Rex, can't you see the self serving nature of your beliefs? I don't mean that in a nasty way at all. That said, there is no way of God that, at the least, doesn't involve the way of self, you have talked in this thread about your impregnable faith etc, you've talked of the spiritual learning you have undertaken over the years, the way of understanding the Bible, don't you see, this is all YOU, it's your interpretation, your upbringing and education, your belief. This "way of God" you speak of, in comparison to the "way of self" you seem to ascribe to Buddhism, it's non existent except as a collection of beliefs YOU are in relation to, that the SELF is in relationship with. Your "way of God" is just another variety of the "way of self". It's like the self wants something more than just mere material things, more than just SELF oriented things and uses SELF to create it, to create this non-self thing called the loving worship of God, non-self cannot come from self.
On top of that, meditation, being central to Buddhism, is about passive observation and self dissipation (just my impression, happy to be corrected by the more knowledgeable). It's about the relationship between the observer and the observed, there is no static self in Buddhism, for Buddhism to even be a "way of the self". What do you actually think meditation is or involves, do you think there is concentration? How about will? Or active discipline? When you talk of meditation as the way of the self, when you talk of Buddha taking the route of self in comparison with Jesus, you miss the point altogether, sadly it's a point that has been repeated again and again here but with every post made, you react instantly with your Christian armour, thinking good discussion will emerge by simply adding more and more opposing opinions into the pot. I think I've seen you talking of meditation in terms of the senses too, with the senses of course being attributed to the self. If meditation were about experiencing the senses you might have a point, I know I may have talked about meditation being experiential but in truth, I would say it is surely beyond this because experience is normally talked about in terms of experiencer and the experienced as static/absolute things, which re-enforces that observer-observed boundary.
I think it would be fascinating to see you, just for a while, consider the possibility that Christianity is NOT the "truth". Don't do this because I say so, or because you're reacting against something, don't see this as abandonment, see it instead as the start of some honest and open understanding of Buddhism. If not, how can you ever hope to appreciate some of the stuff these guys are saying to you without it first being channeled and misapprehended through your Christian tainted glasses. That's not meant as an attack on Christianity but you have to consider the context of this topic, when you mis-represent Buddhism, it's polite to take stock and re-consider.
Quote:I would rather fall into the said trap of "thingness" than in the end to deny my creator for "selfness".
To fall into the trap of "thingness" when talking in such large scope as that of God or reality, is to mis-understand "selfness" completely. Just my opinions of course.
