What Are Core Beliefs of Hindus?

Author: Amrutur V. Srinivasan

Hinduism is not an organized religion and has no single, systematic approach to teaching its value system. Nor do Hindus have a simple set of rules to follow like the Ten Commandments. Local, regional, caste, and community-driven practices influence the interpretation and practice of beliefs throughout the Hindu world.

Yet a common thread among all these variations is belief in a Supreme Being and adherence to certain concepts such as Truth, dharma, and karma. And belief in the authority of the Vedas (sacred scriptures) serves, to a large extent, as the very definition of a Hindu, even though how the Vedas are interpreted may vary greatly.

Here are some of the key beliefs shared among Hindus:

  1. Truth is eternal.
  2. Hindus pursue knowledge and understanding of the Truth: the very essence of the universe and the only Reality. According to the Vedas, Truth is One, but the wise express it in a variety of ways.
    Brahman is Truth and Reality.
  3. Hindus believe in Brahman as the one true God who is formless, limitless, all-inclusive, and eternal. Brahman is not an abstract concept; it is a real entity that encompasses everything (seen and unseen) in the universe.
  4. The Vedas are the ultimate authority.
  5. The Vedas are Hindu scriptures that contain revelations received by ancient saints and sages. Hindus believe that the Vedas are without beginning and without end; when everything else in the universe is destroyed (at the end of a cycle of time), the Vedas remain.
  6. Everyone should strive to achieve dharma.
  7. Understanding the concept of dharma helps you understand the Hindu faith. Unfortunately, no single English word adequately covers its meaning. Dharma can be described as right conduct, righteousness, moral law, and duty. Anyone who makes dharma central to one’s life strives to do the right thing, according to one’s duty and abilities, at all times.
  8. Individual souls are immortal.
  9. A Hindu believes that the individual soul (atman) is neither created nor destroyed; it has been, it is, and it will be.
  10. Actions of the soul while residing in a body require that it reap the consequences of those actions in the next life — the same soul in a different body.
  11. The process of movement of the atman from one body to another is known as transmigration. The kind of body the soul inhabits next is determined by karma (actions accumulated in previous lives).
  12. The goal of the individual soul is moksha.
  13. Moksha is liberation: the soul’s release from the cycle of death and rebirth. It occurs when the soul unites with Brahman by realizing its true nature. Several paths can lead to this realization and unity: the path of duty, the path of knowledge, and the path of devotion (unconditional surrender to God).

Becoming Christian Mystics Again

Author: Matthew Fox

Albert Einstein was asked toward the end of his life if he had any regrets. He answered: “I wish I had read more of the mystics earlier in my life.” This is a significant confession, coming as it does from one of the greatest geniuses of the 20th century, a man who moved beyond the modern science of Newton and ushered in a postmodern science and consciousness.

In the West, the modern age (meaning the 16th to mid-20th centuries) was not only ignorant of, but actually hostile to, mysticism. As Theodore Roszak has put it, “The Enlightenment held mysticism up for ridicule as the worst offense against science and reason.” Still today, both education and religion are often hostile to mysticism. Fundamentalism by definition is antimystical or distorts mysticism, and much of liberal theology and religion is so academic and left-brained that it numbs and ignores the right brain, which is our mystical brain. Seminaries teach few practices to access our mysticism. This is why many find religion so boring — it lacks the adventure and inner exploration that our souls yearn for. As St. John of the Cross said, “Launch out into the deep.”

This launching into the depths — into the deep ocean of the unconscious and of the Great Self, which is connected to all things and to the Creator — often gets stymied by Western religious dogma, guilt trips and institutional churchiness. The mystic gets starved. Patriarchal culture by itself is unable to tap into the deep feminine aspects of Divine Wisdom and Compassion and the heart. But the mystics, male and female, do not present a one-sided reality, as Patriarchy does. The yin/yang, female/male dialectic is alive and well in the mystical tradition. God as Mother is honored along with God as Father. Through this, mystics seek wisdom, not mere knowledge.

The West remains so out of touch with its own mystical tradition that many Westerners seeking mysticism still feel they have to go East to find it. While this can work for many brave and generous individuals, it cannot work for the entire culture. Carl Jung warned us that “we westerners cannot be pirates thieving wisdom from foreign shores that it has taken them centuries to develop as if our own culture was an error outlived.”

Is Western culture an “error outlived”? Or is there wisdom deep within our roots that can be accessed anew and that can give us strength and understanding at this critical time when so much is falling apart the world over, when climate change and destruction of the earth accelerates and so many species are disappearing, while our banking systems and economic belief systems, our forms of education and forms of worship, are failing?

I believe that there is great wisdom in our species and in Western spiritual traditions, but that this needs a new birth and a fresh beginning. As a Westerner I must begin where I stand within my own culture and its traditions. This is where the Christian Mystics come in. We in the West must take these insights into our hearts on a regular basis, allow them to play in the heart, and then take them into our work and citizenship and family and community. This is how all healthy and deep awakenings happen; they begin with the heart and flow out from there.

The crises we find ourselves in as a species require that as a species we shake up all our institutions — including our religious ones — and reinvent them. Change is necessary for our survival, and we often turn to the mystics at critical times like this. Jung said: “Only the mystics bring what is creative to religion itself.” Jesus was a mystic shaking up his religion and the Roman empire; Buddha was a mystic who shook up the prevailing Hinduism of his day; Gandhi was a mystic shaking up Hinduism and challenging the British empire; and Martin Luther King Jr. shook up his tradition and America’s segregationist society. The mystics walk their talk and talk (often in memorable poetic phraseology) their walk.

For instance, this being the season of Earth Day, we might listen to the 12th century Abbess Hildegard of Bingen who was an amazing musician, painter, healer, writer (she wrote 10 books), scientist and poet. She posits an erotic relationship between the Divine and nature when she says: “As the Creator loves his creation, so creation loves the creator. Creation, of course, was fashioned to be adorned, to be showered, to be gifted with the love of the creator. The entire world has been embraced by this kiss.”

Fr. Bede Griffiths was an English Benedictine monk who spent 50 years in India living and building up an ashram that was Christian and, in many respects, Hindu. He wrote a number of books on the coming together of Eastern and Western mysticism.

He writes:
“Perhaps this is the deepest impression left by life in India, the sense of the sacred as something pervading the whole order of nature. Every hill and tree and river is holy, and the simplest human acts of eating and drinking, still more of birth and marriage, have all retained their sacred character. … It is there that the West need to learn form the East the sense of the ‘holy,’ of a transcendent mystery which is immanent in everything and which gives an ultimate meaning to life…”

Thomas Berry was an American priest in the Passionist Order who called himself a “geologian.” A student of world religions and of contemporary science, he was a great ecological prophet as is clear in his books, The Dream of the Earth and The Great Work, where he warns of the work we must do to reinvent our educational, economic, political and religious systems if we are to be a sustainable species on this endangered planet.

He writes:
“The human venture depends absolutely on this quality of awe and reverence and joy in the Earth and all that lives and grows upon the Earth. … In the end the universe can only be explained in terms of celebration. It is all an exuberant expression of existence itself … A way is opening for each person to receive the total spiritual heritage of the human community as well as the total spiritual heritage of the universe. Within this context the religious antagonisms of the past can be overcome, the particular traditions can be vitalized, and the feeling of presence to a sacred universe can appear once more to dynamize and sustain human affairs.”

Deep down, each one of us is a mystic. When we tap into that energy we become alive again and we give birth. From the creativity that we release is born the prophetic vision and work that we all aspire to realize as our gift to the world. We want to serve in whatever capacity we can. Getting in touch with the mystic inside is the beginning of our deep service.

Matthew Fox is the author of 28 books including ‘Original Blessing,’ ‘The Reinvention of Work,’ ‘The Hidden Spirituality of Men’, and most recently ‘Christian Mystics,’ of which this post is an excerpt.

Why Reincarnation?

Author: Rabbi Pinchas Winston

The topic of reincarnation sparks many questions and strong reactions. Sometimes the question is simply, “Is reincarnation really a Jewish concept?”

For many, reincarnation seems to be an idea that belongs to other religions, particularly those from the East, not Judaism. One reason for this is because you do not see the idea of reincarnation showing up in many mainstream Torah texts over the generations, such as Chumash, Mishnah, and Talmud. One would think that if reincarnation is such a mainstream Jewish concept there would be at least a few references to it in such sources and others like them.

Then again, unlike other religions, Judaism prefers not to mix everyday topics together with its more mystical elements. Though Kabbalah is as mainstream as any other area of Torah knowledge,1 even alluded to in the Talmud (Chagigah 14b), it is as helpful to introduce Kabbalah into everyday Torah learning as it is to discuss details of Quantum Theory with ninth grade physics students.

For the person, however, who has graduated from Chumash to Mishnah to Talmud, and then to the Zohar,2 he will find, among countless other topics, a very detailed discussion about reincarnation, particularly in the Zohar’s commentary on Parashas Mishpatim, what reincarnation is, how it works, and why it is necessary in the first place.

For clarification of the Zohar’s teachings, the person can turn to Sha’ar HaGilgulim, or Gate of Reincarnations, or Sefer HaGilgulim, Order of Reincarnations. Both works are the teachings of the greatest Kabbalist of the last 500 years, Rabbi Yitzchak Luria, or “Arizal” for short whose teachings are considered to be authoritative.
Reincarnation is a Jewish concept with a very long Jewish tradition.

So, yes, reincarnation is a Jewish concept, with a very long Jewish tradition. But why the fascination with the topic in the first place?

Sometimes it seems to have to do with staying in touch, at least emotionally, with loved ones who are already gone. People want to know that wherever they are they are doing fine, and might even come back again in another life. They want to know that though they have left this world that life can still go on for them, somewhere else, perhaps. The idea of reincarnation reassures them of that.

For others it has to do more with understanding inexplicable personal tendencies, or curious natures of family members or friends. Sometimes life’s experiences fall short when it comes to explaining unusual events or personality anomalies. Reincarnation can explain a lot of that as well, as we’ll see in the next essay.

And yet for others, it is just a general fascination with mystical subjects, a category to which the topic of reincarnation certainly belongs. Who doesn’t want to believe that there is more to life than we can see or sense? Who doesn’t want to believe that we can have a second chance, and maybe even more, to make amends for past mistakes?
Why is there Reincarnation?

Why is there reincarnation in the first place? Life itself is not unlike the way education works, which is about moving up from level to level as one matures and becomes more intelligent. The educational process that most go through in life is meant to enhance a person’s ability to function in the world, to help people to make most of their lives, and to enhance their appreciation of the need to become responsible members of society.

Likewise as a person grows up, his or her spiritual capability also increases and matures, though not automatically. Just as the more one puts into an education the more one gets out of it, similarly the more one “puts” into spiritual growth the more one grows spiritually—the more spiritually empowered the person becomes.

How does that actually work?

The first thing a person needs to know is that Judaism teaches that though we all have one unique soul, each soul is actually comprised of five parts,3 each of which has a specific name: Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah, loosely translated as: Rest, Spirit, Breath, Life, and Single, names that mean little until one understands how they got them. What matters for now, though, is that they represent the path to spiritual completion, because each level up provides increasingly greater access to higher levels of spiritual capacity.

A good analogy for how this works is computer software. Very often when a person acquires software for his computer he can do so cheaply, or even for free. But there’s a catch: upon opening the newly installed software and using it for the first time he may notice that some of the listed functions are grayed-out, indicating that they are not yet available to him. To access those functions he has to pay for the upgrade.

If the person chooses to take the financial plunge and invest more money into the program, very often all he receives back in addition is a numeric key to complete the registration. However, after keying it in, almost magically, the previously grayed-in functions blacken indicating accessibility, instantly making the program more powerful.

But how does only a keyed-in number deliver so much more additional software to its user?

It doesn’t. What really happens is that all of the functions, the accessible and the inaccessible ones, are delivered to the computer during the first download. The program, however, was written in such a way as to only make certain functions available to the user until additional information, in this case, a paid-for numeric key, has been provided.

This way the user can see what he is missing and be tempted to pay for the rest of the program. Once he does, and he properly registers the program, permission is then granted, though the computer, to utilize the rest of the software’s functions.
At birth every individual has all five levels of soul. We have to if we’re going to continuously receive Divine light to keep us going, since the five levels of soul connect us up to the light of God which nourishes our souls and, in turn, keep our bodies alive.4 To be missing a level of soul would be to break the connection between a person and the Source of Life.
Even the Talmud states that, prior to a child’s birth, an angel teaches it the entire Torah. The only problem is, the Talmud continues, is that the angel causes the child to forget what he learned right before birth (Niddah 30b). Seems pointless, no?
Not really. There is a big difference between learning something new and only having to recall what was once learned. The Talmud is telling us that education, at least when it comes to Torah, is a process of bringing to the conscious mind what already exists on the level of the subconscious. The learning of Torah gives a person access to higher levels of understanding, and really, and as we’ll see later, higher levels of soul.

We are created in God’s image to achieve great spiritual accomplishments.

Because at birth, a person only needs the least of the five levels of the soul, the Nefesh, to remain alive and function. There is very little a baby is required to do other than eat and sleep, and for that the Nefesh is sufficient. Indeed, a person could, and many do, live the rest of his or her life on the level of Nefesh alone, though they wouldn’t really amount to very much spiritually.

God didn’t make man in His image for nothing.5 He did it to allow man to achieve great spiritual accomplishments, to become the very best human being he or she can become, to achieve ultimate fulfillment, in this world, and in the World-to-Come.
Life is about doing exactly this, and ideally, in one lifetime.
It’s All about the Journey

Mankind may be capable of great spiritual feats, but life is not always supportive of his efforts to achieve them, and on many occasions, that may be an understatement.

The culprit? It is what we call in Hebrew the yetzer hara, the evil inclination. In the Garden of Eden the yetzer hara was embodied in the snake, the one which convinced Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil against God’s command. Until that time, humans were free of an internal evil inclination and remained perfectly balanced between good and evil.6
That didn’t last long, though. As a result of the sin man absorbed the yetzer hara into his being until it became a part of him, the result of which is succinctly summed up by the Torah in the following way:
The intention of man’s heart is evil from his youth. (Bereishis 8:21)

Without question, it was a game changer. The yetzer hara, it seems, has its own agenda, seemingly more interested in having a good time materially than becoming more perfect. It doesn’t buy into this whole spiritual development thing, and it seems to try to sabotage any attempts to do so every chance it gets.

The yetzer hara can interfere with our ability to climb the soul ladder.

As spiritually troublesome and burdensome as that can be for the person on a quest for personal greatness, it is not accidental. It is the way we are meant to be because that is the way to make sure that any spiritual growth we achieve is the result of choices we make, not automatic or accidental. We were given the gift of free will and we’re here to use it wisely as the basis for spiritual growth.

The problem is that the yetzer hara can interfere with our ability to climb the soul ladder, from Nefesh to Ruach to Neshamah, etc., so much so that time can run out on our lifetimes before we are done. In some cases, people might, and often do, remain stuck on the lowest levels of soul for decades, or even entire lifetimes.

What happens then? Reincarnation.

In most cases we come back to finish what we started in other lifetimes, even if we aren’t aware of who we were or where we were. The good news is that when we do, we don’t start from scratch all over again, because if we did we’d never get anywhere in life. We’d simply repeat many of the mistakes that we did in previous lifetimes.

In the next segment, we will discuss how to go about figuring out what you’re here to fix up.

Pardes, Sha’ar Esser v’Lo Teisha, Ch. 9; Drushei Olam HaTohu, Chelek 1, Drush 5, Siman 7, Os 8.
One of the main and original sources of Kabbalah thought based upon the teachings of Rebi Shimon bar Yochai, circa 70 CE.
Sha’ar HaGilgulim, First Introduction.
Sefer HaKlallim, Klal 18, Anaf 8, Os 10.
Bereishis 1:26.
Derech Hashem 1:3:7:8.
Sha’ar HaGilgulim, First Introduction.
Published: March 1, 2014

Robert Thurman Doesn’t Look Buddhist

Robert Thurman Doesn’t Look Buddhist
From The New York Times Magazine
By RODGER KAMENETZ

ALL AND IMPOSING, IN A DARK BLUE SUIT and bold red-and-yellow tie, Prof. Robert A.F. Thurman, a former Tibetan Buddhist monk and New Yorker to his bones, marched to center stage at Carnegie Hall. Thurman, who is also the president of Tibet House, was introducing the organization’s annual benefit concert. He announced to the sold-out house, with a certain wry hilarity, the Tibetan New Year of the Fiery Rat. He praised the evening’s performers, Michael Stipe and Emmylou Harris among them, for “putting a shield of poetry around the heart of a suffering people.” Later on, Thurman kicked and shuffled his way across the stage, eyeing his feet nervously, arm in arm with the singers Natalie Merchant and Patti Smith as Dadon, an exiled Tibetan balladeer, led them in a Tibetan New Year’s dance. After the concert, Thurman rushed upstairs to introduce reporters to one of his daughters, the actress Uma Thurman, and to Harrison Ford, hosts of the late supper party to come. There, Thurman held forth energetically, in a swarm of rock stars, models, movie stars and other wealthy patrons of Tibet House.

When I asked him how a meditative Buddhist type could handle so much action, Thurman said, “There’s a stereotype that Buddhism is quietistic: leave the world, drop out — drop dead basically.” Then he laughed and talked about how meditation can also release enormous amounts of energy. Thurman enjoys his contradictions. To him, Buddhist enlightenment is “the tolerance of cognitive dissonance, the ability to cope with the beauty of complexity.”
Cognitive dissonance is Thurman’s way of life. Though a highly respected scholar — he is the Jey Tsong Khapa Professor of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist Studies at Columbia University — Thurman can also come on like a dharma-thumping evangelist. In fact, he has emerged as the most visible and charismatic exponent of Tibetan Buddhism in America: he is a prolific translator and writer (“Essential Tibetan Buddhism,” an anthology of key texts in translation, was just published by HarperCollins), a powerful advocate for the liberation of Tibet and the Dalai Lama’s cultural liaison to America.

In San Francisco recently, he talked four hours straight over lunch until a vacuum cleaner made it clear that the restaurant was completely empty. We then raced across town in his rented red Mustang, and he spoke for another three hours on dharma, the Buddhist teachings, at the California Institute for Integral Studies. His lectures are multivocal psychodramas. Prof. P. Jeffrey Hopkins of the University of Virginia, Thurman’s colleague and fellow translator, calls him “the Red Skelton of Tibetan Buddhism.”

Thurman’s large head is framed with wavy, reddish blond hair, which curls back over his ears in wings. After a while you notice that his right eye roves, while the left stays fixed. Ask one question and Thurman’s booming, reedy tenor rises off at odd angles and zooms into open rhetorical space. Speaking about the Buddha after his enlightenment, for instance: “He was a seething energy field. His skin was all gold. You know this little tuft of white hair, this third eyebrow that he had? It came into its own finally, like a transistor — zzzzzz — and light rays would beam out all over the place.”

Thurman, at 54, seethes with energy himself. Natalie Merchant, a family friend, remembers Thurman singlehandedly clearing a huge boulder from his country house in Woodstock, N.Y.; his son, Dechen, recalls his father shimmying up a tree with a chain saw, cutting off a limb that was threatening to crash into a window. “He was a monk, and monks take 252 vows,” says Thurman’s wife, Nena von Schlebrugge-Thurman, who serves as the treasurer for Tibet House. “And a lot of those vows have to do with not thinking about yourself and being there to help other people. He has developed a bad tendency to say yes to everything. So the entire family is joined together in a desperate effort over all these years to get him to cut down on these things, and he’s become much, much improved lately.”

Well, maybe. In the past two years, Thurman published a new translation of “The Tibetan Book of the Dead,” wrote the text for a picture book called “Inside Tibetan Buddhism” and published “Essential Tibetan Buddhism.” Another book, on Tibetan politics, is in the works. A few years ago, he helped mount a major traveling exhibit of Tibetan art, “Wisdom and Compassion.”

Thurman says he believes that the teachings of Tibetan Buddhism — as lived by the present Dalai Lama — can help save us all. Among Thurman’s greatest passions is Tibet House, which he, along with the actor Richard Gere and two others, founded in 1987 at the Dalai Lama’s request. It serves as a cultural embassy for an occupied nation; among other projects, Tibet House is creating a museum without walls — a library and an archive of artwork and ritual objects — that could eventually be returned to Tibet, and is sponsoring a peacemaking conference in California, to be attended by the Dalai Lama.

In his earlier years, Thurman felt little obligation to support the Tibetan political struggle. “I thought, Tibet had done me the kindness of preserving the dharma from ancient times in India and handing it to me,” he says. “I woke up to how callous that was about 15 years ago and decided that I could try to repay their kindness, by helping to get the world’s attention focused on this massive injustice.”

Thurman, with his intellect, savvy and high-profile connections, is particularly qualified to undertake such a task. Yet as a young man, he spent years as a celibate monk. As he tells it, in his 20’s, Thurman was as intensely set on leaving the world as he now seems to be on changing it.

THURMAN GREW UP IN A HOUSEHOLD shaped by romance and drama. His mother, Elizabeth Farrar, dropped out of college to pursue an acting career; his father, Beverley, left his doctoral studies at William and Mary to follow Elizabeth to New York, and wound up working as an editor for the Associated Press. Augustin Duncan, the dancer Isadora’s brother, conducted weekly dramatic readings in the Thurmans’ home, where Robert and his brothers read parts alongside guests like Laurence Olivier. But Thurman also sneaked comic books inside his Shakespeare folio. In April of his senior year at Phillips Exeter, he ran off with a friend to enlist with Fidel Castro. Fortunately, Thurman says, for the revolution’s sake, the boys were turned back at Miami. Exeter expelled him for that adventure and he waited out a year in Mexico before entering Harvard in 1959.

That spring, he married Christophe de Menil, heiress to a considerable fortune and fine-art collection. In the late spring of 1961, while Thurman was changing a flat on his car, the tire iron slipped and destroyed his left eye. It was a turning point; Thurman realized he did not want to waste his life “drinking Champagne and staring at Rouaults.” He made a young man’s vow — fed by his readings of Nietzsche and Buddhist texts — to act on his highest aims. “I was ready to go to the East,” he says, but “my wife was nervous, scared of the whole thing. I then started identifying with Buddha, left my wife and child and went over there. I was very sad about that, but I felt — even as a father — what’s the use of not being enlightened?”
Dropping out of Harvard, Thurman wandered toward India through Turkey and Iran, “like a beggar.” His mother thought he was crazy, but his father, for whom St. Francis was a spiritual ideal, defended him. “You’re doing what I always wanted to do,” his father said.

“I was already by about that time like St. Francis,” muses Thurman. “I had an empty socket, long hair and a scraggly beard. I wore black baggy Afghani pants, a T-shirt with a white shawl thrown around me and leather sandals.” In India, he was hired to teach English to exiled tulkus — young reincarnated Tibetan lamas. “I was in heaven, because the minute I met the Tibetans, I knew they had what I wanted.”

But Thurman was called back to New York by his father’s sudden death. He visited the Lamaist Buddhist Monastery of America, in Freewood Acres, N.J., and met his first guru — a 61-year-old Mongolian monk, Geshe Ngawang Wangyal. (Geshe is a monastic title indicating years of advanced study.) Thurman was moved by the monk’s quiet intensity and began to study with him. “That was a rebirth for me,” he says. “I learned to speak Tibetan fluently in 10 weeks.”

Thurman helped his mentor build a temple. He meditated. “I’m not saying I attained nirvana — I still don’t know what that is — but I attained a sense of relief,” he says. “I still had many of my bad egocentric habits, and one of them was that I fanatically wanted to be a monk, because I wanted to live like this for the rest of my life.”

Geshe Wangyal advised him against this career move, but he agreed to take Thurman with him to Dharamsala, India. “Since you are so stubborn, I’ll tell the Dalai Lama you want to be a monk,” he said. “Maybe he’ll think that’s not a bad idea.”

THUS BEGAN AN EXTRAORDINARY relationship. Thurman was 23, the 14th Dalai Lama, 29.

“You don’t really study with the Dalai Lama,” Thurman says. “If you’re under his protection in the community, he assigns this or that teacher. He wanted to see me a lot. I soon found out it wasn’t to teach me but because I spoke Tibetan. Basically he got my Exeter and Harvard education over that year and a half. We met once a week. Every talk I’d say, ‘What about this problem in madhyamika thought?’ And he’d say: ‘Oh, talk to blah blah about that. Now what about Freud? What about physics? What about the history of World War II?’ ”
Thurman was personally ordained by the Dalai Lama in 1965, becoming the first Western Tibetan Buddhist monk. He returned to the United States with a shaved head and maroon robe: “Uma said recently, after seeing a photograph of me in my monk phase, ‘Oh, look at Daddy — he looks like Henry Miller in drag.’ ” That phase lasted only about a year. Geshe Wangyal asked Thurman if he thought the world truly needed — or wanted — a white geshe. “He convinced me that the alternative was to become a Protestant monk,” Thurman says. “That is, a professor.”

Thurman met Nena von Schlebrugge, Timothy Leary’s former wife, at a party in New York, and they were married in 1967. (They have four children and now live in Manhattan near Columbia. ) Thurman returned to Harvard, completed his degree and enrolled in graduate work at the Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies. “I created the field of Buddhology,” he says. “I just wrote it down on the form and they said, ‘We don’t have this field here, but I guess it’s all right.’ ”

Tibetan, Zen and Theravada are the three most popular forms of Buddhism among Westerners today. Of the three, Tibetan Buddhism is probably the most difficult and exotic path, with its emphasis on prostrations, visualizations, guru worship and deity yoga, in which the practitioner identifies with Tibetan deities as a path to higher states of consciousness. Tibetan Buddhism now has four main groupings, of which the Geluk, the Dalai Lama’s order, is considered the most philosophical and scholarly.

Thurman’s major contribution to understanding Tibetan Buddhism is his translation of “The Essence of True Eloquence” (now published as “The Central Philosophy of Tibet”), by the 14th-century Tibetan sage Jey Tsong Khapa. Thurman had returned to India in 1970 to work on this project, spending hours with the Dalai Lama, who provided the benefit of his personal notes. Thurman speaks of translation in Tibetan terms as lotsawa — “a world eye,” or window on a new world.

To some observers, a tremendous opening of the Buddhist “world eye” has occurred in the West over the past 30 years. Tibetan Buddhism in particular has been well served by pioneer professors like Thurman and Jeffrey Hopkins, both of whom have established successful graduate programs. A new generation of Tibetan textual scholars has come forth, and mainstream publishers produce a steady flow of translated Tibetan dharma texts.
Much of the interest must be attributed to the tremendous appeal of the Dalai Lama. But other Tibetan teachers have influenced the West, including Chogyam Trungpa, who founded the Naropa Institute, in Boulder, Colo., and Sogyal Rinpoche, author of the best seller “The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying.” The success of Tricycle: The Buddhist Review, a slick magazine devoted to contemporary dharma and profiles of prominent Buddhists, has also contributed to the movement.

But no wave arrives without some froth. Donald S. Lopez, a professor of Buddhist and Tibetan Studies at the University of Michigan and the author of “Prisoners of Shangri-la,” a forthcoming study of the effect of Tibetan Buddhism on the West, refers to a recent J. Peterman catalogue as a case in point: “They’re selling something called a Tibetan shaman’s jacket. The first line of the ad said: ‘It’s official. Crystals are out. Tibetan Buddhism is in.’ ”
Tibetan Buddhism has also attracted its share of celebrities, most notably Richard Gere, who serves on the board of the International Campaign for Tibet, a political action group in Washington. Gere is a frequent visitor to Dharamsala and a serious student of the Dalai Lama’s. On the other hand, few of the celebrities who attend Thurman’s Tibet House benefits are actual Buddhist practitioners, as they made clear. “Just because people want to help Tibet,” Thurman says, “doesn’t make them Buddhists.”

As a scholar, Thurman is especially critical of fuzzy thinking in popular Buddhism. As an example, he cites a 1992 article in Tricycle by Helen Tworkov, the magazine’s editor, in which Tworkov acknowledges strong anti-abortion teachings in Buddhism but also writes that “dharma teachings can be used to validate either pro-choice or anti-abortion politics.” To Thurman, “that’s simply incorrect. It’s the taking of life. The fundamentalists do have it emotionally right — the killing of fetuses is a mass massacre from the Buddhist point of view. It is not a fuzzy issue in Buddhism.”

Some of the confusion among Westerners has arisen, Thurman says, because Buddhism was introduced in this country primarily as a meditation technique. “Western people who were anti-Christian or anti-Jewish were thinking of it as a system that seemed religious but didn’t have a lot of rules,” he says. “That is simply wrong. In Buddhism, the foundation of meditation is a strong ethical system.”

To Thurman, Buddhism is primarily an educational program, and the monastery remains the Buddha’s great social invention. The monastery made spiritual seeking a credible alternative to the military ideal and fostered a nonviolent religious revolution in India. When Buddhism was wiped out there during the Muslim invasions of the 8th through 12th centuries, the monastic ideal and its philosophical curriculum found refuge in Tibet.

As Thurman sees it, the ultimate triumph of Buddhist monasticism came with the rule of the fifth Dalai Lama, known as the Great Fifth, who assumed power in 1642. “For the first time in Buddhist history, a monastic took the throne of a nation,” Thurman writes in “Essential Tibetan Buddhism.” “The military was gradually phased out, with three centuries of relative peace, a unique, mass monastic, unilaterally disarmed society.” While some scholars, including Donald Lopez, see a danger in overidealizing Tibetan history, Thurman remains unabashed. He says he believes the current Dalai Lama is taking Buddhist teaching onto the world stage.
Thurman and the Dalai Lama share a relationship whose warmth and depth is palpable. I saw them together in 1990 in Dharamsala at a meeting between the Dalai Lama and a group of Jewish rabbis and scholars. While the Tibetans treated their leader with extreme reverence, Thurman openly teased him, laughing and making him laugh, tweaking the Buddhist master for being too modest.

Thurman feels that the Dalai Lama, in his continuous nonviolent struggle for Tibetan autonomy, provides a new definition of heroism. Humans have succeeded on this planet in the past, Thurman argues: “because people have been heroic enough to sacrifice their lives for a group. At this moment, with the development of nuclear weaponry and technology, heroism has to be redefined as developing the power not to blow up in hatred.” That, Thurman asserts, “is the Dalai Lama’s teaching to the planet.”

Presenting the concert at Carnegie Hall, Thurman passionately echoed this idea of “cool heroism”: “We who claim we want peace should not reward violence. We should reward those who insist on making peace their method as well as peace their goal.”
Still, while the post-concert party was raging around him, I thought of the young man who set off for India in Afghani pants and returned as a Buddhist monk. With so much lecturing, writing and advocacy, does he miss the quiet, contemplative life?

“There are things you can’t develop in yourself if you just meditate apart from people. . . . ” Thurman shouted above the din. “You have to get out there where people annoy you and injure you. Then you have to take and tolerate that injury. As the Dalai Lama would say, If there’s no enemy, then you can’t develop tolerance. And if there are no people who need gifts, then you can’t develop generosity.”

A Tibet House donor approached, and Thurman turned to greet him. “Being a Buddhist does not mean leaving the world,” he called over his shoulder, “it means. . . . ” And whatever else he wanted to add got swallowed up in the crowd.

Rodger Kamenetz is the author of “The Jew in the Lotus,” a best-selling account of Jewish-Buddhist dialogue. With the film maker Laurel Chiten, he is working on a documentary based on the book.

Is There An Afterlife?

Most scientists would probably say that the concept of an afterlife is either nonsense, or at the very least unprovable. Yet one expert claims he has evidence to confirm an existence beyond the grave – and it lies in quantum physics.Professor Robert Lanza claims the theory of biocentrism teaches that death as we know it is an illusion created by our consciousness.

Professor Robert Lanza claims the theory of biocentrism teaches death as we know it is an illusion. He believes our consciousness creates the universe, and not the other way round, and once we accept that space and time are ‘tools of our minds’, death can’t exist in ‘any real sense’ either ‘We think life is just the activity of carbon and an admixture of molecules – we live a while and then rot into the ground,’ said the scientist on his website.

Lanza, from Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North Carolina, continued that as humans we believe in death because ‘we’ve been taught we die’, or more specifically, our consciousness associates life with bodies and we know that bodies die. His theory of biocentrism, however, explains that death may not be as terminal as we think it is.

Biocentrism is classed as the theory of everything and comes from the Greek for ‘life centre’. It is the believe that life and biology are central to reality and that life creates the universe, not the other way round. This suggests a person’s consciousness determines the shape and size of objects in the universe.

Lanza uses the example of the way we perceive the world around us. A person sees a blue sky, and is told that the colour they are seeing is blue, but the cells in a person’s brain could be changed to make the sky look green or red.

LANZA’S THEORY OF BIOCENTRISM AND THE AFTERLIFE

Biocentrism is classed as the Theory of Everything and comes from the Greek for ‘life centre’. It is the belief that life and biology are central to reality and that life creates the universe, not the other way round.

Lanza uses the example of the way we perceive the world around us. A person sees a blue sky, and is told that the colour they are seeing is blue, but the cells in a person’s brain could be changed to make the sky look green or red. Our consciousness makes sense of the world, and can be altered to change this interpretation. By looking at the universe from a biocentric’s point of view, this also means space and time don’t behave in the hard and fast ways our consciousness tell us it does. In summary, space and time are ‘simply tools of our mind. Once this theory about space and time being mental constructs is accepted, it means death and the idea of immortality exist in a world without spatial or linear boundaries.

Theoretical physicists believe that there is infinite number of universes with different variations of people, and situations taking place, simultaneously. Lanza added that everything which can possibly happen is occurring at some point across these multiverses and this means death can’t exist in ‘any real sense’ either. Lanza, instead, said that when we die our life becomes a ‘perennial flower that returns to bloom in the multiverse.’ ‘Bottom line: What you see could not be present without your consciousness,’ explained Lanza. ‘Our consciousness makes sense of the world.’

By looking at the universe from a biocentric’s point of view, this also means space and time don’t behave in the hard and fast ways our consciousness tell us it does. In summary, space and time are ‘simply tools of our mind.’ Once this theory about space and time being mental constructs is accepted, it means death and the idea of immortality exist in a world without spatial or linear boundaries. Similarly, theoretical physicists believe there is infinite number of universes with different variations of people, and situations, taking place simultaneously.

HOW THE DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT SUPPORTS LANZA’S THEORY

In the experiment, when scientists watch a particle pass through two slits in a barrier, the particle behaves like a bullet and goes through one slit or the other. Yet if a person doesn’t watch the particle, it acts like a wave. This means it can go through both slits at the same time. This demonstrates that matter and energy can display characteristics of both waves and particles, and that the behaviour of the particle changes based on a person’s perception and consciousness. Lanza added that everything which can possibly happen is occurring at some point across these multiverses and this means death can’t exist in ‘any real sense’ either. Lanza, instead, said that when we die our life becomes a ‘perennial flower that returns to bloom in the multiverse.’ He continued: ‘Life is an adventure that transcends our ordinary linear way of thinking. When we die, we do so not in the random billiard-ball-matrix but in the inescapable-life- matrix.’

Lanza cited the famous double-slit experiment to backup his claims. In the experiment, when scientists watch a particle pass through two slits in a barrier, the particle behaves like a bullet and goes through one slit or the other. Yet if a person doesn’t watch the particle, it acts like a wave, This means it can go through both slits at the same time. This demonstrates that matter and energy can display characteristics of both waves and particles, and that behaviour of the particle changes based on a person’s perception and consciousness.

Lanza’s full theory is explained in his book Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.

Read more:
• Robert Lanza » Biocentrism / Robert Lanza¿s Theory of Everything
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2503370/Quantum-physics-proves-IS-afterlife- claims-scientist.html#ixzz2kr3gCxdl
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Manly P. Hall on Mindfulness

In our daily manifestation we are constantly in the presence of energies, but we take them for granted. We never question how it is that we can raise a finger, use a typewriter, or play a musical instrument. We see nothing mysterious about taking a walk, talking with our friends, or performing various arduous tasks in the name of health. The mystery behind the commonplace is something we do not understand but use constantly with little inquiry into our own nature. We have never questioned the process by which we are alive because we more or less take for granted that the questions cannot be answered and that whatever lies behind us is a mystery. Science has never undertaken to explore it. Philosophy has never been able to create a completely comprehensible exposition of principles, and religion deals in such abstract vagaries that we are not sure what part is true and what part is imaginary. But some have questioned and from the questioning developed various concepts by means of which it might be possible for us to explore this unknown world of causes.

Man specializes with his own mind, and whatever most occupies his mind is most supported by his resources. Persons interested in making a living devote their energies to this task, only occasionally taking time for meditation or reflection. It would seem, therefore, that there must be a motion, a process within our own thinking through which we can create the instrument for self-exploration. There must be some way of turning the mind from external addictions to the examination of internals. Most persons have never attempted to do this, and most do not even believe it possible. But there must be some way to use our faculties to discover ourselves, rather than using them constantly to buildup our store of knowledge about externals which, in the last analysis, are of very little basic importance to ourselves. To be given the equipment that we possess, only to use it for a few years, and then have both ourselves and our equipment fade away, seems to be contrary to the economy of nature. It would appear more reasonable that we have not yet attained to that degree of evolution which will enable us to develop the faculties of self-examination. They must lurk somewhere in our extrasensory perception band, and if we cannot find them, we will never know ourselves nor actually experience our true place in the universe or in the universal plan for ourselves.

It was first assumed that before we before we could penetrate the illusion of matter, we had to turn our attention away from matter, that to free our inner equipment for its apperceptive function, we had to relieve it of the burden of its continuous perceptive function, for every sensory perception that we possess is held in fascination in the world of phenomena. It is not so likely that we will be able to disentangle our functional resources and turn them in another direction. In order to explore causes, we must break the tie which forces us to continually use our energies as an outflowing toward externals. This is accomplished through a series of experiences in which we come to understand by degrees the unity of this life principle in ourselves. To the degree we understand life, we participate in it, and we are closer to enlightenment when we are tied to reality by bonds of intense sympathy. If our dedications are towards enlightenment, we have a greater probability of attaining it than when our dedications are turned to other things and enlightenment is merely an avocational interest.

To attempt this it is necessary to reverse the involutionary process which ties energy to matter, and set up an evolutionary process within ourselves. Involution is the breaking up of one life into many manifestations. Evolution is the restoration of unity, the bringing back of diversity until oneness is re-established. Illusion is diversity. Reality is unity. To quiet down the experiences of diversity, to gradually bring separate things together, to search for unities where we have accepted diversities, to seek forever the one in the many and to discover finally the one behind the many – these are the labors of spiritual evolution. We begin symbolically by seeking the common ground of things and, in so doing, overcome forever the antagonisms and the conflicts which arise from our inability to perceive the identities of life.

~Excerpted from Manly P Hall Lecture #193 – “The Mystical Experience Union with The External Self.

Where Do We Come From?

The 7 Most Intriguing Philosophical Arguments for the Existence of God

Nietzsche said God is dead, but here are seven fascinating and provocative philosophical arguments for the existence of God.

This article originally appeared on io9.com, and is reprinted here with their permission.

Nietzsche is famous for saying that God is dead, but news of The Almighty’s demise may have been greatly exaggerated. Here are some of the most fascinating and provocative philosophical arguments for the existence of God.

To be clear, these are philosophical arguments. They’re neither rooted in religious scripture nor any kind of scientific observation or fact. Many of these arguments, some of which date back thousands of years, serve as interesting intellectual exercises, teasing apart what we think we know about the universe and our place within it from what we think we’re capable of knowing. Other arguments, like the last two listed, are attempts to reconcile questions that currently plague scientists and philosophers.
Now, none of these arguments make a definitive case for the existence of God, and many of them are (fairly) easily debunked or problematized (as I’ll try to show). But at the very least, they offer considerable food for thought.

Finally, by “God” or “god,” we’re not talking about any specific religious deity. As this list shows, the term can encompass everything from a perfect, omnipotent being to something that can be considered even a bit banal.

1) The very notion of an all-perfect being means God has to exist

This is the classic ontological, or a priori, argument. It was first articulated in 1070 by St. Anselm, who argued that because we have a conception of an all-perfect being — which he defined as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived” — it has to exist. In his essay “Proslogion,” St. Anselm conceived of God as a being who possesses all conceivable perfection. But if this being “existed” merely as an idea in our minds, then it would be less perfect than if it actually existed. So it wouldn’t be as great as a being who actually existed, something that would thus contradict our definition of God — a being who’s supposed to be all-perfect. Thus, God must exist.

Okay, admittedly, this sounds a bit weird by modern standards. Actually, it even sounded weird back then; Gaunilo of Marmoutiers ripped apart Anselm’s idea by asking people to conceive of an island “more excellent” than any other island, revealing the flaws in this type of argumentation. Today, we know that this type of a priori argument (i.e., pure deduction) is grossly limited, often tautological, and utterly fails to take empirical evidence into account.

But surprisingly, it was a position defended by none other than Rene Descartes. His take on the matter is a bit more illustrative; Descartes, in his “Fifth Meditation,” wrote that the conception of a perfect being who lacks existence is like imagining a triangle whose interior angles don’t sum to 180 degrees (he was big on the notion of innate ideas and the doctrine of clear and distinct perception). So, because we have the idea of a supremely perfect being, we have to conclude that a supremely perfect being exists; to Descarte, God’s existence was just as obvious, logical, and self-evident as the most basic mathematical truths.

2) Something must have caused the Universe to exist

Philosophers call this one the First-Cause Argument, or the Cosmological Argument, and early advocates of this line of reasoning included Plato, Aristotle, and St. Thomas Aquinas. It’s predicated on the assumption that every event must have a cause, and that cause in turn must have a cause, and on and on and on. Assuming there’s no end to this regression of causes, this succession of events would be infinite. But an infinite series of causes and events doesn’t make sense (a causal loop cannot exist, nor a causal chain of infinite length). There’s got to be something — some kind of first cause — that is itself uncaused. This would require some kind of “unconditioned” or “supreme” being — which the philosophers call God.

I’m sure you’ve already come up with your own objections to the First-Cause Argument, including the issue of a first-causer having to have its own cause. Also, infinity does in fact appear to be a fundamental quality of the universe. All this said, however, cosmologists are still struggling to understand the true nature of time and what “caused” the Big Bang to happen in the first place.

3) There has to be something rather than nothing

Called the Cosmological Argument from Contingency, this is a slightly different take on the First-Cause Argument. The German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz put it best when he wrote,

Why is there something rather than nothing? The sufficient reason … is found in a substance which … is a necessary being bearing the reason for its existence within itself.

Because it’s impossible for only contingent beings to exist, he argued, a necessary being must exist — a being we call God. Writing in “Monadology,” he wrote that “no fact can be real or existing and no statement true without a sufficient reason for its being so and not otherwise.”

More recently, the philosopher Richard Swinburne looked at the issue more inductively, writing,

There is quite a chance that if there is a God he will make something of the finitude and complexity of a universe. It is very unlikely that a universe would exist uncaused, but rather more likely that God would exist uncaused. The existence of the universe…can be made comprehensible if we suppose that it is brought about by God.

4) Something had to have designed the Universe

The Design Argument, or teleological argument, suggests we live in a Universe that surely had to be designed. The cosmos, goes the argument, exhibits orderliness and (apparent) purpose — for example, everything within the universe adheres to the laws of physics, and many things within it are correlated with one another in a way that appears purposeful. As William Paley argued, just as the existence of a watch indicates the presence of an intelligent mind, the existence of the universe and various phenomena within it indicates the presence of an even greater intelligence, namely God.
Needless to say, this line of argumentation was far more compelling prior to the advent of naturalism (the idea that everything can be explained without the benefit of supernatural intervention) and Darwinian evolution. Indeed, Darwin served as a kind of death knell to the Design Argument, at least as far as the biological realm is concerned. We know that the human eye — in all its apparent complexity and purpose — is not the product of a designer, but rather the painstaking result of variation and selection.
But the Design Argument isn’t entirely dead yet. The exquisite fine-tuning of the “biophilic universe” has lead some to conclude there is in fact a greater intelligence at work. To counter this line of reasoning, however, philosophers say we should simply defer to the anthropic principle, which is interesting because theists say the same thing!

5) Consciousness proves that immaterial entities exist

We still don’t have a working theory of consciousness, giving rise to the notorious Hard Problem. Indeed, subjective awareness, or qualia, is quite unlike anything we normally deal with in our otherwise material universe. The weirdness of consciousness, and our inability to understand it, has given rise to the notion of substance dualism, also known as Cartesian dualism, which describes two fundamental kinds of stuff: the mental and the material. Dualists say that material on its own is incapable of producing qualia — one’s capacity to have internal thoughts, subjective awareness, and feelings.

Theists have used substance dualism to make the claim for an independent “realm” of existence that’s distinct from the physical world. It’s a scenario similar to the one experience by Neo in “The Matrix”; his mental experiences occurred in a realm separate from the one that hosted his body. Theistic philosophers have taken this idea to the next level, using it to infer the existence of otherworldly or immaterial entities, including God. It’s a bit of a stretch, and an argument that could use a lot more evidence.

6) We’re living in a computer simulation run by hacker gods

God is in the eye of the beholder. Unlike Anselm’s take on God as something “that which nothing greater can be conceived,” gods can also consist of entities vastly beyond our comprehension, reach, and control. If the Simulation Hypothesis is true, and we’re the product of posthuman ancestors (or some unknown entity), we simply have no choice but to recognize them as gods. They’re running the show, and our collective (or even individual) behavior may be monitored — or even controlled — by them. These hacker gods would be akin the gnostic gods of yesteryear — powerful entities doing their own thing, and without our best interests in mind.

7) Aliens are our gods

We have yet to make contact with an extraterrestrial intelligence, but that doesn’t mean they’re not out there. A possible solution to the Fermi Paradox is the notion of directed panspermia — the idea that aliens spark life on other planets, like sending spores or probes to fertile planets, and then leave, or monitor and control the process covertly. By definition, therefore, they would be like gods to us.
This idea has been addressed many times in scifi, including the “Star Trek: The Next Generation” episode “The Chase”, in which a god-like species is responsible for all life in the Alpha Quadrant, or Ridley Scott’s “Prometheus,” in which an alien can be seen seeding the primordial Earth with life. Even Arthur C. Clarke’s “2001” is a take on this idea, with the monoliths instigating massive evolutionary leaps.