Re: Proof of God's existence?

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 22:25:35 -0800, "Not so quick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>
>"Keynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 16:35:50 -0800, "Not so quick"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Keynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:18:20 -0800, "Not so quick"
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Keynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:10:56 -0800, "Not so quick"
>> >> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >You lose me with the nature is created by God idea.
>> >> >> >If you look at black widow spiders, carnivorous animals
>> >> >> >eating the young of other animals, etc. do you see God
>> >> >> >there?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> There is cruelty, suffering and death in the world.
>> >> >> All living things, young or old, die and are eaten by other living
>> >things.
>> >> >> Life is the snake that eats it's own tail.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But the human experience of life is a mystery that we
>> >> >> will argue over until the sun freezes. What death and
>> >> >> life may be is not general knowledge.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> There is suffering.  What is it?  We call it an unpleasant
>> >> >> sensation.  Is the sensation unpleasant in itself or is it
>> >> >> just our personal judgement of it?  What is the difference
>> >> >> between ecstacy and agony except the bias of judgement?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We imagine a world here or hereafter that is full of only the
>> >> >> good things without the bad things, but without the bad things
>> >> >> how would we classify any things as good?  To be submerged
>> >> >> in happiness without relief would be a dark grey hell IMBO.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >It sounds like wishful thinking to believe that a person
>> >> >can change pain into pleasure by a change in attitude.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Believe it or not, it can be done (by sadists and masochists anyway).
>> >>
>> >> The spiritual traditions teach the transformation of these personal
>> >> opinions about sensations.  These instinctive opinions have helped
>> >> the animal kingdom to survive, but in man there is the hope of
>> >> transcending instinctive judgements to arrive at better living,
>> >> an appreciation of existence not possible in lower animals.
>> >>
>> >> I think that is the christian idea about everyone having their cross to
>> >bear
>> >> gladly, or the necessary sin of Adam (and Judas as well).  The world is
>> >painted
>> >> on our emotions in glaring colors of incredible majesty and meaning.
>We
>> >just
>> >> have to overcome the normal rodent-like cowering in safe corners
>> >> and accept life as it is, without petty bias.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >I would be interested in seeing testimonials of people
>> >changing their perception of pain into pleasure. It goes
>> >against the idea of pain giving feedback about injury,
>> >and Siddartha said that life is mostly pain and that
>> >accepting that but not changing it was a key, no?
>> >
>>
>> The Buddha?  He said that all good things must end
>> and that ending is painful.  Desire, as pursuit of the good,
>> is sure to bring also the bad even if the pursuit is successful.
>> More often the pursuit is unsuccessful and painful all through.
>> Therefore desire is not considered as leading to unmitigated good,
>> but also leads to the certainty of the bad.
>>
>> Overcoming desire is then an unmitigated good without the
>> necessary accompanying bad.  But this was a 'skillful means'.
>>
>> >Let me know some substantial sources for changing
>> >pain into pleasure, not perversion related.
>> >
>>
>> Such a thing is the very definition of 'perversion'.
>>
>> The acts of extreme ascetics (like the modern shiites who
>> practice public group self flagellation even to bloody
>> unconsciousness) are certainly not experienced as pains
>> even if we might consider them painful ourselves.
>>
>> I wasn't referring to perversion directly but to the
>> method of critical evaluation of emotion in some
>> eastern practices.  Both east and west warn against
>> the emotions of anger, greed, and hate, but the eastern
>> practice is more detailed and effective in building up
>> habitual aversions to 'unhappy' emotions -Before- they
>> take over and are acted out.  (Mindfulness.)
>>
>> In the same way, pain can be felt and not felt both at
>> once when the critical faculty is developed.  This method
>> does not remove pain as such, but it removes the additional
>> pain of 'having' a pain that we normally experience.
>> Unhappy feelings are ordinarily felt as personal insults
>> which magnifies their unpleasantness since we consider them
>> not only as pains themselves, but as psychic attacks on our
>> self-image or even threats of death.  This secondary echoing
>> feedback can be avoided. With concentration, pain can be ignored.
>> Hypnosis can also do the same.  Acupuncture?
>>
>> What if there is pain, but no one to receive it?
>>
>> Change tzu remarked that if we are in a small boat on a foggy
>> river and another boat drifts into us, we experience no
>> great anger if that boat is empty.  But if the boat is manned
>> then our anger is sure to arise.  He also considered how
>> a sleeping drunken man can fall from a moving cart without injury
>> while one who falls out sober and awake is sure to break something.
>>
>> Acceptance of necessary pains is a good strategy that can lead to
>> the actual transformation of unpleasant experience into something
>> much better.  It is the aversion-fear of the unpleasant that gives it it's
>> power of unpleasantness.  One can overcome this.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Okay, but I don't think the Buddha said that
>life is pain mostly, 

He said all life is 'dukka' (opposite of sweet?)
for the reasons I stated.  Check it out.

>and I can't imagine a Zen
>master being so detailed. 

(Am I a zen master?  If so, please send money.)

I have lots of books by zen masters who didn't
bother to be more cryptic than necessary.

>It sounds like a lot of words to ... 

Apparently you got through them without damage or comment.

>anyway, what have you done
>to change pain to pleasure? what were we
>talking about?
>

We were talking about the apparent injustice and cruelty
of natural life.  The prevalence of pain even on the just
and the innocent.  (God must therefore be a real bastard.)  ;-)

I said the difference between agony and ecstacy was mainly
a matter of opinion.  Both are profound nervous signals.

Pain in many cases serves a useful purpose.  Why eliminate it?
We ought to just deal with it intelligently.  Turning pain into
pleasure would seem to be counterproductive anyway.
But many pains are not profitable.  Realizing this can
save much suffering.  The dread of pain is a worse pain
all by itself, and it won't yield to drugs.

Unavoidable physical pains can be experienced in different ways,
according to one's wisdom and experience.  Psychological pains
can be erased entirely only by insensitivity to the world.
This is not recommended.

I think it is not a question of pain or pleasure, or even of
happiness.  What is happiness anyway?  I think it was some
greek who said that one could only judge if a life was happy
after it had been lived through.  What a definition!

We are granted the right to pursue happiness, but the harder
we pursue it the farther it flees.  If you consider your happiest
moments you might find there was no 'you' there at all.
Have you ever tried to have fun on purpose?

One might say contentment was better than the ups and downs 
of happiness/unhappiness, but even that misses the mark.
I can't think of a word wide and tall enough to contain the ideal.

How do I deal with pain?  I have no idea.  

(That's the secret.)