Archived_member14
SPNer
JimRinX,
I don’t know what pan-religionist is, but after reading your first sentence, the idea of “khoa pad ruam mitr” or ‘fried rice with assorted meats’ cropped into my mind. This was once a popular dish served in Thailand which I never really enjoyed since it had beside egg, pork, chicken, cuttlefish, prawn and crab meat and I could never really get a good taste of any of these meats. And as I read on, “Radha Soami” also came to mind, and this is something I’ve always felt aversion towards.
Lao Tzu, I used to like once and even had five different versions of Tao Te Ching. But this was when I was strongly attracted to Mahayana Buddhism as you are, but before I finally settled on the Theravada tradition. Now I don’t read anything else and disagree with the basic positions of all other religions. I’m particularly critical of Mahayana Buddhism, but more off-putting is the tendency to take ideas from this and that religion and trying to create some sort of amalgam. Or having some vague idea about “enlightenment”, projecting this and claiming then that all “paths lead to the same goal”. Or those who after studying the various religions, conclude that different religions are aimed at different levels in the ‘spectrum of consciousness’, and create all sorts of new theories in the process and as consequence.
JimRinX, you may or may not like to discuss any of this. But if you do, then I suggest that we start a new thread in the Interfaith Dialogues section.
I'm a Westerner and, though I list myself as Mahayana Budhist (and my answer will reflect that!), I'm really more of a 'Pan-Religionist' - so I think some references from other beliefs will be the best response; as Sikhism, it would seem to me, is a perfect - or near perfect - Belief, because it seems to encompase ALL of the Kernels Of Truth that most other Beliefs only teach some of.
Thus: I think reading (or re-reading) Lao Tsu would help you find the answer you seek; just as it would also help you to remember that this is a Samsara Realm - one where the ordinary temptations of Maya are part of the 'curriculum'; the 'study course' of Life itself, by which we are able, through action and interaction with the temptations and challenges of ordinary existence, achieve the Higher State (Nirvana) of Consciousness that we MUST achieve to be accepted, and thus to stay in Shambala (or; to be released from the cycle of death and rebirth).
I don’t know what pan-religionist is, but after reading your first sentence, the idea of “khoa pad ruam mitr” or ‘fried rice with assorted meats’ cropped into my mind. This was once a popular dish served in Thailand which I never really enjoyed since it had beside egg, pork, chicken, cuttlefish, prawn and crab meat and I could never really get a good taste of any of these meats. And as I read on, “Radha Soami” also came to mind, and this is something I’ve always felt aversion towards.
Lao Tzu, I used to like once and even had five different versions of Tao Te Ching. But this was when I was strongly attracted to Mahayana Buddhism as you are, but before I finally settled on the Theravada tradition. Now I don’t read anything else and disagree with the basic positions of all other religions. I’m particularly critical of Mahayana Buddhism, but more off-putting is the tendency to take ideas from this and that religion and trying to create some sort of amalgam. Or having some vague idea about “enlightenment”, projecting this and claiming then that all “paths lead to the same goal”. Or those who after studying the various religions, conclude that different religions are aimed at different levels in the ‘spectrum of consciousness’, and create all sorts of new theories in the process and as consequence.
JimRinX, you may or may not like to discuss any of this. But if you do, then I suggest that we start a new thread in the Interfaith Dialogues section.