If there is no God, Who Governs Right or Wrong?

[bluedes]

---

It is because it is not indoctrinated, forced and not created to be popular but to be accepted as your own choice.

amen to that.

[bluedes]

I have said this before, that if Buddhism was such a mystic in peace and harmony, how come they are not the majority in this world? They would have had attracted millions of peace advocates throughout the entire globe.
Humans cannot attain peace, love and harmony for the reasons presented by the entities being attained themselves.
1.) Peace is a never ending process; attaining peace for one's self is not peace at all. If peace is attained by a single person and the teaching will be passed on to another and everyone would attain it, we would not be living in a world where we are today. Buddhism's idea of peace is of temporal nature, though they aim to surpass peace as an average man would think, still their peace is of temporal nature. Why? Having peace within your while being unproductive or less productive is not peace as a whole. That is the same reason why Siddhartha resorted to his middle ways. Peace within you is not peace outside of you. Therefore someone must maintain that balance of peace within and environmental peace. Man cannot balance the distribution of peace by himself, if he can, there would be no neccesity for a realization, yet alone an idea of god.

because ultimate peace or absolute peace is an illusion. most people cannot grasp the idea of a temporal attainment because they get "tired". they prefer the "light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel" scenario, and having to perpetually attain peace is something that is very ridiculous.

2. Love is a 2 way relationship, it is communal in nature; one cannot love alone. That is reason why God(i'm ont being bias again) created us. Because love is communal and it needs 2 to love. The monk's teachings are correct love towards and love inwards a communal aspect of it. But human as a race needs to love as one and must love someone as a race; in order for us to love in harmony.

No offense bro, but i think you're still adhering to the duality of nature. To view love as a two-way relationship is an animalistic characteristic. That is not love, but care and concern, to belong within a group or a group within a larger group. In Maslow's pyramid of needs, level 3 pa na xa.

3. There are a lot of harmonious relationship we can talk about. But again, generally man as a race and as one being must be harmonious with something that is capable of being in harmoney with all of us, could be nature or the energies, but more than that. Buddhism's teachings rooted from a single man's desire to be free from earthly connections, and evolved into an attempt of communal massive harmony. The root itself is imperfect.

still the duality of nature. you are viewing that each one of us is separate in its own entity, thus the feedback. When you begin to view that we are actually all in this together, that we are "one", you'd cease to view the separation.. and in fact, it will come to a point that this separation is just an illusion. It must start with the self. Although not clearly defined, that is Buddhism's aim. Because its still riddled with all those "rules", 8 fold paths, 4 noble truths, etc etc of a regular religion. But once you attain a level of enlightenment, you will know within that the rules were just there to help you attain that level of enlightenment. Sticking to the rules is fine, but imposing and forcing it on others, well, that's another story.

[handsoff241]

because ultimate peace or absolute peace is an illusion. most people cannot grasp the idea of a temporal attainment because they get "tired". they prefer the "light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel" scenario, and having to perpetually attain peace is something that is very ridiculous.

Having peace of mind by doing what you will know will gain you peace after wards while being productive is peace enough in human standards. The peace we offer is not ultimate, as what the Buddhists are trying to attain(refer to the apprentices); our peace is, although in nature inner, is something that is owed to a God or perhaps, if you will insist, an energy or the cosmos itself. Now, where is more appropriate as peace? A peace of a certain degree that you are at harmony with the world(the energy, the god) or by having peace by sitting down and contemplating what it meant and how to work it out in this peace-impossible world?

No offense bro, but i think you're still adhering to the duality of nature. To view love as a two-way relationship is an animalistic characteristic. That is not love, but care and concern, to belong within a group or a group within a larger group. In Maslow's pyramid of needs, level 3 pa na xa.

No offense bro, at least I am speaking my mind, what you see is raw mental capacity, not tainted nor trained by any idealism long pondered and prepared for you by your universities. My views are purely mine, not prepared by decades of studies and pre-scrutinzed by others as to give you the comforts of having it's product and digested by YOU who paid the school to get those ideas. Can you please, by my feeble request, parry my original idea's with your own(and let me demand) ORIGINAL ideas?
OnT:
Now, as a regards to your proudly stated, though not your own(are you not even ashamed?) Maslow's pyramid. And I quote wikipedia:

My generalizations grew out of my selection of certain kinds of people. Obviously, other judges are needed.

Guess what Maslow and me had in common? We both had our own generalizations. Can't you use your own?
I say again, with regards to his(Mr. Maslow) Love is a two-way relationship.
And! If we look at it carefully, he stated that it is a pyramid of need, therefore, when you need something you need to have someone to supply that need. And because love is supplied by humans for humans, I have proven my case, love is a two-way relationship.
Talking about gigisal sa kaugalingong mantika, eh?
(Sorry sa trash talk blue, I can't stop myself)

But once you attain a level of enlightenment, you will know within that the rules were just there to help you attain that level of enlightenment. Sticking to the rules is fine, but imposing and forcing it on others, well, that's another story.

Sorry I disregarded the earlier part of this paragraph. Tell me; have you been there? See, a glitch with Buddhism's design is the fact that everything must be attained within a lifetime. That is not possible in this world, just like Communism was, a beautiful idea totally impossible.
You are speaking for a practice you are not living, be careful; I for myself is still conscious even if I am animating daily(pwera hambog) my faith and beliefs.

[handsoff241]

It is because it is not indoctrinated, forced and not created to be popular but to be accepted as your own choice.

We run on different roads, Buddhism was in nature of self-centered start then a journey of relating to the world, our church is of dynamic stewardship and mission. Though fueled by the same passion of righteousness and morality; we are on different roads.

Again, if it was such a good mysticism, why not spread throughout?

[bluedes]

Having peace of mind by doing what you will know will gain you peace after wards while being productive is peace enough in human standards. The peace we offer is not ultimate, as what the Buddhists are trying to attain(refer to the apprentices); our peace is, although in nature inner, is something that is owed to a God or perhaps, if you will insist, an energy or the cosmos itself. Now, where is more appropriate as peace? A peace of a certain degree that you are at harmony with the world(the energy, the god) or by having peace by sitting down and contemplating what it meant and how to work it out in this peace-impossible world?

if that is the peace that you seek, I don't see how different it is from how the Buddhists who offer such.. you probably misunderstand the peace of Buddhism as that merely by sitting down and contemplating.. that is only part of the process.. if you do not sit down and contemplate for a moment, you do not give time to your heart and mind to understand the things around you. meditation is a stage. but of course, one still has to do the chores, wash the dishes, and cook food.

No offense bro, at least I am speaking my mind, what you see is raw mental capacity, not tainted nor trained by any idealism long pondered and prepared for you by your universities. My views are purely mine, not prepared by decades of studies and pre-scrutinzed by others as to give you the comforts of having it's product and digested by YOU who paid the school to get those ideas. Can you please, by my feeble request, parry my original idea's with your own(and let me demand) ORIGINAL ideas?

it is funny.. but i understand your concerns.. i assure you though, i am not speaking out of idealism or concepts brought down upon me by universities and other academic situations. i speak out of genuine experience.. i just quote to you maslow's heirarchy of needs because some people require proof than mere personal talk.

OnT:
Now, as a regards to your proudly stated, though not your own(are you not even ashamed?) Maslow's pyramid. And I quote wikipedia:

Guess what Maslow and me had in common? We both had our own generalizations. Can't you use your own?
I say again, with regards to his(Mr. Maslow) Love is a two-way relationship.
And! If we look at it carefully, he stated that it is a pyramid of need, therefore, when you need something you need to have someone to supply that need. And because love is supplied by humans for humans, I have proven my case, love is a two-way relationship.
Talking about gigisal sa kaugalingong mantika, eh?
(Sorry sa trash talk blue, I can't stop myself)

no offense taken, hands..
but again, the love you and Maslow talk is still on level 3. one that requires constant affection and attention from your lover. at times that this affection is absent or non-existent, you tend to seek it out because of a need from within.. this need is rooted at the feeling of emptiness from inside of you that needs to be fulfilled in this "love" relationship. Love is an abstract word, it is used for many other meanings.. like making love is tantamount to having ***. The love I talk of is something else..

Sorry I disregarded the earlier part of this paragraph. Tell me; have you been there? See, a glitch with Buddhism's design is the fact that everything must be attained within a lifetime. That is not possible in this world, just like Communism was, a beautiful idea totally impossible.
You are speaking for a practice you are not living, be careful; I for myself is still conscious even if I am animating daily(pwera hambog) my faith and beliefs.

within a lifetime? it is not so.. buddhism teaches karma and reincarnation.. that certainly spans more than a lifetime.

have i been to where? I strive that my everyday practice is a living example of what I have learned and realized.

how much do know of buddhism to make such (excuse the term) haphazard comments about it?

We run on different roads, Buddhism was in nature of self-centered start then a journey of relating to the world, our church is of dynamic stewardship and mission. Though fueled by the same passion of righteousness and morality; we are on different roads.

Again, if it was such a good mysticism, why not spread throughout?

actually, it is more widespread than you think it is.. just not popularized or forced..

[Sinyalan]

We run on different roads, Buddhism was in nature of self-centered start then a journey of relating to the world, our church is of dynamic stewardship and mission. Though fueled by the same passion of righteousness and morality; we are on different roads.

Again, if it was such a good mysticism, why not spread throughout?

Are you sure that was the first intention for those who brought christianity to the world? I don't take sides with buddhism but their doctrines are easy to understand than those who keep on assuming of false appearance of virtue. Exactly as it is... your religion and buddhism are on different roads... theirs are just better.

Wny not spread thoughout? It is spread throughout the world but people just like to ignore what's good.

[kebot]

ambot lng brad.. its a simple basic question of pwede ba ang humanity without God..
ngano lisud-lisuron man na oi..

unsay gahi brad?

standard? people believe in forces greater than themselves, that's the standard. but God? kanang divine God? that's a very uncommon concept.. kanang gipangtuohan sa mga major religions karon, like christianity, islam, judaism, puro na cultural idols.. the god they fashion their minds into...

basig lahi ra jud ta ug pasabot siguro brad.. d na lng ta magstorya ani..

Mao lagi brad, d lagi mahimo walay God. Yea better be indifferent than forcing it... makes sense to me that way. Yea ayaw nalang Istoryahe ang God if you don't want to... it will confuse you.

[bluedes]

Mao lagi brad, d lagi mahimo walay God. Yea better be indifferent than forcing it... makes sense to me that way. Yea ayaw nalang Istoryahe ang God if you don't want to... it will confuse you.

mao jud brad.. happy go lucky na lng ko ani.. kaysa ma-confused ta sa imong God diha..
murag confused na gud mo tanan.. joke2x..


naa ko pangutana brad.. asa man ni nagpuyo si God?

[kebot]

Im not taking away your happiness brod, im happy for you.
I am not implying that people should become buddhist; what i was trying to get at is the factual system of religion that is working in achieving peace & harmony. And making most of their followres gentle,loving & w/ great tolerance to other religions; hence the question who governs this & that w/o a god has been answered by the buddhist.
We are equiped w/ the necessary tools to govern our lives,
as what youve said "I am the captain of my soul" one way of saying im the governor of my life.

hehehe, there is a difference brad I will explain... Its rather synonymous but different when applied.

Captain means I go where I choose to go... Captain is about direction.

Govern means Forsee all the action.

in summary brad to make this argument short.

Brad ang Captain sa Barko Ako.
Marina ang ga Govern Unsay mahitabo sa barko base sa ako decision.

so its not the same... naa ko accountability to someone... Gets...

[kebot]

mao jud brad.. happy go lucky na lng ko ani.. kaysa ma-confused ta sa imong God diha..
murag confused na gud mo tanan.. joke2x..


naa ko pangutana brad.. asa man ni nagpuyo si God?

Its in the heart brad, based on experience. I have gone through the lowest part of my life brad and I know he is there for me. So, If you think its my delusion, well I keep that dilusion because he prove it to me he is worth believing. Ok.

But if you don't. I don't care brad, you have to ask him that experience... but be ready lang...