Volu wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:


  On a lighter note.  Just watched that youtube video Volu. 

   Is that you singing so seductively in this video?!
   

Justin,

"Is that you singing so seductively in this video?!"

Haha. Njet dude, then I'd prolly be too busy sharing the wonders of lol. Would be fun to see him do a trololo cover of leper messiah. A loungy classical version perhaps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muPg_Ny-_8g

If one has concern for others and their well-being, then why limit one's fight to one minor player that most of the world does not care about and yet not seem to hold others to the same level of scrutiny on the same issue? Most people do not even know who  Sai Baba is, yet child molestation is a general problem in our world. Speaking out against Sai Baba does nothing to fix that. He's a tree in a big forrest.

Quote:


Like, most of organized religion????

That doesn't mean there are not great individuals and saints in all religions, just that the body of the work is lacking.

I mentioned before that I find Mother Teresa lacking because she was a mouthpiece for the Roman Catholic Church. She undoubtedly did many things to help many helpless people, but she did it in the name of the Church.

So to me, when you talk about something being insidious in its manifestation of purporting to do good when it actually furthers evil, then I think of her.

When it comes to the issue of child molestation, surely the Catholic Church takes the cake (though having read Kite Runner, I don't think Islam is doing much better. and if it is the Buddhists in Thailand and other SE Asia countries who sell their daughters into prostitution, then I have an issue with that religion too). Catholicism has long maligned women who "stray." yet look at the history of the priesthood! The abuse of children by the clergy and the systematic hiding of that by the ruling men in the clergy has been well documented (unlike Sai Baba's transgressions which we seem to have trouble finding proof of?) in the press and in court. And in the book Sex, Priests, and Secret Codes, there is a desctiption of how this coverup works and an argument that this sort of thing has systematically been used for centuries to bind people to the society of the priests and keep control over them (this process includes relationships between older priests and younger priests, which can then be used to emotionally blackmail the younger priests). This far out does anything Sai Baba could have done.I don't support him but why are we picking on him? Why make a career of picking on him when there are much bigger fish in the ocean?

The comments above on gurus (from Joseph Campbell) made me realize that I think the Pope acts like a guru. He makes the moral decisions for his flock. What's the difference between what he does and what a guru does? Look at how that church controls people by having them go to confession (to a priest who may also be a child molester!). What I recall from my (Protestant) upbringing was a movie we kids once watched at church. It was a dramatization of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection. In the movie, at the moment the Christ died, one thing that happened was that a veil in the synagogue that separated the rabbis from the people was split. The message was explained to be that  that meant each person should be going directly to God for advice and whatever, that nothing should stand between the individual and God. * Surely the Catholic Church has been a vehicle for evil if it teaches that there should be someone between the individual and God.

(* they just didn't do well in telling us how to accomplish that, though I don't think I was exposed to a really good prayer or Bible study group, which could have taught me a little about that. I don't want to drag Justin into my argument, but I thought Justin's above description of asking for guidance was a good one).

The problem with child abuse is so univeral (especially when you include teenagers forced into protitution) that I think we are asking the wrong questions about these issues if we just focus on a few individuals. In one of his books. Jared Diamond discusses a variety a subcultures in I think it was Borneo. This place remained out of the main track for decades and when anthropologists found it, it was a gold mine. One subculture he described had a lifestyle pattern of segregating the men and the women. As I recall, the houses were 2-story group houses. The men lived upstairs and the women downstairs. They seemed to only get together to make babies (literally). The men enjoyed freely interacting sexually with each other. The young boys were sent upstairs at a fairly young age and particiapted in the lifestyle. What we would call pedophilia was normal for them That freaks me out! What does that mean about humans?

Is this something in all our DNA? How can we change the world if it is in our DNA? (...did Sai Baba grow up in a culture like that?) I doubt we can change the world. At least not by moral action. Moral action can give personal strenghth but it does not change the world, other than that to change one's self changes the world.

Also, I would never interfere with anyone's right to choose their religion. This is Catholic Boston. Some people take great comfort in their relationship to their church. Every group has saints and sinners. It is the church policies that stun me. I have read the quotes of those who talk about childhood experiences of being told by a man that he represented God and then he raped them. In the name of God. Where do you go when God's representative rapes you? What hope can you have when you get out of bed the next morning?

That's the real issue with any of this, isn't it? Surely breaking one down to empty their cup makes them open to truly receiving God. But it doesn't seem to work when the one doing the breaking claims to represent God. Who can one really trust?

Lucy wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 8:31am:


Hi Lucy: LOL! When are you going to let Charlie Brown kick the football. 

The devil made me do that.   

All kidding aside very well thought out post. Keep up the good work.

S.

I think Albert has given a very hardy opinion of what he believes and certainly there is nothing wrong with that, but without the links for this information I have to side with Pauli and feel that there is no proof here that would warrant me making any kind of judgment. It just seems to be a lot of finger pointing and heresay so far...That's here say, but it may be heresy ...I just can't tell from what's be put out here so far.

So bottom line, I'm just saying it doesn't seem to me that any evidence has been forthcoming yet, but I don't doubt Albert's sincerity at all.

Lucy wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 8:31am:



  To address the first part.  My take is that instead of just taking on Sai Baba, Recoverer is more so addressing the issue of being entrenched in Guru based belief systems in general, rather than just picking on one guy.  He's mentioned a number of known to be misleading, selfish Guru leaders before on this site.

  I think if you tally up all the numbers of people in this world who follow a Guru, or Guru based belief system, then I think you will understand that it's a significant amount of people in the world that do so.  (On a side note, i think if you do more research into Sai Baba, you will find that he is not such a small fish because for a long while most of the Indian Gov. supported and defended him despite the many child and adult molestation accusations and the footage showing sleight of hand tricks.) 


  Regarding the second point about religion.  First off i would say, for the most part i agree with you about the traps and issues behind religion.  It surely is a mixed bag.

  However, during this thread Recoverer and I are addressing people on the Afterlife Conversation Board, most of whom are familiar with, or to some extent resonate with Bruce Moen and his work. 

  While some of us here seem to have some religious leanings, most of us here seem to be more primarily on a "spiritual" or non-denominational path.   Hence if Recoverer and i were to bring up the many issues and pitfalls of more mainstream, conventional religion (especially the major forms of Christianity), well we would be just preaching to the choir no (and truly wasting our breath)?   Many of us are already not particular fans of such ways and belief systems. 

  Also, while probably a subjective perception, i find that more mainstream, larger, more organized religions are slowly but surely dying in most areas of the world, except in the case of Islam.   It seems to me that more people are walking either an atheistic, agnostic, or more spiritual, non-denominational or open minded nonphysical oriented path.  Even those who profess a "faith in Christ" aren't necessarily religious though it may seem that way to some more hardcore New Age types.

   There seem to be many Westerners on this site, at least a significant amount of active posters seem to be based out the U.S., Europe, and other areas wherein Christianity, for an example, has reigned in a religious form for a long time. 

  I've noticed in my own observations here in the U.S., that often what happens when a person becomes disillusioned with the mainstream dogmatic beliefs around them, in my case primarily religious Christianity, but they still feel there is something out there, often they turn to Eastern based beliefs. 

  It's more exotic, seems rather different on the surface, possibly has less history of twisting as a political weapon and construct.   

   Personally i think there is plenty of worth to be found in all the major religions if one actually looks for it, Western and Eastern, though i do not personally follow one specific belief system.   Ultimately, i think it's most helpful for people to learn how to go within for wisdom and connection with Source and guidance. 

  Hence, i think, eventually all religion, both Western and Eastern must eventually die off, or radically transform to a more open ended, much less authoritative approach, if this World is to be transformed. 

But we consider the public we are speaking too in the here and now.   RB seems to be popular on this site.  What Recoverer and i are simply saying is why not use your discrimination a little more when it comes to him or any other sources.   If one sees "red flags" surrounding a person who has set themselves up as a spiritual or nonphysical authority of some kind and especially someone who to some extent makes a living off that reputation... then why not speak up about one's concerns and insights? 

  I outlined a rather fool proof method of spiritually discriminating about any source.  I challenge people here to start applying it to RB or any outer source, and to see what you get.  Whether or not you want to report back what you got is a personal decision.

  If everyone in the world interested in spiritual or nonphysical issues honestly practiced this, i think we would find that many voices out there that are currently quite listened too, would eventually trail away for the lack of interest, and i can't see how this wouldn't help the world and the state of same.  Maybe to even a significant degree. 

  Maybe more intune/spiritually helpful Guidance energies, both inner and outer, would have an easier time of helping people if more people practiced such discrimination and going within methods?   Maybe this would help to speed up the spiritual transformation of this world? 

   I would remind everyone that Like attracts and begets Like.  Often we resonate with outer sources not necessarily because they are spiritually what is most helpful for us, but because they are closer to the level that we are already at.  That's fine if one is really, really intune, but how many of us are really that intune in this world? 

  So we need methods of getting past ourselves.  Methods which help us reach beyond that Like attracts and begets Like reaction and tendency.  One of the reasons i like Bruce's work because he seems to be about teaching such methods.   

Yeah, that's more like it. But I still take issue with rejecting someone's spiritual ideas just because the physical aspect of their Self can't keep it in their pants. As to child molestation the only evidence I see of that in this stuff is based on the phrase "Young Men". So where is the evidence of this heinous accusation?

There have been plenty of great thinkers who devoted their life to "all things spiritual" who were fallen by the flesh. And even if he were Hitler (oh, god I hope we don't go there) if he had some insights that spoke to someone and moved them along in their OWN journey I just don't see the harm of that. To me its like outing a celebrity. I would still listen to Michael Jackson's music and enjoy it even though someday it might be proven that he indulged in the forbidden taboo... because it is his journey not mine and if something he had to say at a point in his life resonates so be it.

I don't equate having an interest in someone's spiritual works the same as condoning their "impure" actions. And btw I'm not trying to imply that anyone here is saying the opposite.