Define Ur Religion or Theology

[rachamim]

Resin: I understand your feelings. Kabbalah is very attractive to people who thirst for a more spirutal existence, it is indeed very deep. However, tradtionally we believe that anyone not obeying the strictures I discussed will probablly loe their mind. In a more rational approach, it is more along the lines of, if you cannot understand the alphabet, how can you read a novel?

Kabbalah builds upon lower levels of Jewish consciousness. The Kabbalh cultists, like "Kabbalah Center" and the man that was linked to try to tell people that any religion can study Kaballh, anyone can study it without a foundation in the science, and so on. That is just ridiculous.

Let us say for example, a person like Madonna studies it. She is a Catholic, or perhaps just a believe in Christ at theis point. whatever. However, Kabbaalah being a Jewish School is diametrically opposed to anything Christian. Plus these organisations charge money! The idea that on can buy and sell knowledge of G-D is anthema to Jews!


On your teacher being a fraud...Does he charge money? At any point, to anyone? If "yes," believe it or not he is a comeplete fraud. Judaism is very specific on these particular issues. We discourage converts. Not because we jealously hide our techanings but because we believe that only very hihly motivated people will be able to master any level of consciousness. The traditional formula is to refuse a student 3 times, and if they continue seeking to welcome them with open arms.

Then, to each that one does not even have to convert to study the teachings is again nonsense. How can you profess to be a Christian, etc while reciting basic Jewish creeds that are diametrically opposed to your faith? Westerners have this buffet attitude towards spirtuality. It is true that G-D is universal no matter your form of worship, however, if you are reciting things that profess A, B and C, and then in your heart or beliving X, Y and Z, it makes no sense.

The basic Islamic credo is, "There is no G-D but G-D, and Muhammed is his messenger." If I am a Muslim, this is the most basic part of my faith, and then go to some Kabbalh course that does not even hold that Muhammed was anything, it is completely non-sensical.

On a more specific level, research the man, he is not unknown. He is but one of many who sell these teachings to people who do not have the faintest foundation in Judaic thought,and that is unfair to the "students." As I said, if I cannot even recognise the alphabet how on Earth would I be able to read a novel? It is common sense.

Anyone can find the right path, but it takes great effort. It is also important to note that we do not require folks to believ ein our way. You can be a Muslim, whatever and still join in the Reward To Come, just as any Jew can. Only 7 Commandments are universal, the so called "Noahide Commandments," given to Noah. Only Jews must abide by the 613. However, if one finds the Jewish way appealing, or a source of truth, it is away perhaps, although not articulated just so, of finding extra Grace.

 

[rachamim]

Resin: "Buddhism." There was a film I saw about the Jewish thing for Buddhism. Only assimilated Jews find it at all appealing because you can find its basic premise within Judaisim! Meditation, Reincarnation, Karma, Live and Let Live, but with one major difference. True Buddhist thought holds intoxicants to be forbidden while in Judaism they are required (unless mediclly unable) hahahaha.

 

[rachamim]

Control Denied: "Here and now.": That is exactly Ayn Rand's argument AGAINST Buddhism hahaha. She was writing the thought in the very early 60s as Western intellectuals were devloping their fascination for all things Eadstern. he arged that adopting a belief system and world view developed millenia ago as a NEW way of life was counter-intutive and non-sensical.

Judaisim though does not rely on any "ancient" structure. It has evolved (highly) over the course of 4000 years. Do we kill our sons who do not follow every instruction? Do we abandon people to die just because they have skin conditions?

Today most Jews pratice Rabbinic Judaisim which is HIGHLY Evolved, having been developed in the wake of the Roman Exile and the loss of the Temple Cult. We have substituted Sacraices with Charity, and many, many other evolved practices.

We also teach personal interpreation and customs are the rule, not the exception meaning that we can interpret our faith as we see fit as long as we retain some very basic principles.

We are the oldest religion on the planet, as well as the longest continuous religion, but are keenly modern. The perception you hold I believe I somewhat common, probablly owing to the habits of some groups like Modern Chassidim (Hassidic) who wear clothes that were fashinable 500 years ago and do resist modern change. However, their faith, whether or not they even realise it is highly modern (Moden Chassidism did not even exist 300 years ago!).

"Judaisim does not preach racism.": I do not understand the point before it, but of course it does not preach that AT ALL.

"The Chosen People" is not the positive thing non-Jews imagine it to be. It refers to the CHOICE made by Jews, not G-D. We CHOSE to accept the onus of the 613 Commandments. It does not mean "favoureD" per se.

Physially, because of attrition and assimilation we represent every physical form on the planet. We have Jews who look Chinese (from Assam and parts of Mynammar/Burma, the Chin Tribe who claim descent from a Lost Tribe), to the LEmba in S. Africa, a black tribe who actually are descended from Jews who migrted there during Judea's existence. This has been proven via geneitc science as well as my ethnological research, etc.

I am fair skinned, very blue eyes and when I was a tot I had white hair. I have 3 children who would be called black in the US. My wife is a convert, a Bisaya from the Philippines. the point being that we do not believe in the physical at all. We oppose inter-marriage for religious reasons, because as we see with inter-marriage around the world the offspring of these unions incorporate elements from bot parents' backgrounds, and eventually within a couple of generqations more often than not Judaisim ends in that family.

 

[GoddessLSD-XTC]

Seven Noahide Laws

To Rach:

Jews endeavor to impose upon gentiles 7 laws God,
according to Jewish mythology, revealed to Adam & Noah:
prohibiting idolatry, blasphemy (denying Holocaust dogma?),
murder (even of an embryo), sexual sins (homosexuality,
adultery etc.), theft, eating flesh from a living (sic) animal,
disobedience of Jewish authority (courts). A non-Jew who
violates any of these laws is to be decapitated; whereas a
Jew faces similar laws with little or no penalty! Amazingly,
Congress passed a Public Law praising these 7 laws and an
alleged Messiah in New York!

Sources: Talmud (Sanh. 56); Ency. Judaica, sv., "Noachide
Laws" (Freemasons = "Noachites," qv. Webster's unabridged
dictionary); Public Law 102-14 (3/20/91).

 

[neonads]

what is Ur idea of "Heaven on Earth"?

Firstly I believe that nothing is constant and all states are fleeting. These moments come when all thought is erased. e.g. Being in the mix, riding a wave, sex etc.

 

[rachamim]

G-Dess: Noah predates both Judaisim and Jews, sow e do not try to impose anything. They are basic laws that serve all mankind and in fact, we do not reuire anyone to even follow the 7 Noahide Commandments. We leave the choice to the person. We are all for Free Will. Your soul is your business, that is a basic Jewish axiom.

I have to tell you though that you are cluessless on what the 7 are. Sexuality has nothing to do with them, neither does "blasphemy," or dietary laws of any kind, and so on. Please get your facts straight before taking up a battle.

 

[GoddessLSD-XTC]

Seven Noahide Laws -- Wiki

I have to tell you though that you are cluessless on what the 7 are. Sexuality has nothing to do with them, neither does "blasphemy," or dietary laws of any kind, and so on. Please get your facts straight before taking up a battle.

Ur sooo arrogant Rach. How are my facts not straight?!

The seven laws listed by the Tosefta and the Talmud are

Prohibition of Idolatry: You shall not have any idols before God.
Prohibition of Murder: You shall not murder. (Genesis 9:6)
Prohibition of Theft: You shall not steal.
Prohibition of Sexual Promiscuity: You shall not commit any of a series of sexual prohibitions, which include adultery, incest, bestiality and male homosexual intercourse.
Prohibition of Blasphemy: You shall not blaspheme God's name.
Dietary Law: Do not eat flesh taken from an animal while it is still alive. (Genesis 9:4)
Requirement to have just Laws: You shall set up an effective judiciary to enforce the preceding six laws fairly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Laws_of_Noah

Here's the part about decapitation in Sanhedrin for heathens violating the laws:
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_56.html

Heres an article in the Jewish Encyclopedia, which mentions decapitation for violating the Noachide Laws:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=113&letter=L

 

[rachamim]

G-Dess: First off, Wikipedia is useless as a source as I have said many times, indeed I have authored dozens of pieces on there and srtill say the same thing. Why? As I have told you and others, it is without any real editorial policy ergo anyone can out anything they want as a new entry or to reedit an existing entry.

I am arroogant? People mistake confidence in facts as arrogance, and in your case G-Dess, you having used avowed anti-jewish hate mongers as primary and secondadry sources over and over, i would be careful about labeling anything. I am sure you have not easily forgotten that CE and P thread where you used a Lithuanian non-Jew as a"Talmudic expert" despite te fact that th man had believed the Talmud to have been wirtten in Hebrew, plus the fact that even the Czar's Secret Police had labeled him as a lunatic (and coming from the Czar in terms of anti-Jewishness that is saying a WHOLE lot). Anyway, onto this subject.

First, i will go over the 7 Noahide Commandments and then talk about why your idea is incorrect.

I) "Belief in One G-D," not "idolatry" per se. One must believe in one and only one G-D. how does this relate to say Hindus, let alone Triniatrian Christians like the Roman Catholics? Its requirement is negated by the simple and very basic requirement of "having never been exposed" to the truth, and then and only then "willfully denying truth once one is exposed to the truth."

Ergo, if you were born a Tamil in southen India or in parts of Sri Lanka, you would have no real concept of monogamy, as you have lived (in almost all cases) an insular existence, and noone in your family or village has ever been taught ny other worship other than hinduism, et al.

If we do not know the truth, we cannot be accused of ignoring the truth. Ideally one shouldalways seek actual truth but G-D is compassionate and knows (knows everything) that we must cope with a whole range of day to day variables that do not often allow one deep introspection.

II) "No murder.": Enough said.

"No theft.": Ditto.

IV) "No Sexual Promiscuity.": No adultery but polygamy is allowed, and furthermore nowhere in any way, shape or form are we told what is a true marriage process so as long as one takes one into one's heart, it equals marriage upon physical consummation. As for "homosexuality," etc, that has nothing to dow ith the Noahide LAws, it is part of the 613.

V) "No blasphemy.": Only denying the One G-D equals thus, nothing else. Ahgain, if one is not exposed to the truth, they have a clean slate in G-D's eyes.

VI) "No eating of aliving animal." Do I really have to tell anyone here not to take a bite out of a breathing animal? We consider, as does G-D, the feelings of ths animal which is created by G-D and worthy of or respect and humility.

It has nothing to do with anything else G-Dess, it only apples ot a breathing animal. Of cours, if you were born in Fukkien in China and everyone you knew was munching on living animals (as they often do there and elsewhere) and you had no idea it was prohibited, you are again with a clean slate.

VII) "Judges." One must have a legal system of some kind, any kind, and one must do one's best to adhere to it AS LONG AS it does not conflict with G-D's Laws.

For example, in the US they are anal retentive about mind altering substances. they do allow alchol, so we should try to use it for the requirement of intoxication, but only if physiucally able. If unable, one must still try to meet the Commandment and thus one should use others, even when it conflicts with the secual legal code.

As for the "decapitation by the Sanhedrin," G-Dess are you actually that forgetful? Do you NOT remember that you tried to introduce THAT into the above mentioned thread in CE and P? Do I need to remind you how Imploded that idea?

I will give you another tip, for Jewish Law, talk to knowledgeable Jews, not Lithuanian crackpots who lived 150 years ago and do not even have the most basic knowledge of the subject.

The last Sanhedrin sentenced 2 people to death over its entire existence and neither were non-Jews, let alone anyone charged or anything like that. It is not even a true admonition, i the context you present it.

 

[yougene]

I have to say that I get a great kick out of Westener's fascination with Buddhisim. You know, if you think it so attractive, you might try actually delving physically intot heri world and see if it still holds that appeal. In Cambodia i would see women putting their newborn daughters on the sides of swamps in the hopes of crocs eating them, or at least dying of exposure. I never try to school people in life so to speak, but am curious and so brought it up through a translator. I am told it is common. Why? Because as infants their karma is way ahead and as such they will be reborn into better incarnations and therefore killing them is an act of compassion.

You recognize the complex evolution of your own tradition but you draw broad strokes through other traditions. Like Judaism, Buddhism isn't monolithic and is no magic bullet.

You see Buddhism throough an exotic prisom perhaps but there is agood reason why in anyplace it has come up against other faiths it has failed. Afghanistan was a Buddhist cetre once upon a time.

Buddhism is the fastest growing orientation in the West. There's good reason for that. It directly appeals to our post-Enlightenment need for empirical verification.

Resin: I understand your feelings. Kabbalah is very attractive to people who thirst for a more spirutal existence, it is indeed very deep. However, tradtionally we believe that anyone not obeying the strictures I discussed will probablly loe their mind. In a more rational approach, it is more along the lines of, if you cannot understand the alphabet, how can you read a novel?

Kabbalah builds upon lower levels of Jewish consciousness. The Kabbalh cultists, like "Kabbalah Center" and the man that was linked to try to tell people that any religion can study Kaballh, anyone can study it without a foundation in the science, and so on. That is just ridiculous.

Kabbalah does build on Jewish knowledge and experience but its "Tree of Life" is not an experience unique to Jews. Plotinus was talking of emanation thousands of years ago, and Plato had the allegory of the cave even long before then. Variations on this metaphysical conception is found in pretty much all traditions. In my opinion, if there is one Jewish conception that can speak to people outside the Jewish tradition, it is the "Tree of Life".

Resin: "Buddhism." There was a film I saw about the Jewish thing for Buddhism. Only assimilated Jews find it at all appealing because you can find its basic premise within Judaisim! Meditation, Reincarnation, Karma, Live and Let Live, but with one major difference. True Buddhist thought holds intoxicants to be forbidden while in Judaism they are required (unless mediclly unable) hahahaha.

There is no "true" Buddhist or Jewish thought. Both are in a constant process of moving forward. You take the most un-evolved examples of Buddhism and you contrast them with the most evolved examples of Judaism. I could do the same thing but that would be completely rhetorical.

I) "Belief in One G-D," not "idolatry" per se. One must believe in one and only one G-D. how does this relate to say Hindus, let alone Triniatrian Christians like the Roman Catholics?

The same argument has been drawn against the Sephirot's of the "Tree of Life." No matter what, there are always going to be Jews that see the 10 perspectives as 10 different Gods. For the same reason, it's completely reasonable and common to be monotheistic in the face of a Hindu pantheon. Deity's are anthropomorphized perspectives on the One.

 

[ControlDenied]

something interesting i read in an alan moore interview yesterday...though of course he is no 'official' expert or anything. but he said the template of kabbalah actually originates with pythagorus and not jews...he proposed an extra 3 spheres of being/essence on top of the 7 that already existed at the time. im not really sure of this myself, or care for that matter. but it was a shocking and intriguing thing to read. anyone?

 

[yougene]

I think it depends on what you mean by template and Kabbalah. Some maintain that Kabbalah has been passed down for thousands of years from one practitioner to the next. It's reasonable to assume that Jewish mysticism has existed since its inception and has been passed down from one person to the next. But this knowledge is cumulative, how much of what we recognize as Kabbalah now has been around say 3,000 years ago.
Both the Zohar and the work of Lurya were concieved in times that were saturated with Platonism and Neo-Platonism. This is reflected in both works. Does that mean these ideas weren't around in Judaism before Platonism though? Not necessarily. The "template" for these ideas are cross-cultural. Versions of it sprung up in all the traditions. It's just the way the world revealed itself from the perspectives of those times.

 

[GoddessLSD-XTC]

Rach: Sanhedrin is one of the books in the Talmud . . . the link I posted mentions decapitation for violating one of the 7 Noachide laws.

For Jewish Law, talk to knowledgeable Jews, not Lithuanian crackpots who lived 150 years ago and do not even have the most basic knowledge of the subject.

Who U talking about, the Rabbi who the US Senate praised who believe's he's the Messiah?

I know wiki is biased but not toward Jews . . . read the article on "Holocaust Denial," which I have a few comments on the discussion page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Holocaust_denial

I don't understand who would or could eat a living animal! WTF?!

So Ur saying the Talmud, Wiki & Jewish Encyclopedia links I posted are wrong?!

Please provide a proper link to the Noachide Laws.

 

[rachamim]

Yougene: "Rachamim allows for a wide range of schools within Judaisim but draws borad strokes where other faiths are concerned. One example is buddhism, it is not so narrowly defined.": I have studied the faith in depth, as well as spending ALOT of time in SE Asia, where I live now (although not in a Buddhist nation).

I am quite aware in the differences between all major schools, but like ALL faiths Buddhism has core values/ideology. Buddhism is neither original, nor ground breaking. that is the truth. anything within it can easily be found within its parent, Hinduism. the major difference within the faith is in the concept of the Buddha hisself. Divinity in other words.

At the same time, all things found within Buddhism (in terms of core values0 can also be had in Judaism, and that was my intention in drawing that analogy (much earlier in thsi thread). Jews that are attracted to "Live and let live," "disattachment to the meteriel," "Reincarnation, " "Karma," and so on need only look within their own faith (which almost to a person they know practically nothing about thanks to assimilation).

Later in this thread I talked about WWesterners in general and THEIR fascination with all things Eastern and it is absolutely correct. Westerners approach "Eastern Thought" as if it is a "Hidden Truth." Furthermore, what I said about "Karma" in terms of the Cambodians is absolutely valid in any form of the faith so again, it holds absolutely true.

"Buddhism is the fastest growing orientation (sic) in the West...": Nope, not at all. Islam is, just as it is throughout the world, and THAT is a scary thought.

Buddhsim reached its peak in the late 60s/early 70s but has since become passe, although in the mid-80s Zen gave way to Tibetan mainstream (Tibet of course has several Schools of Buddhism) as in the Dalai Lama whose shi^ never stinks as far as the world sees it (despite his followers murdering other Tibetans but hey, none of my business, right?).

"Buddhism appeals to a need for empirical verification.": WHAT???? How do you see it THAT way? That is just bizzare considering how it is a major contradiction with ALL major forms of the faith?

"Kabbalah and the Tree of Life.": That is not even a minor part of the science and this is exactly what I mean about not studying basics. Without conversion and serious (as in decades) studying you will never be able toe ven have the most basic Steps revealed (not one of the so called Kabbalh cult faddists is even a true Disciple so even if they wanted to they could not actually teach it). Anyone can buty an english version of the Zohar and cop some 400 dollar words and sound "deep" and "mysterious" but remember, it was a jew (i.e. Early Christian) who recycled the ancient Jewish proverb when he said, "Do not cast pearls."

Judaisim does not exist within a vacuum but you arguing that Plotinus was "talking about it" is non-sgiven that he lived in the 3rd Century CE/AD! Kabbalh goes back tht e Exile in Babylon, please stop thinking of the Kabbalh in terms of the Zohar which is merely a compandium used to teach children. When Pltinus was born we were alrerady in our 3rd millenia of existence. indeed, if you want to go further, when Romulus and Remus were suckling their figurative wolf we were already ancient.

We predate Hindusim (which of course is merely the merging of Aryan and Dravidian mythology and belief systems), Zoroaster, Buddha, and any other faith now in existence, and that is a fact. As I said, it did not devlop in a vacuum and so we have absorbed many things from many places and of course faiths but to point to someone who comes on the scene about 2000 years into the act, as someone who predates is non-sensical to say the least.

"Plato.": We predate Clasical Greece by a millenia or more. Dig deeper.

"There is no 'true Jewish or true Buddhist thought' since all are evolving and moving forward.": Wrong. All faiths and odelogies have core values. in Judaism it can be narrowed down to just one sentence, the Sh'ma (Sh'ma Yisroel Adonai Elohanoo Adonai Echad/ Listen to me Jews, Our L-RD, G-D is One! ). That is Judaisim's absolute essence.

One can then add many other things, like the Principles, the Mitzvot (Commandments) and so on but core values are those which cannot be stripped away in any way, shape or form without losing the integral part of that doctrine/ideology/religion.

"Belief in One G-D has been used as an argument against the Tree of Life.": Only by ignoramuses. Mainstream Jews have never made that an argument because G-D is everywhere and in everything. We are HIS manifestations. the issue is "worship" of the One G-D. Do we pray to a tree? NEVER. Do we look at the tree which is merely an intellectual concept and say we shall look at that when we pray, NEVER. Seeing G-D in everything, or maifested any number of ways does not change HIS essence AT ALL.

"jews who see the 10 Perspectives as 10 different G-Ds.": sorry to disagree once again but not any educated Jew. NEVER. See, you are examing this whole subject as an outsider, and intellectual consideration is perfectly fine as long as you do not talk in absolutes. How many traditional Jews do you know in your life? More than by name? If i was to make the statement you just made, to a crowd of Jews they would think I had lost my mind (as they would if any Jews made such a statement). It is such a very, very basic thing in the faith.

 

[yougene]

Yougene: "Rachamim allows for a wide range of schools within Judaisim but draws borad strokes where other faiths are concerned. One example is buddhism, it is not so narrowly defined.": I have studied the faith in depth, as well as spending ALOT of time in SE Asia, where I live now (although not in a Buddhist nation).

Not to be offensive but Theravada Buddhism in these regions are often the most un-evolved examples. Methods of contemplation have not been developed further because they have been dogmatized, and the publics relationship to the tradition is through various forms of magical rituals, not contemplation.

I am quite aware in the differences between all major schools, but like ALL faiths Buddhism has core values/ideology. Buddhism is neither original, nor ground breaking. that is the truth. anything within it can easily be found within its parent, Hinduism. the major difference within the faith is in the concept of the Buddha hisself. Divinity in other words.

There is alot of over-lap between Hindu and Buddhist core structures. I think there is a big difference between the two in the framing of these concepts as well as some novelty. Hinduism is an ethno-centric belief structure first and foremost. Buddhism is a method for seeing your own "I AMness" first and foremost. Now ofcourse Buddhism has evolved its own versions of dogmatism and what not. But when you think Buddhism you think three things. "Four Noble Truths", "Eight Fold Path", and meditation.

At the same time, all things found within Buddhism (in terms of core values0 can also be had in Judaism, and that was my intention in drawing that analogy (much earlier in thsi thread). Jews that are attracted to "Live and let live," "disattachment to the meteriel," "Reincarnation, " "Karma," and so on need only look within their own faith (which almost to a person they know practically nothing about thanks to assimilation).

I agree, it's all there. I don't think it's about assimilation though. I think it's a matter of being stuck between a rock and a hard place. On one end you got the Orthodox that do engage in methods of mysticism but are extremely dogmatic, and ethno-centric. On the other end you basically got all the "assimiliationists" that embrace the positive aspects of modernity. That's just my surface take on it though. I have no concrete experience with the matter.

Later in this thread I talked about WWesterners in general and THEIR fascination with all things Eastern and it is absolutely correct. Westerners approach "Eastern Thought" as if it is a "Hidden Truth." Furthermore, what I said about "Karma" in terms of the Cambodians is absolutely valid in any form of the faith so again, it holds absolutely true.

The Zen guys would have to seriously disagree with you there.

"Buddhism is the fastest growing orientation (sic) in the West...": Nope, not at all. Islam is, just as it is throughout the world, and THAT is a scary thought.

By conversion, immigration, or birth?

Buddhsim reached its peak in the late 60s/early 70s but has since become passe, although in the mid-80s Zen gave way to Tibetan mainstream (Tibet of course has several Schools of Buddhism) as in the Dalai Lama whose shi^ never stinks as far as the world sees it (despite his followers murdering other Tibetans but hey, none of my business, right?).

In America, most of the Tibetan monastaries do not have affiliation with Dalai Lhama or his particular variety of Tibetan Buddhism.

"Buddhism appeals to a need for empirical verification.": WHAT???? How do you see it THAT way? That is just bizzare considering how it is a major contradiction with ALL major forms of the faith?

Like I said earlier in this post. I'm not sure how that is a contradiction.

"Kabbalah and the Tree of Life.": That is not even a minor part of the science and this is exactly what I mean about not studying basics. Without conversion and serious (as in decades) studying you will never be able toe ven have the most basic Steps revealed (not one of the so called Kabbalh cult faddists is even a true Disciple so even if they wanted to they could not actually teach it). Anyone can buty an english version of the Zohar and cop some 400 dollar words and sound "deep" and "mysterious" but remember, it was a jew (i.e. Early Christian) who recycled the ancient Jewish proverb when he said, "Do not cast pearls."

I guess I'm not swine then.

Minor or not, it's still clearly a version of the "Great Chain of Being" found in most traditions.

Judaisim does not exist within a vacuum but you arguing that Plotinus was "talking about it" is non-sgiven that he lived in the 3rd Century CE/AD! Kabbalh goes back tht e Exile in Babylon, please stop thinking of the Kabbalh in terms of the Zohar which is merely a compandium used to teach children. When Pltinus was born we were alrerady in our 3rd millenia of existence. indeed, if you want to go further, when Romulus and Remus were suckling their figurative wolf we were already ancient.

He wasn't just talking about it, his thought has been influential to all cultures that touched the Greek empire.

I have no problem not thinking of the Kabbalah as Zohar. Like I said, Jewish mysticism probably goes back to its inception. The Kabbalah of thousands of years isn't going to be the Kabbalah of today though.

We predate Hindusim (which of course is merely the merging of Aryan and Dravidian mythology and belief systems), Zoroaster, Buddha, and any other faith now in existence, and that is a fact. As I said, it did not devlop in a vacuum and so we have absorbed many things from many places and of course faiths but to point to someone who comes on the scene about 2000 years into the act, as someone who predates is non-sensical to say the least.

I'm not sure about Hinduism, but yeah it's a very old tradition. I'm not thinking in terms of predating I'm thinking in terms of cross-cultural pollination. The elements to perceive God as emanating have been around for a while. And Greek culture was certainly influenced by Judaism as well as vice-versa. I do think the take of Plotinus' was unique though.

But Kabbalism takes on the language of Plotinus, unless you can show prior art, the age of Kabbalah is a moot point.

"Plato.": We predate Clasical Greece by a millenia or more. Dig deeper.

Yes, but Plato had a unique take that influenced all involved.

I'm not sure what the big deal is. Maimmonides openly drew from Greek knowledge and he is considered a great thinker by both Jews and Westerners. Or is he just an assimilationist in your eyes?

"There is no 'true Jewish or true Buddhist thought' since all are evolving and moving forward.": Wrong. All faiths and odelogies have core values. in Judaism it can be narrowed down to just one sentence, the Sh'ma (Sh'ma Yisroel Adonai Elohanoo Adonai Echad/ Listen to me Jews, Our L-RD, G-D is One! ). That is Judaisim's absolute essence.

One can then add many other things, like the Principles, the Mitzvot (Commandments) and so on but core values are those which cannot be stripped away in any way, shape or form without losing the integral part of that doctrine/ideology/religion.

I guess you're right.

"Belief in One G-D has been used as an argument against the Tree of Life.": Only by ignoramuses. Mainstream Jews have never made that an argument because G-D is everywhere and in everything. We are HIS manifestations. the issue is "worship" of the One G-D. Do we pray to a tree? NEVER. Do we look at the tree which is merely an intellectual concept and say we shall look at that when we pray, NEVER. Seeing G-D in everything, or maifested any number of ways does not change HIS essence AT ALL.

But some do pray to a certain perspective of God. Although it's all a matter of perspective at that point.

"jews who see the 10 Perspectives as 10 different G-Ds.": sorry to disagree once again but not any educated Jew. NEVER. See, you are examing this whole subject as an outsider, and intellectual consideration is perfectly fine as long as you do not talk in absolutes. How many traditional Jews do you know in your life? More than by name? If i was to make the statement you just made, to a crowd of Jews they would think I had lost my mind (as they would if any Jews made such a statement). It is such a very, very basic thing in the faith.

It was more of a hypothetical example, but there's no one type of Jew. I guarantee you that out of the millions of Jews there are at least a couple that do this.

I know a good bit of traditional Jews.

 

[ControlDenied]

wow your guys's long-ass posts are so brutal lol

rachamim, you bring out your jewish pride way too much in these online discussions. i am really not trying to confront that - i am jewish too, but definitely not religiously - but it is silly to be saying things like "WE did that WAY before THEY did!" or that idea "belongs to US!"

not trying to start an argument im just observing that. maybe i am looking for a good old fashioned heated jewish debate lol... i dunno

 

[rachamim]

Control: Pythagoras was born while we were in our Baylonian Exile, and of course Jews were all over Classical Greece and so , again, chances are that he was effected by us much more than us by him.

As I said, cross pollination was rampant, always is, but the timeline does not support it being like that. Also, as you said, the author is not an "expert" let alone someone who can even read actual Kabbalah texts, so his words should not be given much weight as I see it (none from the idea you mentioned0.

G-Dess: "Sanhedrin was a book of Talmud.": Yes, but more importantly it was the Supreme Court of our nation and People for a millenia or more and as such when quoting Talmud, you need to attribute it as such. Sanhedrin was NOT theBook though that contained that tidbit.

"Rabbi who believes he is the Messiah, and was praised by the US Govt.": I know of no such Rabbi, perhaps you might clarify whom you believe THAT to be. For the record, I was of course talking about the man you yourself used as your primary source in the afore mentioned CE and P thread, surely you remember.

"Wiki is biased but not against Jews.": It is biased against everything since it has no real editorial policy, as I said. Anyone can post anything which makes it absolutely UNreliable. I have had plenty of morons reedit articles i composed to make racist diatribes against Jews and long ago grew tired of playing the "Reedit" game back and forth.

"Who could eat a live animal?" Chinese for one, Koreans and Japanese for ohers. Chinese have a urious taste for cats fried LIVE, and eaten while they still move their mouths. A huge brouhaha over in Beijing about 3 months ago when some more enlightened Chinese took issue with the practice and the GOvt made the protestors shut up (go figure). Eating monkey brains is not just urban legend by the way, surely you might have seen it when you went to BK, yes? Art one time it was all the rage there so add the Thai to the mix as well.

"Is Rachamim saying the links G-Dess posted are wrong.":I am saying that just like the first time you posted THAT link (non-Jews being executed) you have taken a mis-translated dictum, also taken out of context to make a spurious point. Did you not pay attention to that CE and P thread? Surely you remember?

"Please provide a proper link to Noahide Laws.": G-Dess, did you actually read my last couple of posts? I expleined why your contetions are wrong, and only your understanding of the laws are wrong. Do you want a link showing the mentioned misunderstandings are as such? Do you want a link telling how one is only responsible for a sin if they understand fully that it is indeed a sin after all? Please be specific.

 

[rachamim]

Yougene: "Theraveda is the most unevolved usually.": No offence Yougene but have you ever been to a country where it is actually practiced? People in Cambodia happen to be eons ahead of most Tibetans in both literacy and religious instruction. In Tibet people are still being burned alive over Buddhist sectarian strife!

One could argue Japense Zen is somewhat more advanced but they would be introducing personal cultural bias into the issue since it is most like Wesern mores in terms of genteel and calm introspection, and the fact that Japan does not suffer (now) from willfull killing of infants, etc as far as a cultural practice.

"Allot of overlap between Hindu and Buddhist core values.": Absolutely but that is to be expected given the fact that the Buddha never declared his teachings to be anything but Hindu enlightenment in a Hindu frame of reference.

I will continue later...

 

[ControlDenied]

im not sure why alan moore said that. tbh it did seem like he was just bragging about being able to find some kind of secret information... plus, as we know with history as it is, pythagoras might have been the first to write about 10 spheres of consciousness or what-have-you (seriously, what HAVE you?!?!) but it didnt mean jews didnt sneak that idea into his bulging Greek forehead

 

[rachamim]

Control: Well it is going to be impossible to prove one way or the other but I would say (as i did) that the liklihood is that we taught Pythagoras given the context and history involved.

People have an idea that Kabbalah developed in the middle Ages when we were engaging in its practices before the Common Era. Merkava (Chariot) was only one School of Mysticism of which came to be collectively known as Kabbalah.

People used to imagine that Gnostics had influenced Jews until they discovered Hammadi, etc. My money is on the Jews, not because they are my People but because with 4000 continuous years the odds are highly in their favour any way you look at it.

Yougene Continued...: "It is not so much 'assminlation' though. On one hand you have Orthadoxy, and on the other Assimilationists with all things modern.": You surely can recognise the oxymornic turn of phrase, yes? "Orthadoxy" as a label is entirely modern, and is too narrow a label at that. I use "Traditional" most of the time because that is about the most accurate way to describe it.

Within Orthadoxy you have "Modern ORthadox," "Chassidim," "ultra-Orthadox" which are of course sometimes confused with Chassidim and so on and so forth. there is only one Judaisim. how much you try to abide by its teachings defines you as a Traditionalist,. or a Modernist, with Assimilationism being the far extreme of Modernism, even to the point of discarding the faith while retaining the cultural practices, or else even discarding those as so many Jews in America do.

Chassidim are actually rebels, most early ones were excommunicated by the Traditonalists, but because the Chassidim have managed to usually retain the trappings of those times (300 years ago) they are seen by Modernists as being the epitome of Traditionalists. the point though is that these labels can be confusing even for many Jews.

movements like "Liberal," "Reform," "Conservative," "reconstructionist, and "Humanist" are just weak attempts to rationalise a person's failure to live by the correct teachings. "My neighbours do not understand Family Purity Laws that require my wife and I to sleep in separate rooms, and even eat at different tables for nearly half the month so instead we will discard most or all of those Laws and live like our neighbours." This is the frame of mind almost always that is responsible for these failures within Judaisim.

It is a plural moder of thought, but plural in that we are responsible for interpreting teachings while ALWAYS retaining specific core values.

On "Orthadoxy being ethno-centric...": Well of course! If they were not I would not be ehre today. in the US almost 60% of Jews marry non-Jews. Of those marriages most do not retain even fringe levels of Judaic Observance, and in this day and age this includes culturlisms as well (Judaisim is a religion, while Jewishness is also related to one's ethnicity/Peoplehood). In the former USSR the figure is close to 70% of marriages and so that in that ethno-centrism we see the continuance of the oldest continuous culture on the planet and I am happy for it. Had my wife not said to me, BEFORe I even thought of her like that, "I wish to become a Jew," I would have never even considered her as a prtner. Why? Not any kind of bias, but the desire to see this ancient culture (not so much religion to me) continue.

"Ethno-centrism" can have ugly connotations, espeically from a Jewish perspective but I understand (I think) your usage of the term.

"Zen followers would disagree with Rachamim's opinion on Core Values within all forms of Buddhism.": OK, how so? I have been to Japan a couple of times, visited their shrines and even talked but admittedly not in depth. On my own I have certainly stuied their tenents and teachings when I embarked on my own search for truth, but I am always open to ideas.

"Hos is Islam the fastest growing religion? Birth? Conversion? Immigration?": in the West, all of the above but worldover it is by conversion.

I live in the Philippines as ome already know (some quite well). This is a country with a significant Muslim minority. However, they are limited geographically to the southern islands (like my own). However, of the majority Catholics, more than a quarter million have converted to Islam only within the last 10 years and that is only according to govt. statistics so that the real figure is going to most likely be well over 500,000. that is an incredible number when you factor in generationald ata like ages (most are quite young and so will have full families even without poloygamy and so forth).


All over the world it is the same. With little stumbling blocks, since the Islamic Advent it has been much the same although int he first few centuries it was by the sword. however, islam ittself is conducive to these mass conversions for its , and many will be offended, its PREJUDICIAL strictures. Let me qualify the statement before people whine.

In Islam, there are 3 classes, the Muslim, al Dhimmi, and Infidel. Muslim needs no explaining, neither does Infidel I am sure. al Dhimmi is limited to Christians, Jews and what the Qur'an calls "Sabeans" which are usually interpted todday to mean followers of Mani (the largest surviving Gnostic sect, and the one most visible in the Islamic World). Even the Dhimmi though are severely prejudiced. Officialy "Protected," they can not take a conveyance of the same class as any Muslim and enver a camel. in other words, if Muslims ride horses, I can only take donkeys and this of course is modernised according tof orms of modern transport. Dhimmi cannot build any edifice taller than the LOWEST Muslim owned edifice in any municipality. Cannot vote at all, nor testify in court. Cannot act as legal witnesses for signings of documents, in other words not considered "human" according to the Muslim view of "humanity." Must pay a steep, steep tax that only Dhimmi pay.

What do you imagine awaits the Infidel? Conversion though automatically (at least on paper but I will not get into that now) equalises the playing filed and so it has this inherent appeal for the early converts. People were not supposed to be threatened with violence and death for not converting but this happened en masse as well.

Today it is still the fastest griowing faith worldwide.

"Most Tibetan Monasteries in the US have no allegaince to the Dalai Lama.": Have to disagree with you there of course, but even the other Schools are no better. One does not imagine Buddhist monks offing each other in sectarian violence but it happens more than people think.

I will get to the rest later...

 

[Gahan]

If I had to define my beliefs somehow, I would call myself a Spiritual Naturalist. I think that spiritual experience is an appendage of consciousness, and has meaning by virtue of this fact alone. That's my philosophical position, but what I actually practice tends to be much more colorful.