Imagine all the people living life in peace ....

[BSM1]

YMMV = You Made Me Vomit

Well, that just entered my lexicon...

 

[Altfish]

It was an error. 'Falsehood' means lying, which I did not.

No it doesn't.
Lying is done on purpose - reference Trump and Johnson.
A falsehood in the context I used it, is repeating something you believed to be true.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, that just entered my lexicon...

...for the next time anyone posts a Yoko Oh No (which just entered my vocabulary) video.

 

[Left Coast]

But it's built into the very notion of religions. As in, they invariably split into factions besides conflicting with other religions.

The problem is, you could say this about politics as well. Does that mean political ideology, of any stripe, is inherently problematic or shouldn't exist, because people are bound to disagree about it?

In both cases, it seems to me that religious and political ideologies are capable of dividing people in profoundly harmful ways. Yet they are also capable of uniting people in profoundly helpful ways. In either case, the good or harm done in the name of an ideology seems to be dealer's choice.

 

[Left Coast]

With aforesaid data in the background, I ask readers to enquire into and discuss if possible four questions: 1) Is it correct to say that religion is the main cause of war and killings?

I would say no. People are the main cause, and people will use lots of creative excuses to justify violence and murder.

2) Is it correct to say that Islam is the main cause of conflicts in the world?

No. Islam is a cause, or rather, certain interpretations of Islam are a major cause.

3) What worldview drives the materialistic motivation of maximising profit from war economies for the companies and countries?

Crony capitalism.

4) What peaceful loving individuals can do to mitigate the demonic power of private merchants of death?

Vote. And work to disseminate accurate information about what's going on and to promote empathy for other people groups.

5) What scientists can do to minimise damages from potential misuse of scientific and technological advances?
...

Insist on ethical use of their discoveries and inventions.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

1) Is it correct to say that religion is the main cause of war and killings?

I think it is people. Sure, religion can motivate people to do all manner of things, bad as well as good. But all sorts of other things motivate people, which religion can simply mask.

2) Is it correct to say that Islam is the main cause of conflicts in the world?

I think ditto to above. Also, as you have already highlighted, the arms exporters don't exactly help. And the proxy wars fought by the bigger powers.

 

[icehorse]

Do you ever have differences with your colleagues, family or in neighbourhood? What causes these differences?

Hi. Earlier you said that I hadn't answered some of your questions. I went back to look and this is what I found, since I gave you my answer to the masters of war question.

So, the question I've copied to this thread seems to be asked from the position of an apologist, but you're saying that that is not the stance you're taking in this thread. Given all of that, I'm not sure I see how differences I might have with people in my personal life is relevant to the discussion. Can you clear that up for me?

 

[atanu]

The problem is, you could say this about politics as well. Does that mean political ideology, of any stripe, is inherently problematic or shouldn't exist, because people are bound to disagree about it?

In both cases, it seems to me that religious and political ideologies are capable of dividing people in profoundly harmful ways. Yet they are also capable of uniting people in profoundly helpful ways. In either case, the good or harm done in the name of an ideology seems to be dealer's choice.

Please allow me my half-cent. The ego-sense "I am this body" is inherently divisive. Religions try to pull us out of such false identifications by pointing that the "I am" awareness is a general and pervades all. But we know that for the ego-self that believes itself to be separate, hatred of the other is automatic and inbuilt. It is not true that religions have taught such hatred for the other.

Again YMMV (Your mileage may vary). -- in case revolting man tries his mischief again.

 

[atanu]

Hi. Earlier you said that I hadn't answered some of your questions. I went back to look and this is what I found, since I gave you my answer to the masters of war question.

So, the question I've copied to this thread seems to be asked from the position of an apologist, but you're saying that that is not the stance you're taking in this thread. Given all of that, I'm not sure I see how differences I might have with people in my personal life is relevant to the discussion. Can you clear that up for me?

Please see post 48.

 

[Mock Turtle]

The problem is, you could say this about politics as well. Does that mean political ideology, of any stripe, is inherently problematic or shouldn't exist, because people are bound to disagree about it?

In both cases, it seems to me that religious and political ideologies are capable of dividing people in profoundly harmful ways. Yet they are also capable of uniting people in profoundly helpful ways. In either case, the good or harm done in the name of an ideology seems to be dealer's choice.

Well mostly, apart from Trump, we know that politics doesn't come from some divine source, and I think it takes a bit of twisting reality to see them both having the same capacity for division. Communism may be the evil opponent of democracy in the eyes of many but as far as we can tell it didn't come from God or anything similar, neither did democracy. The simple fact is that religions - many at least - are supposedly coming from some divine source (by whatever means), even if such is not provable, and believed to be such by those subscribing to the religion. One can debate anything in politics, and one might be correct in any assessment, but religions often are not up for debate about many things, such that there is a difference. And origins (veracity of such) is one such all too often. They are tied to the past all too often whereas politics generally is not.

 

[ecco]

In a perfect world, the religious texts would never be rewritten or changed by people who come after the first generation of religious teaching.

It isn't just that religious texts are changed. It's that they need to be interpreted. The various interpretations often lead to religious schisms.


But, more specifically...

Teachings of Falun Gong - Wikipedia
Li Hongzhi introduced the Teachings of Falun Gong to the public in Changchun, China in 1992.
...
According to the book Falun Gong, "Fǎlún" (Buddha Fǎ) is a great, high-level cultivation way of the Buddha School (different from Buddhism), in which assimilation to the supreme nature of the universe, Zhen-Shan-Ren, is the foundation of cultivation practice."​

Why should anyone pay any attention to the words and writings of a Li Hongzhi?

Li Hongzhi - Wikipedia
These biographies state that Li was born on 13 May 1951, in the town of Gongzhuling, Jilin Province. The first account, by Zhu Huiguang, stated that Li's family lived amidst poverty, with his mother earning awage[clarify] of only 30 yuan. In this edition, Li was described as developing a "spirit of bearing hardships and tolerating hard work" as he helped care for his younger siblings. The second, official version of his biography emphasized Li's average social background, stating that he belonged to "ordinary intellectual's family".[2]

Why are there multiple versions of his earlier life? How can you give either any credence?

Was he divinely inspired? Is he, like Jesus, divine?


In terms of this thread, it seems there is much room for interpretation. Interpretation leads to differences. Differences lead to schisms. Schisms lead to people not living in harmony.

 

[ecco]

1) Is it correct to say that religion is the main cause of war and killings?

No. If humans hadn't invented religion, they would still have started wars to prove that their nation, their tribe or their race was superior to their neighbors.

However, religions influence tribes and nations. Religions influence racial ideologies. Religions give authority to authority. We can fight for our nation or we can fight for GodAndCountry.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It isn't just that religious texts are changed. It's that they need to be interpreted. The various interpretations often lead to religious schisms.


But, more specifically...

Teachings of Falun Gong - Wikipedia
Li Hongzhi introduced the Teachings of Falun Gong to the public in Changchun, China in 1992.
...
According to the book Falun Gong, "Fǎlún" (Buddha Fǎ) is a great, high-level cultivation way of the Buddha School (different from Buddhism), in which assimilation to the supreme nature of the universe, Zhen-Shan-Ren, is the foundation of cultivation practice."​

Why should anyone pay any attention to the words and writings of a Li Hongzhi?

Li Hongzhi - Wikipedia
These biographies state that Li was born on 13 May 1951, in the town of Gongzhuling, Jilin Province. The first account, by Zhu Huiguang, stated that Li's family lived amidst poverty, with his mother earning awage[clarify] of only 30 yuan. In this edition, Li was described as developing a "spirit of bearing hardships and tolerating hard work" as he helped care for his younger siblings. The second, official version of his biography emphasized Li's average social background, stating that he belonged to "ordinary intellectual's family".[2]

Why are there multiple versions of his earlier life? How can you give either any credence?

Was he divinely inspired? Is he, like Jesus, divine?


In terms of this thread, it seems there is much room for interpretation. Interpretation leads to differences. Differences lead to schisms. Schisms lead to people not living in harmony.

I can not and have no interest in saying others "have to" follow Falun Gong or our teacher Li Hongzho. it is fully free to be a practitioner and all i can do is to give the links to different parts of the teaching or the PDF file of the book Zhuan Falun (teaching). My part as a practitioner is to self realize the truth within the teaching i Cultivate.

Why there is a somewhat different version of our teacher background is because he has not said much about it himself, so different people assume they know and give their version.
To me as a practitioner what is important is the teaching.

in my understanding, Li Hongzhi has said it is not him as a person that is important to know or understand, it is his teaching we as cultivators should understand and practice according to.
What I do know is that our teacher is from the heavenly realm, but to become a being in physical form, he has cultivated down to our human level of wisdom before he was reincarnated into this world, then he cultivated up to his enlightenment level, which I do not know what level is, but I know he holds a very high wisdom level.
To me His level of enlightenment is not important, only his teaching is. that is how I can cultivate toward a form of enlightenment to one day.

When we study Zhuan Falun we are not to make any interpretation to the text, we are to read it over and over again, and the wisdom will arise within us without any interpretation needed.
There is not one section of the teaching that is more or less important than the other, so we should also read without the intention of learning a small section, then the next and so on.

 

[atanu]

Might want to check your facts. John wrote the song alone, and some of the lyrics may have been influenced by Yoko's poetry; which begs the question is you've ever forced yourself to sit through thirty seconds of Yoko's "singing"....

I corrected it. Thank you for pointing out.

 

[joe1776]

However, religions influence tribes and nations. Religions influence racial ideologies. Religions give authority to authority. We can fight for our nation or we can fight for GodAndCountry.

Yes, you're right but my point was that if religion didn't exist, we'd still find excuses to go to war because we arrogant humans have the need to prove ourselves superior to people who belong to other groups.

 

[PureX]

1: No, misunderstanding of religious/spiritual scripture can lead to war, but not Religion in itself.
2: No, Islam in itself is not the cause, the wrong understanding of the Quran and the use of power is the cause of Islam has gotten a bad reputation. Terrorists who claim to be of Islam is not Muslims (in my understanding)
3: Communism, Marxism, are two of the worsed drivers for materialistic worldview (in my understanding)
4: Peaceful spiritual people could do, but they often do not care about the materialistic lifestyle.
5: Stop producing weapons for countries and especially to governments around the world.

There is another song out there ... "Money, That's What I Want". It's all about the money. Political and social ideology are just excuses to take other people's money. As much of it as can possibly be gotten.

 

[Left Coast]

Well mostly, apart from Trump, we know that politics doesn't come from some divine source, and I think it takes a bit of twisting reality to see them both having the same capacity for division. Communism may be the evil opponent of democracy in the eyes of many but as far as we can tell it didn't come from God or anything similar, neither did democracy. The simple fact is that religions - many at least - are supposedly coming from some divine source (by whatever means), even if such is not provable, and believed to be such by those subscribing to the religion. One can debate anything in politics, and one might be correct in any assessment, but religions often are not up for debate about many things, such that there is a difference. And origins (veracity of such) is one such all too often. They are tied to the past all too often whereas politics generally is not.

I'm not sure I'm following. Looking at the last century of world conflict, I see political ideology, conservatively, at least as much to blame for those conflicts as religions, if not arguably far more so. I'm not sure what religion being allegedly from a divine source has to do with it. People can be just as dogmatic when it comes to their political ideology as they can with any religious doctrine...examples of that are legion. And as someone who spends an inordinate amount of time on a religious discussion and debate forum, I'd say pretty much everything in religion is up for discussion and debate. But the same can be said for politics. There are close-minded and open-minded people in both categories.

 

[ecco]

Why there is a somewhat different version of our teacher background is because he has not said much about it himself, so different people assume they know and give their version.

What I do know is that our teacher is from the heavenly realm, but to become a being in physical form, he has cultivated down to our human level of wisdom before he was reincarnated into this world,

Are you assuming that he is from a heavenly realm? Or are you believing what he or others have said about him?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Are you assuming that he is from a heavenly realm? Or are you believing what he or others have said about him?

I believe every word he says in his teaching. I have no doubt in him as who he says he is.

 

[Twilight Hue]

That is a cause of worry. AI is not going to be humanlike with compassion but it can multiply with precision the greed of those who may want so.

That's definitely the cause of worry as you mentioned. When the factor of fear is removed, war will be fought with impunity.