here are some articles by a bhikkhu Nyanajivako, whom I met in Nuwara Elia, a philosopher from Yugoslavia who moved to Ceylon and become a Buddhist priest. He was a fascinating and enlightened man and it took me years to understand his points from our conversation. Anyway, I feel obliged to him for the knowledge he shared with me.

Maybe you will find your answer here, he was probably better than I in explaining Buddhism.

www.yu-budizam.com...


About karma:

www.yu-budizam.com...

And another one:

www.yu-budizam.com...

[edit on 4-3-2009 by DangerDeath]

[edit on 4-3-2009 by DangerDeath]



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic_al

If one person believes Jedi is a religion, they're a nut job
If two people believe Jedi is a religion, they're crazy
If a dozen people believe Jedi is a religion, that's a cult
If a million people believe the Jedi thing, it's a religion

Once you reach the religion status the organization doesn't have to
pay tax. The problem is going from 12 to a million.

Very clever.


And with more than just a grain of truth behind it too



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 10:53 PM
link   
To a great degree, something being a cult is not like being dead or pregnant, it's not merely either/or. For example, the initial 'requirements' for something being a cult (as quoted in OP) involve money, but I have known tons of really obvious, textbook case cults that did not involve money, and whose recruitment if any was very limited.

Cultism is a spectrum, a sliding scale if you will; it starts with 'rapport' and goes toward 'group think' and continues into 'clique' and escalates into 'cult-ish' and finally into 'cult'.

One of my main hobbies is in a field where this kind of thing is rampant. It comes in degrees and most groups have some elements and not others, but in the end it comes down to "when leader-worship goes bad" (which is, you won't be surprised to know, easily correlated to when the leader is an egomaniac).

It's a rather sad thing. People really get sucked in so hard sometimes that you realize you just can't get them out. They need to be "deprogrammed" as much as any Moonie ever needed.

PJ

[edit on 4-3-2009 by RedCairo]



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 10:55 PM
link   

reply to post by headlightone
If one person believes Jedi is a religeon, they're a nut job
If two people believe Jedi is a religeon, they're crazy
If a Dozen people believe Jedi is a Religeon, that's a cult
If a Million people believe the Jedi thing, it's a religeon

Once you reach the Religeon status the Organisation doesn't have to
pay tax. The problem is going from 12 to a million.


That's great! Very quoteable.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by violet

Some are able to leave but won't leave out of fear that's been instilled in them. It's like an inivisible fence, the followers are taught not to go outside of the boundaries. I recall watching a documentary, and journalists joined a group under cover to secretly tape what was going on, and at one point the journalist was finding it difficult to stay on task. She admitted she was beginning to fall for all that the leader was preaching.

[edit on 4-3-2009 by violet]


Here lies the problem of following a group or cult. Some start to want to leave through their own awarness but find as they try they hit this invisable boundary set out by the guru.
Also you make another important point, those that arnt really interested in the cults message , (as this journalist was) or maybe just enquire, if they stay around long enough they may find it actually starts to work on their mind too. This is a trap that may fall into without even realizing it.




top topics



 
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join