And no he does not masturbate to the image. I am pondering of either seeing a psych doc with him or his PCP. Apparently this has been going on for the past 2 years.
And no he does not masturbate to the image. I am pondering of either seeing a psych doc with him or his PCP. Apparently this has been going on for the past 2 years.
Sorry what is TEC?
I like how you worded this as different perspectives and focuses with potential a singular underlying messages rather than the common saying, which I dislike, of they’re different paths up the same mountain.
May I ask how do you handle big and/or cosmological differences? Or do you focus on the advaita one’s? One of the biggest reasons I haven’t studied any form of Hinduism is the main Buddhist critiques of it. Non-self/atman, anti-caste, no eternal source, and no creator god. I also, find the three marks of existence quite logical as well as the four noble truths. Though I study it academically I also follow it personally. If I understand correctly your current method or interest is taking advaita as your core but studying traditions around it to gain other perspectives? It’s fun that the Buddha ran into some big religious traditions if his time and had debates with them so there is a record of exactly the sort of back and forth you are interested in.
Have you watched Let’s Talk Religion’s videos on Advaita? They’re pretty interesting. Watched them a while back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMEsszfBYMo&pp=ygUHYWR2YWl0YQ%3D%3D
May I ask what about nondualism interests you? And what about Kashmiri Shaivism carried this interest? What is the difference with Shiva as center? What does that imply for the practice?
I actually used to have this understanding as well until I read this book by James Laidlaw: https://archive.org/details/richesrenunciati0000laid His main point, which is a good point to understand for religion in general, is that in Jainism as understood through its texts and Jainism as its lived can be wildly different traditions with little pressure for lay people to renounce. The particular city he did his fieldwork in showed that many Jains were wildly rich though they supported those who renounced. If you only approach it from its texts it appears the only point of the traditions is to renounce. This is was a pretty eye opening moment for me in school that lived religion is the best approach. This comes as a critique of how early Protestant scholars of religion only studied religions based on what their texts said then would label its followers as good or bad based on that. If one follows this method there are few Buddhists in East Asia, when in reality there are millions.
I guess because of my more Buddhist views I have trouble being interested in more creator centered traditions. I, like you, was brought up Christian and one of the big eye opening moments for me in Buddhism besides emptiness and impermanence was no creator god. In the nondualism you study is Brahman necessarily a creator god or are there forms where they are not?
I hope I don’t come off as aggressively Buddhist. I also enjoy reading about what your talking about. Really fun to listen to podcasts on all of it and Great Courses talks. Studying at the phd level has somewhat ripped away my non-Buddhist time and care since it’s my job lol.
When I was more Buddhist-Christian I really did enjoy such nondualist traditions within Abrahamic and potentially South Asian religions as they sort of bridged my way.
IDK if I already asked it but what particularly about nondualism interests you? And outside of that what about those two traditions way above interest you? What made them click moving from Christianity?
I like this metaphor!
Taking this and going back to your comment on universalism. How do you think that can work when there are radically different core beliefs? Makes me think of the Chinese Yiguandao religion which stems from the sanjiao or three teachings tradition mixing Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, Christianity, and Islam, lol.
Oh yeah this is also very fun. Like how Gilgamesh contains the story of Noah and the flood way before the Tanak wrote it. I find it difficult to balance these manners of thinking. On the one hand I believe Buddhism to be true but find other traditions interesting and potentially helpful. On the other hand I academically recognize the truth in thousands of years of traditions radically affecting one another. I don’t like to randomly mix traditions but I do see “native” followers doing so in more traditional manners such as sanjiao and find it reasonable. On the other hand it makes me annoyed when people say it’s just multiple paths up the same mountain. This complication in both one’s religious life and one’s research of historical and modern traditions long influence is what makes religious such as interesting topic.
Same.
//these are rambles written very late at night. I hope it’s an engaging reply for you :) I’m gonna send this as a pm as well in case this gets deleted though I am on my own instance.
Thanks! I’m gonna reply once I’m on a computer to keep things organized.
But TEC is the episcopal church, sorry!