« Religion is a warm bath. Atheism is a cold shower. | Main | If God is real, why do religions disagree so much about God? »

February 26, 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

You know, I question how we assume that all “addictions” are necessarily ‘bad’.

I think this comes from a subconscious generalizing that may not be valid, a subconscious conflation of the particular with the general that may not really be warranted. We know of many addictions that are harmful ; and so we tend to extrapolate that into thinking that ALL addictions are necessarily harmful. I don’t think that’s true.

Working out, or running, these actually can be very addictive. In every sense of the word “addictive”. I’d once, years ago, contracted a pretty serious case of pneumonia, and had to be hospitalized for a week. And then, for almost a year, I had had to lay off not only workouts but also active sports. What resulted was classic withdrawal : mild depression, overeating, wholly irrational feelings of inferiority and hopelessness. All of which went away like magic as soon as I was able to return to these activities I had been addicted to.

Of course, the truly mature way, the truly optimum way, to deal with ALL addictions, harmful as well as benignant, is to observe oneself, to objectively and disinterestedly understand one’s motivations and feelings and drives, and to consciously pick and choose such of these one wants to retain. Sure, zero addiction, in that sense, is probably the best option.

But this best option may not be within everyone’s grasp, and perhaps may not really be necessary either.

As far as opioids, turned to in order to escape pain, physical or mental : One possible solution can easily be to develop drugs that are not harmful. Why not? Science in general and medical science in particular has progressed enough that this is not an unrealistic demand to be made.

If we could have a drug that has zero negative effects, and yet soothes away mental and/or physical pain, then such a drug, even if only a short-term fix, and even if potentially addictive, is nevertheless probably a fairly good answer (not the ideal answer *, sure, but still a very good answer) to many of the sufferings of many people.

* I agree with you that the IDEAL answer would be to objectively and disinterestedly, through practice, be fully AWARE of oneself, and to be free of ALL addictions, both harmful and harmless. Just playing devil’s advocate here to point out this other obvious solution that occurs to me.


And, incidentally, the implications of the point of view I am forwarding are obvious : this can be extrapolated to things other than medication as well.

For instance, it is no bad thing to be addicted to running, or to working out.

And, equally, I would say, it is not necessarily a bad thing to be addicted to certain religious practices that bring one solace and happiness.

Indeed, can we perhaps say the same of religion itself? Perhaps religion itself needn’t necessarily be thought of as harmful merely because it can be addictive. I fully agree that religion is (mostly) bad ; but that ‘badness’ needs to be evaluated separately from the addictiveness of religion. Those are two separate things : the ‘goodness’ or ‘badness’ of some particular religion, or even of religion in general ; and its addictive-ness. That religion is “addictive” isn’t, in itself, necessarily a reason to junk it. *

* Again, as with medication, as well as running etc, I agree that the BEST way is to gently, through observation, rise above ALL addictions -- the good, the bad, and the ugly. That includes religion. That is the ideal, what I myself strive towards in my own humble way. That, indeed, is (ironically!) what one of the traditions I follow explicitly advocates as one of its chief aims. And yet, the second-best option, which is being accepting of addictions that are not themselves harmful, that can still be a good enough option for most people.

Giving twist to simple philosophy of Sant-mat which advocates controlling carnal desires to rise above carnal consciousness is expected from paid trolls who want to suppress Unified Field that vibrates in every atom because it would end their flimsy dreams of american dominance.
Asians have become CEOs of major international corporates & this man is still ranting about Saints.
Even Thomas Edison had faith / blind faith which propelled him to work for years before his first invention. This man calls it blind faith , I call it living faith. That's the difference.

Yes Asians have become CEOs. Most are driven by pride, ego and ambition to better themselves and boost their egos. Many will be found out to be frauds as many CEOs find. Sociopaths.

CEOs are not there to save your soul or rant about that this life is the only chance to escape. Saints are! Saints have responsibilty to the world - seen and unseen. Thats the sifference!!

That's why people want to be sure that they have the real thing to follow.

Time for real saints to show something which cannot be explained by the people working at CERN or analysed by Stephen Hawkins - that would be something. The hell with the Devils law that Masters cannot perform miracles. Scientists dont know everything!!!!!!

Satan breaks his laws- Saints if you are reading this! Show them now what good you can do. People need it so badly.

The brain is hardwired for faith, the practice of concentration, and the rich internal rewards of both.
Drugs destroy that capacity.
It's an injury many cannot recover from.
But their perspective on life is going to be different.

A rich man can afford to see all aspects.
A poor man must stay close to their immediate sources of food and comfort. They are in no position to acknowledge anything that will take their focus away from their next moment of survival.
But when a poor man discovers wealth within themselves, then they find their peace. They are not alone.

They are part of this creation. This is their family. Someone is watching over them.

It takes a very calm mind to awaken to this fact.

I re-read the main blog post here, and the comments, including mine, and something seemed a bit off about how I’d apparently been looking at this whole business.

I’d been arguing, in my previous comment, that an addiction is not, merely by virtue of being an addiction, something harmful. Whether or not it is harmful needs to be assessed separately from whether or not it is addictive.

On second thought, I’d like to add a nuance to what I’d said up there, a nuance that was missing in my original comment.

One difficulty about getting hooked on to something addictive is this : as long as everything is good and fine, in terms of the source of addiction, we’re good (provided the source of addiction isn’t itself inherently harmful). But if for some reason the source becomes unavailable, then not only does it cease to soothe the basic original pain (that the addiction was taken up to obtain solace from in the first place), the withdrawal from the addiction actually adds disproportionately to this original pain.

Thus : if we’re addicted to something as beneficent as running or working out, then, if for some reason we are no longer able to do this, then my own personal example, discussed in my previous comment, shows how that actually adds to one’s difficulties. Does that mean that these “addictions”, even beneficent ones, are to be kept away from? Obviously not : but I just wanted to make clear (to myself, in sussing this out, and to whoever might care to follow my train of thought here) that the issue is rather complex.

Also : if it turns out that some apparently harmless addiction, say some drug that we had started out on believing it to be harmless, subsequently turns out to have harmful effects, then how do we get this monkey off our back? Won’t we then need to fall back on some inner strength to not only fight the original pain, but also to escape this monkey that we have ourselves placed on our back?

And, if we recognize all of this : then wouldn’t it make sense to attempt to tap that wellspring of inner strength directly, without resorting to the addictive substance/practice/idea in the first place?

Which is not to negate the immeasurable benefit that discovering some harmless palliative medication might do, but merely to think this idea through to its logical end.

Food for thought! And obviously, this applies not only to addictive medication, but also to addictive exercises, as well as addictive ideas and thoughts and belief systems.

I’d written my earlier comment on this thread without really having thought this issue through fully.

So Brian is now a Buddha supporter. Way to go. Yes of course Buddha was right - life is suffering. But Buddhas solution was nirvana - or, simple happiness in life. Very simple. Simples. You see, life is more than suffering. Unless you are an ultra hyper Buddhist who believes in annihilating themselves by practising meditation to achieve the end of life and suffering. Makes total sense. As does reincarnation without a soul renamed "rebirth" and apparently not understood properly by scholars.


Buddha said :
Life with the wrong attachments is suffering, . . a lot !


Isn’t being conned and following a path - the same as taking drugs ????

Both seek some solace .

Yes Arjuna

If you ever intensely loved and you lost some . . .

Go into the Anahabad Shabd . .

They , . . . It is all THERE

Yes Arjuna, a drug
for more happiness and Love , whatever that means, apart from happiness



@ 777 I have lost a lot of people in my family whilst young so I know about love.

It is painful and my faith in god is shattered into small pieces

Yes, Arjuna, I understood

But my point was : In the sound , we find also the sweetnes
of what we had felt with these love one
And suddenly they are back

About all this , I read today in


a book written partly by our own Brian Hines

and i must say : All is so beautifully explained

Especially when you ( me too ) have experienced these things in our own life
it made me cry

Who are we, to find all this out ourselves in our lives.

It is so wonderful

Brian, up to today fulfills so thoroughly and mysteriously
the Him allotted tasks - that . . . brings also tears in my eyes

and Juan
Now we can pray to Maharani as well !

@ 777 - you sound like special soul. Thank you guiding me to the article

I m a Privileged bastard

Just like to make You Happy again


Our lifes are not that ´makable¨ practicable.

We have actually no freewill!

Who made the caracter,your parents,who made you born in the circumstances we are in?
Ohhh karma..,ofcourse,so that is the ´quilt´trick.
I dońt believe in freewill.
We have to do as if ofcourse from hereout we SEEM to make choices.
So life is not so, that we carry quilt.
Again who gives us ´our´ caracter?

If you have no free will you cannot make any choices in anything. That is not true.

@ 777. Thank you. You sound familiar to me. That is strange.

I will try to be happy

D.r you're wrong. If there is no free will, and there isn't, choices are determined by causes. There isn't anything mysterious about this. There are reasons why you wrote your blog post comment, and why I'm replying to it. Many, if not most, of these reasons are outside of our conscious awareness. We feel "this is what I should do," and then we do it.

Einstein understood this. He said:

“Honestly, I cannot understand what people mean when they talk about the freedom of the human will. I have a feeling, for instance, that I will something or other; but what relation this has with freedom I cannot understand at all. I feel that I will to light my pipe and I do it; but how can I connect this up with the idea of freedom? What is behind the act of willing to light the pipe? Another act of willing? Schopenhauer once said: Der Mensch kann was er will; er kann aber nicht wollen was er will (Man can do what he will but he cannot will what he wills).”


Brian you are right and you are wrong.
1. Right. We are whatever God made us. All decisions are predictable (from His level).
2 Wrong. The more powerful we become, the greater our freedom of choice. The more responsible we become as we develop, the better we exercise our will over our desires and instead exercise that will to do the right thing.

Even very high or spritual persons become sick,they can do nothing about that.
Healthy living helps,but can not prevent what has to happen.
How we look like..is important in this life..nobody could make him/herself better or lesser beautiful.( ;0)
Everything in the body goes by ´itself´
If you really watch your mind,your thinking...

No we are not the ´rulers´..
Even the very wise say that they know that they do not know..

Where do our choices come from?..

It is like our heart beat..it just comes,works..here in this body..

It is wonder..
How can we even think that we are the doers??

Ask the doers.
They will tell you about the exercise of will.
Ask the saints.
They will tell you about effort and focus.
You have your role to play.
Play it well.
Do not make excuses for inaction.
Do not make excuses for impulse, or addiction.
No excuses. No whining. Don't play the victim. Human beings are built and meant for more.

Yah, it's all on you.

Ask the doers what their approach is.

What is out of your hands isn't worth your consideration.

What is in your hands is way more than you know. Which you start to see the moment the excuses stop.

What is it to be human?

To take f****Iing responsibility.

The two items Free Will and Suffering

The Truth is always in the middle for common people
and there is no Y/N

It becomes easy to understand when you imagine
to observe outside of time

I mean from the moment that you were God, . . up to our lousy now
and see the whole as one painting
from All Powerful Free Will exercising up to this poor beggar

We really did it all to ourselves S* and the sooner you get that :
the Better

Imaging in this great scheme you HAD NOT EXISTED
Wauw WOW thought is that

Imaging the sweetest Song you know, you ever heard

You are exactly THAT and so much more

When you arrive at the non-existent end
there are to enjoy ( if willing )
these nonfree-will adventures of myriad to the power of xillion
of other Saints like YOU
who traveled through space_time like we all doing Now

What a delicious concept of creation
Congratulations, . . all of You


Who says how one ,who do not believe in´freewill´,lives..

I take all my responsabily and always did.

So do not judge ...!

This last post from me was for Spencer..
It feels as if you think that there is no responsablity..
One has to live at the best one can, ofcourse.
But everyone is different..

We are all part of the whole..

No Brian, you are wrong. You have no actual proof that free will doesn't exist. You have assertion and conjecture only. Your example isn't science, it is speculation. And most importantly of all, what you said doesn't negate free will existing or the fact that people make choices.

In fact, you are stuck with Einstein, and haven't evolved to Bohr yet.

D,.r, you don't understand the scientific method. It is up to you to show evidence that free will DOES exist. Meaning, you have to show that the human brain can will something that isn't affected by prior causes and conditions. In other words, a free will that stands outside of the causes and effects that are plainly evident in every sphere of life. Since neither you nor anyone else can do that, I and other reality-minded people stand by our assertion that human actions are determined, not free.

Your definition of free will assumes every action has a measurable cause. That's not always testable.

Lots of people go into the supermarket at their own discretion. Some choosr to go to the store on Monday, others in Tuesday. No one buys the same exact assortment of stuff.

Everyone is different. Nearly impossible to prove why each chooses what they do.

Your argument that everything has a cause, which I agree with, isn't scientific at all because the capacity to actually measure even a portion of that is limited.

Spencer, you're confusing determinism with predictability. A chaotic system is deterministic. This is the meaning behind the "butterfly effect" in which the atmospheric perturbations created by a butterfly flapping its wings could create a hurricane through a complex series of events that are unpredictable, yet deterministic.

People shopping on different days obviously is a case of determinism. So is everything else outside of the quantum realm. No one has ever shown an example of "free will" proceeding without a cause. Free will is a fiction, even though most people believe they have it.

I don't know where you got the idea that determinism means everybody or everything acts the same. Obviously every person has unique causes acting upon them: genetics, experiences, upbringing, circumstances, and so on. Human behavior, like the butterfly effect, usually can't be predicted in any detail, especially on the individual level.

But group behavior is much more predictable. This is how insurance underwriting works, for example.

Hi Brian

Interesting clarifications. I think you may have accidentally fallen into a trap of sorts, not by any intention.

Your proof of determinism is the same argument in kind as the argument for God: A closed system.

If by definition all things have a cause, because we have no evidence to the contrary, then it isn't testable. You can't test anything without a cause.

Therefore your claim is unscientific.

Hi Brian

I realize this may be a little cryptic for you.

Let me clarify. Testing the presence or absence of an element requires the capacity for both states and the ability to manipulate an independent variable in a way that can both cause and not cause the effect. This is proof of your cause.

But when you claim all things have a cause that cannot be tested by definition, because you cannot create a state of no cause and another state of cause. It can't be tested scientifically, only by definition.

Same for God.



And his bro Heisenberg....

A chaotic system is deterministic. This is the meaning behind the "butterfly effect"

NO No, ..... .. this is 7 dimential chess
the butterfly HAS TO FLY where it does
many low grade 3-D Quantum Computers involved called Kal

Saints us 7-D when they f.i. prevent an car accident
just changing the destiny of one disciple

Therefore it's said :"They are located at the Crown Chakra "
these 3-D computers then are filtered

Therefore they many times create this universe
out of compassion and Love

I wish my english was better to better explain this simple truth



re-create this universe


Hi 777
Yes, so true!

The entire creation is nothing but a projection of still pictures. Newton understood this. It's built into Calculus. It is re-projected an almost infinite number of times per second. Between the beats time doesn't exist. The Saints, as you say, can re-write the script. An airplane crash can become a bus flat tire.

But generally they don't. So many scripts to correct for such a change... Though generally the universe flows around such changes and tends to restore itself, like a river floating around a Boulder. If you throw in a few stones the momentum in the karmic river isn't effected in the least. The butterfly effect is a flawed human conception since it ignores the general momentum of evolution, environment, even the genetic pool. Everything has a tendency to self correction.

The script rewrites itself to restore the original plot, as much as possible.

But of most importance, those beats. If you can stop thought for a moment, you slip through. It is an avenue of escape. So when you see flashes of light, those are the blinds of time flashing open and shut like an old fashioned cinema projector, and you are seeing the flashes because mind is slowing... So they appear to slow. And if they stand still, the flood of light.

Seeing how all this is projected moment by moment we realize there actually is no such thing as attachment. Nothing is permanent. Our mind is detached and re-attached all the time, mechanically, automatically, according to a program we wrote, by nothing more than placing the next image in front of our conscious mind. It's one huge distraction. The entire creation. The pictures shown to us we forged in the programming language of our own past sensory impressions. This creation is more machine than the most complex machine conceived by the human mind.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.