« My #1 problem with Steve Hagen's "The Grand Delusion" | Main | Stephen Bachelor has a beautiful take on Buddhist emptiness »

October 26, 2020


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

Buddhism is no ancient teaching, if it exists. Because then it must exist in the understanding of today's human beings. And that means it is a re - creation, a re-invention within each who has a view, whether positive or negative, of Buddhism.

Because a teaching can only exist and have current support if it has relevance. Its interpretation within the context of today is its only means of survival and propagation.

We choose what to believe, and we shape it according to what we understand. In this way each person creates their own version of any system of belief or practice, including the practice of science. And that develops as they continue to look, to see, to discuss, to interpret.

Each day is another grand experiment, ripe for observation, reflection, analysis and discussion.

And each of us, whether we like it or not, ultimately chooses what to believe from all of that, and so we ourselves, each of us, invents our own beliefs.

@ I like how Buddhism is in line with modern neuroscience in how it denies the
@ existence of an enduring self or soul. ...
@ The way I see it, Buddhism, along with any other philosophy or approach
@ to living, must continually evolve as fresh ideas and new facts about the
@ world are known.

To the extent Buddhism [and/or neuroscience] denies an enduring self,
or any theory, they abandon that evolutionary approach. They set up
a holy altar of "externally observable fact" only. The worshipper who
enters must genuflect before this altar and heed its orthodoxy.

The problem with that rigid approach is that the observer is integrally
a part of the observation and its outcome. . It is foundational to the
development of quantum mechanics. Einstein in the last moments of
life, said, “I did not give enough attention to the role of an observer.”
A dreamer and co-dreamer testify they both observed the same
monster until they wake up and discover the monster has vanished.

The mystic however doesn't limit his gaze. He looks to see what is
observed inside as well as outside. The observer becomes a key
player. What is seen inside is vetted and subject to standards of
proof just as rigorous as those applied to objects of observation
outside. "Where was my attention", the mystic asks, "when I saw
the luminous image within? Does it disappear? Reappear?"

Mysticism and physical science can co-exist amicably. Both
steer clear of blind belief. They should refuse to kowtow before
an altar of sacred inviolable scriptures dictating what truth is and
where it can be found. Their approach should remain a "sturdy
vessel of our ideals and aspirations, not a derelict sailing ship
locked in the ice of a world far from our own."


Mysticism and physical science can co-exist amicably.

Yes ofcourse they do, so I see it.

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.