Matthew 6:26-34 26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? 27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? 28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, [shall he] not much more [clothe] you, O ye of little faith? 31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? 32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. 33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. 34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day [is] the evil thereof.
Proof by contradiction: Assume that not all numbers are interesting. Construct the set S of all (postive) numbers that are not interesting. That set will have a minimum - a number which in itself is quite interesting. But this cannot be, since it is a member of S.
QED
That concept actually pre-dates (ref to Galatians 6:7 ) Buddha.
There is much wisdom in the bible. When the bible talks of "ashes to ashes, dust to dust", Buddhists will recognise that as a teaching on impermanence and the unsatisfactory nature of existence.
Don't flame me if I have my facts wrong here, but I heard somewhere that early Christianity did believe in reincarnation, but that it got suppressed after awhile. And it's the The Church Of The Latterday Saints, or something (again, don't flame me for factual inaccuracy), that believe that Jesus was reborn in North America. Not that I'm trying claim that this "proves" reincarnation, you understand.
Although it seems you don't believe in Buddhism in it's purest sense.
The Buddha said that even his words needed to be examined. From the reincarnation angle, it's impossible to verify scientifically, and it's probably safe to say that many Buddhists have great doubts about the whole reincarnation thing. Still, I think it's possible to leave the issue of reincarnation aside, and ask to what extent the religion can still serve a purpose. And I find that Buddhism offers a great deal of insight into the nature of the world, and our purpose in life.
I still don't see how quokkapox's reference to karma and buddhism helps a trauma or rape victim in the now. His comment would be very inflamatory and insensitive to such readers. No hope whatsoever in that message.
Buddhism is no quick fix. Rape victims will most likely suffer. The Buddha pointed out that the world does indeed suck. The Buddha looked for a way out of suffering, and claimed to have found it. He did not say that it would be easy, only that it is possible. The rape victim suffers because of a sense of self. When the sense of self diminishes, and the anger is let go if, then the mental anguish will decline.
Once, a woman went to a monk with a very sick child, and asked what the child did to deserve such a punishment. The monk explained that although one could speculate about whether he liked to choke kittens and puppies in a previous life, the reason he has to suffer is because he was born.
And in that, I concede defeat. According to Buddhism, there is no soul, no permanent self. So the age-old question is "if there is no soul, then what gets reincarnated". No clearcut answers are usuallly forthcoming from monks, though.
Apparently there do exist, or did exist, people who could determine the fate of people after they died. Alas, there does not appear a way to determine the veracity of their claims.
Still, that's no reason why any of this should prevent one seeking Nirvana in this life. And since vipaka operates in this life, it is definitely worthwhile developing good karma. No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
The rotation of the earth perhaps could be the force behind gravity?
Sigh. It was a rhetorical question. The point was that noone sets up and administers gravity, it does it by itself. Likewise for karma. *that* was the point I was making.
The concept of karma where people reap what they sow in their next life is not. Reaping what you sow in this life might be realized i.e. smoking all your life might cause cancer.
The concept of karma does not state that what you sow in this life you will reap in the next. Karma is more down-to-earth than that. As your example stated, it's perfectly possible for bad karma to ripen in this life.
However the idea that you reap from unrelated events via karma is not observable.
Your comment does not contradict the principle of karma. Karma is about causes and effects. If an event has a result, then ipso facto it is related.
As an examaple, I went into a bookshop once, and picked up a book on buddhism. The book stated that the mere fact that I picked up the book was no accident, but essentially "had" to be. When you think about it, the author was speaking the truth. I was interested in buddhism, I decided to enter the bookshop, I went to the section on religion, etc.. Me picking up the book was the "fruition" of a whole string of previous karmas. All the events were related interdependently - there were no "unrelated" ones.
The whole karma / reincarnation concept is a total crock.
Karma means action. Vipaka means result. So the "karma concept" means that causes have results. Karma is the seed for vipaka. So karma isn't a weird concept, it's a verifiable fact. Good karma creates potential for good results, bad karma creates potential for bad results. Commit a crime, and you could end up in jail.
Now, you may be thinking that this is obvious - and you'd be right. Much trouble exists in this world because we either don't understand the principles of karma, or don't act in accordance with it.
All know the way; few actually walk it. -- Bodhidharma
Who setup and administers the reincarnation process?
When I was a kid, I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized that the Lord, in his wisdom, didn't work that way. So I just stole one and asked him to forgive me. -- Emo Phillips
I go to the rabbi and I ask him the meaning of life. He tells me the meaning of life, but he tells it to me in Hebrew. Then he wants to charge me $600 for Hebrew lessons. --Woody Allen
If someone did died (permantly or not) it will be replaced as soon as it needs to be. Geeks tend to like to have tools ready when they need them. So if one is missing theopen source geeks will start to work on it. No matter the name or brand everything will return from it's death in some form.
My god, I think the parent post just gave me an aneurysm.
No, not the Linux distribution, but a puzzle that was put to me in the 80's...
There's a game called the Red Hat Game. Each person has a coloured hat on their head, and they don't know what colour it is. The players are put into a room, where they can see each others hats. The purpose of the game is to work out the colour of one's own hat. The rules are: 1. if you see somebody with a red hat, you have to put up your hand. 2. when you've worked out the colour of your hat, you leave the room.
In one particular instance of the game, each player has a red hat. The players go into the room, and after awhile the most intelligent player leaves the room. The question is: how did he know he had a red hat?
The problem is one of logic - there's no trick solution.
'Standards for a safer world' is the theme of the message signed by the leaders of the three principal international standardization organizations to mark World Standards Day 2005.
Could anyone imagine a more boring and tedious event such as this?
They see standards as vital in disseminating [...] new technologies"
You've lost me. How does having standards improve the dissemination of new technology? Can't we just look at the internet, or look at the world around us with our eyes open.
I get the impression that these guys seem to think that the world would run more efficiently if only we had a lot more paperwork.
Considering that each and every word must be separated from each and every other word
You've obviously never programmed in FORTRAN;)
The proper quote is:
Consistently separating words by spaces became a general custom about the tenth century A.D., and lasted until about 1957, when FORTRAN abandoned the practice.
"moral of the story? if you have 1/2 a brain it is really easy to elude the police in "computer crime" and hide all your evidence easily. the only thing going for the police is that the typical criminal is working with 1/16th of a brain."
I'm being somewhat OT, but a case in point...
I live in a rural area. A few years ago, there was an armed bank robbery at a small village branch. I remember thinking that it was odd that the robbers chose that particular bank, and that they would have to be complete idiots if it was their local bank that they robbed. Sure enough, it turned out that there were known criminals with convictions for similar offenses in the area, which the coppers promptly nicked, and prosecuted.
I remember remarking at the time that it's a good job that criminals are so stupid, otherwise plod would never be able to catch them.
"Please remember that the most important role of American government is to make it safe to collect profits."
Holy crap, can anyone spell "capitalist pigshark"? Whilst acknowledging the view that capitalism is the most successful economic system that exists, isn't it just possible that we, as human beings, can aspire to something nobler than merely succumbing to outright greed at the expense of everybody else?
Some recruitment agency once 'phoned me up and asked if I had much experience with "algorithms". I tried to explain that the question was meaninglessly vague, and that all programs/are/ algorithms anyway. I don't think I got my point across, though. They probably thought I was being clever; but not in an employable sense of the word.
I also heard of a young woman who was contacted and asked if she had any experience in "C and two pluses".
Slashdot Mirror
Matthew 6:26-34 26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? 27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? 28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, [shall he] not much more [clothe] you, O ye of little faith? 31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? 32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. 33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. 34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day [is] the evil thereof.
I'm not sure about that - although I do know if you weigh as much as a duck, then you must be a witch.
Theorem: All numbers are interesting
Proof by contradiction: Assume that not all numbers are interesting. Construct the set S of all (postive) numbers that are not interesting. That set will have a minimum - a number which in itself is quite interesting. But this cannot be, since it is a member of S. QED
There is much wisdom in the bible. When the bible talks of "ashes to ashes, dust to dust", Buddhists will recognise that as a teaching on impermanence and the unsatisfactory nature of existence.
Don't flame me if I have my facts wrong here, but I heard somewhere that early Christianity did believe in reincarnation, but that it got suppressed after awhile. And it's the The Church Of The Latterday Saints, or something (again, don't flame me for factual inaccuracy), that believe that Jesus was reborn in North America. Not that I'm trying claim that this "proves" reincarnation, you understand.
Although it seems you don't believe in Buddhism in it's purest sense.
The Buddha said that even his words needed to be examined. From the reincarnation angle, it's impossible to verify scientifically, and it's probably safe to say that many Buddhists have great doubts about the whole reincarnation thing. Still, I think it's possible to leave the issue of reincarnation aside, and ask to what extent the religion can still serve a purpose. And I find that Buddhism offers a great deal of insight into the nature of the world, and our purpose in life.
I still don't see how quokkapox's reference to karma and buddhism helps a trauma or rape victim in the now. His comment would be very inflamatory and insensitive to such readers. No hope whatsoever in that message.
Buddhism is no quick fix. Rape victims will most likely suffer. The Buddha pointed out that the world does indeed suck. The Buddha looked for a way out of suffering, and claimed to have found it. He did not say that it would be easy, only that it is possible. The rape victim suffers because of a sense of self. When the sense of self diminishes, and the anger is let go if, then the mental anguish will decline.
Once, a woman went to a monk with a very sick child, and asked what the child did to deserve such a punishment. The monk explained that although one could speculate about whether he liked to choke kittens and puppies in a previous life, the reason he has to suffer is because he was born.
And in that, I concede defeat. According to Buddhism, there is no soul, no permanent self. So the age-old question is "if there is no soul, then what gets reincarnated". No clearcut answers are usuallly forthcoming from monks, though.
Apparently there do exist, or did exist, people who could determine the fate of people after they died. Alas, there does not appear a way to determine the veracity of their claims.
Still, that's no reason why any of this should prevent one seeking Nirvana in this life. And since vipaka operates in this life, it is definitely worthwhile developing good karma. No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
The rotation of the earth perhaps could be the force behind gravity?
Sigh. It was a rhetorical question. The point was that noone sets up and administers gravity, it does it by itself. Likewise for karma. *that* was the point I was making.
The concept of karma where people reap what they sow in their next life is not. Reaping what you sow in this life might be realized i.e. smoking all your life might cause cancer.
The concept of karma does not state that what you sow in this life you will reap in the next. Karma is more down-to-earth than that. As your example stated, it's perfectly possible for bad karma to ripen in this life.
However the idea that you reap from unrelated events via karma is not observable.
Your comment does not contradict the principle of karma. Karma is about causes and effects. If an event has a result, then ipso facto it is related.
As an examaple, I went into a bookshop once, and picked up a book on buddhism. The book stated that the mere fact that I picked up the book was no accident, but essentially "had" to be. When you think about it, the author was speaking the truth. I was interested in buddhism, I decided to enter the bookshop, I went to the section on religion, etc.. Me picking up the book was the "fruition" of a whole string of previous karmas. All the events were related interdependently - there were no "unrelated" ones.
Karma means action. Vipaka means result. So the "karma concept" means that causes have results. Karma is the seed for vipaka. So karma isn't a weird concept, it's a verifiable fact. Good karma creates potential for good results, bad karma creates potential for bad results. Commit a crime, and you could end up in jail.
Now, you may be thinking that this is obvious - and you'd be right. Much trouble exists in this world because we either don't understand the principles of karma, or don't act in accordance with it.
All know the way; few actually walk it. -- Bodhidharma
Who setup and administers the reincarnation process?
Who sets up and administers gravity?
Should array indices start at 0 or 1? My compromise of 0.5 was rejected without, I thought, proper consideration.
And then it's just a few short steps before not carrying a cell phone with you full time is considered some kind of indication of criminal activity.
shown to Euro MPs in a charm operation.
In my days, we called them charm offensives
We don't want to invade people's privacy too much
Isn't that sweet. It almost gives me the warm fuzzies, until the words Microsoft and Euro MPs were mentioned.
Soon I'll be able to browse for pr0n hands free =D
Yes. Something that can be controlled just by pointing.
I'm thinking ... Clippy TNG ... on steroids... in 3D. Plus, it should use up any spare CPU cycles to enhance the user experience.
When I was a kid, I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I
realized that the Lord, in his wisdom, didn't work that way. So I just stole
one and asked him to forgive me. -- Emo Phillips
I go to the rabbi and I ask him the meaning of life.
He tells me the meaning of life, but he tells it to me in Hebrew.
Then he wants to charge me $600 for Hebrew lessons. --Woody Allen
The CIO immediately thought I was going to do something terrible to the system, and destroy accounts, and any other activity that I have access to
My boss and co-workers generally feel the same way about me.
My god, I think the parent post just gave me an aneurysm.
If you die, I hope it will be nothing permanent.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
To do is to be - Nietzsche. To be is to do - Sartre. Do be do be do - Sinatra
TFA sucked. It had a "shop or compare prices" section at the end and you couldn't buy a zombie. Real slashdotters make their own.
No, not the Linux distribution, but a puzzle that was put to me in the 80's ...
There's a game called the Red Hat Game. Each person has a coloured hat on their head, and they don't know what colour it is. The players are put into a room, where they can see each others hats. The purpose of the game is to work out the colour of one's own hat. The rules are:
1. if you see somebody with a red hat, you have to put up your hand.
2. when you've worked out the colour of your hat, you leave the room.
In one particular instance of the game, each player has a red hat. The players go into the room, and after awhile the most intelligent player leaves the room. The question is: how did he know he had a red hat?
The problem is one of logic - there's no trick solution.
Could anyone imagine a more boring and tedious event such as this?
They see standards as vital in disseminating [...] new technologies"
You've lost me. How does having standards improve the dissemination of new technology? Can't we just look at the internet, or look at the world around us with our eyes open.
I get the impression that these guys seem to think that the world would run more efficiently if only we had a lot more paperwork.
You have no idea just how many psychopats theer are out there.
People are listening to too much Tsun Tsu, and not enough Gotama Buddha.
Looked at from that point of view, the solution to "too much office politics" is not "more politics".
Especially the children of future colonists that will live in the Bon Jovi crater.
Exactly! Why can't they give them more sensible names, like Hoary Hedgehog, or Breezy Badger.
The Egyptian beer (which built the pyramids) has been described as 'mildly alcoholic, liquid bread'
Interestingly, when making bread, Roman soldiers used to add beer to the dough to act a raising agent.
Considering that each and every word must be separated from each and every other word
;)
You've obviously never programmed in FORTRAN
The proper quote is:
Consistently separating words by spaces became a general custom about the tenth century A.D., and lasted until about 1957, when FORTRAN abandoned the practice.
-- Sun FORTRAN Reference Manual
"moral of the story? if you have 1/2 a brain it is really easy to elude the police in "computer crime" and hide all your evidence easily. the only thing going for the police is that the typical criminal is working with 1/16th of a brain."
...
I'm being somewhat OT, but a case in point
I live in a rural area. A few years ago, there was an armed bank robbery at a small village branch. I remember thinking that it was odd that the robbers chose that particular bank, and that they would have to be complete idiots if it was their local bank that they robbed. Sure enough, it turned out that there were known criminals with convictions for similar offenses in the area, which the coppers promptly nicked, and prosecuted.
I remember remarking at the time that it's a good job that criminals are so stupid, otherwise plod would never be able to catch them.
"Please remember that the most important role of American government is to make it safe to collect profits."
Holy crap, can anyone spell "capitalist pigshark"? Whilst acknowledging the view that capitalism is the most successful economic system that exists, isn't it just possible that we, as human beings, can aspire to something nobler than merely succumbing to outright greed at the expense of everybody else?
I also heard of a young woman who was contacted and asked if she had any experience in "C and two pluses".