RevBogovac

I find this soo confusing... either Croatia is such a wealthy nation compared to the USA or something else is going on (and I really do not know what), but Croatian war veterans get all kinds of privileges like housing, tax exemptions, pensions that rival medical healthcare specialists salaries et cetera... how come the USA is treating it's veterans so poorly?

Mainly because of the gluten in them, but for a big part also because of the genetic modifications made on them. The "modern" wheat does not even ressemble the original (genetically) for 50%. Just for you reference; if we consider chimpansee and bonobo monkeys to resemble men (genetically) for at least 98%, would you let a chimp/bonobo drive a car? But if you'd like to know more about it cardiologist Dr. William Davis has published a lot about it. All I know is that my inflammations (shoulder, back) disappeared and the moment I consume wheat again I feel like an invalid. Strangly enough I can eat a Snickers without any side effects but 2 hours after eating a whole grain sandwitch I'm "broken"...

Criminal? Really?!? I think you are missing "the big picture" here a bit bud... Yes, the more it spreads, the more it mutates et cterea... BUT (big but as you might have noticed): viruses are an everyday reality. This one too. SARS/Covid is here to stay. We - as a whole - will have to "deal" with it. The quicker we manage that, the better. We can discuss how we want to do that. But sticking your head in the sand (or behind a mask for that matter) and labelling other people as "criminal" doesn't really help IMO. Dr Mike Yeadon (highly skilled, educated and experienced; retired respiratory pharmacist and vice president of Pfizer) explains it really eloquently (and much better than I can): https://youtu.be/Zfo0yg1mhp4

Yes, the stuff you eat and drink also influences your body (a lot). Besides cow's milk also try eliminating all wheat and acidy foods/(carbonated)drinks from your diet...

Welcome Don!

I think that is a healthy look at it... and if I remember correctly if we look at the scrolls that didn't "make it" into the "new testament" he himself saw it more or less that way too...

There are a few "wise" things to be found in there. More or less like a parable or philosophy... But as a "all knowing and 100% accurate depiction of reality"...? Not so much...

But it is sooooo scary to make your own decisions...

Oh, I was just thinking about this when I read your post in the "Hedonism" topic about happy individuals... O how the sheep love their shepherds... forgetting what a shepherd eventually does to his sheep...

It would be fair however to say in that light that if Hedonism does make this world a better place, than anything going against it actually makes this world a worse place..?

Caring less and less about those labels... Do care about my own pleasure though and making the lives of those important to me more pleasurable... there are some cherries to be picked here.

That's the fun part; the "old" gods were just here to explain natural phenomena and to establish a "calendar" for cycles that had to be honoured for our survival and social well being... The monotheistic gods were made my humans (to go with Freud on this one) to be able to control large groups of (other) humans... At least so it seems... And don't get me started on Santa, as I live in the Netherlands where the traditional feasts of Saint Nicolas are still being honoured (5/6 december)...

But the sole fact that the gods evolved is an interesting one... If we look at the scientific process we make conjectures/hypotheses, design and execute experiments to check our predictions and then either accept, adjust or reject the theory. If we look at the evolving of gods (in the light of this process cycle) your Freud quote comes to mind...

True, but isn't that "semantics"...? Something along the lines of: all Buddha's are enlightened, but not everyone who's enlightened is a Buddha..?

And then there is even more to it: If we take a (very basic) look at some gradations of religions (basically from the "natural" polytheistic all the way to the three "big" monotheistic religions from today) we see a historical clear shifting from "explain[-ing] how the world works" to "controlling the masses". The denser the populations of humanity became the more we shifted towards monotheism and the clergy to "support" it...

Thank you for the compliment! But if that is true, then there must be an awful lot of Buddha's on this planet as there are a lot more enlightened, wise people then me... Have we then just proven there are a lot of Buddha's and thus the path is valid..?

True, but the funny thing is that these traits/paths are not only available through Buddhism. Aristotle - for instance - basically described the same path... Will it make me a Buddha? Probably not (damn hard). Will it help me in everyday live? It does... I find that journey enjoyable and find meaning in it for both me and my surroundings. Would this world be a "better" place if more people walked that path? I think so. Will all these people eventually come to that "divine" state? Probably not (again... damn hard...).

HmKay, (mostly) fair enough... But what would be against "cherry picking" some of those "core ideas" for one's own benefit (maybe even pleasure)..? Basically as anyone can do with any philosophy he comes about...

Sometimes even asking the questions equals answering them... In this case I would agree with the "therapeutic" view... anything else seems practically unreachable. But the intentions of the original Buddha can not be verified any more...

It's not unfair... it's actually as we say about deities that can not be demonstrated in everyday live. If they can not be demonstrated then they are irrelevant, aren't they...?

It depends on the positions they "take". Unfortunately in the "post-modern" world the systems in place have made it so that sociopaths and psychopaths are in the most influential positions (previously most often being banned from their groups but in our "anonymous/governed societies" they actually become CEO's and presidents)....

Valid. Now, let's see: who do we consider to have become Buddha? Those who are awake? Or those who are done learning? Or anything in between...?

HmKay... let's go with that; - 1:10.000 what? Humans? Azians? Chinese? Tibetans? - people don't live 3.000 years... so there's a "growth path" to be considered here (again but in reversed order: Tibetans -> Chinese -> Azians -> Humans...).

And you are absolutely right; we should expect the same "proof". And Buddhism actually proves it quite easily; there are some people who actually acquire enlightenment by walking the path the Buddha paved. Unfortunately it is not an "easy" path to take (so quality over quantity, I would argue)...

If it were easy to obtain, it would be worthless...