日志
Quitted, We gave up the life as reincarnation of a child prodigy of Tibetan Budd
|
Quitted, We gave up the life as reincarnation of a child prodigy of Tibetan Buddhist
Frank Aug.
21, 2014, in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
http://www.kwcg.ca/bbs/home.php?mod=space&uid=61910&do=blog&id=3883
Today, Aug, 21, 2014, I read the article Leaving Om: Buddhism's Lost Lamas: Critical Eye : Details, I was shocked by the comments: "Before they could even read, they were hailed as reincarnations of Tibetan Buddhist legends in the vein of the Dalai Lama. Now young adults, these reluctant would-be spiritual leaders are stepping out of their monk's robes, becoming rappers and movie makers, and blowing the whistle on sexual abuse at Buddhist monasteries."
I think of The German philosopher and anthropologist, Ludwig Feuerbach in his <The Essence of Religion> said that:
"The religious admiration of divine wisdom in Nature is only an incident of enthusiasm; it refers only to the means, but is extinguished in reflecting on the purposes of Nature. How wonderful is the spider’s web, how wonderful the funnel of the ant-lion in the sand! But what is the purpose of these wise arrangements? Nothing but nourishment -- a purpose which man in regard to himself degrades to a mere means. “Others,” said Socrates -- but these others are animals and brutish men -- “others live in order to eat, but I eat in order to live.'”
"How magnificent is the flower, how admirable its structure! But what is the purpose of this structure, of this magnificence? Only to magnify and protect the genitals which man in himself either hides from shame, or even mutilates from religious zeal. “The creator of the vine-fretters and of the cochineals” whom the naturalist, the man of theory adores and admires, who has only natural life for his purpose, is therefore not the God and creator in the sense of religion.
"No! Only the creator of man, and that of man such as he distinguishes himself from Nature, and rises above Nature, the creator in whom man has the consciousness of himself, in whom he finds represented the qualities which constitute his nature in distinction from external Nature, and that in such a manner as he imagines them in religion, is the God and creator such as he is an object of religion."
In my June 20 2014 article, Oh My God the Filmmaker Peter Rodger tries to dig the Nature of the Religions, I said with that:"May 26, 2014, I wrote an article The director of "The Hunger Games" tought his son to have played "The Killer Games", from then I often think of the father of Elliot Rodger, the filmmaker Peter Rodger with searching more information about him."
"Now, I have a strong sense that Mr. Peter Rodger is the most rational filmmaker."
"He said in 2009:"
"' My goal was to find out what ‘God’ means to people, and to determine whether religion and religious people were causing all the world’s problems,” “There was such commonality in all the responses that at one point I didn’t even think I had a film.'"
"' … And then it occurred to me that if there are all these placid descriptions, why is there so much turmoil, upheaval and war in the name of God? I realized that the problem in the world may be what Man does with ‘God’ — how he uses it to control other men, how he twists the preaching of its prophets to create politicized clubs that serve his narrow ends. --- Elliot Rodger ‘Hunger Games’ Connection Shocking?.'"
"Bill Maher, an American stand-up comedian, television host, political commentator, satirist, author, and actor. is highly critical of religion and views it as highly destructive. His Religulous Full Documentary (2008) reveals Religious deceptive."
"Bill Maher - Religulous Full Documentary (2008)"
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2zhlDbMfDg"
"Collection of Bill Maher stand-up about religion"
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POhryDr0Q4g"
"It is worth noting that, only the people like Ludwig Feuerbach, Bill Maher and those who have paid depth observation and thinking for the society can rationally make the right judgment."
"According to Crowd psychology, as an individual, once she or he joins the group, will lose self-assertive, blindly follow others, easily to be controlled by a few mindless people. Therefore, most people accepted view, in fact, still is the view of the fewer people."
"In the book L'age des foules (The Era of Mob), Monsieur Serge Moscovici said that: In short, the era of mob is a handful of people on the illegal use of a huge crowd in order to achieve the purpose of the interests of small groups face sounding era."
"Therefore, in many cases, that most people accepted opinion is not reliable. The religious fanaticism of the most people is a such case."
--- Frank Aug. 21, 2014, in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
