The body and mind are very closely interrelated. It’s easier to observe the sensations arising on the body than the mental processes. (For example, if when you are angry you try to observe your anger, which is abstract, you will tend to focus on the cause or object of your anger and get embroiled in it.) The training is to learn to observe the sensations with detachment, to understand their changing nature. When we do this, we stop the process of reaction, we stop creating new sankharas; the old stock of sankharas, conditioning, comes to the surface, and if we remain detached, equanimous, they are eradicated. The causes of our tensions, of our unwholesome behaviour, are eradicated. This is the process of purification, of dissolution of the ego. When the impurities are removed, what remains is purity.

Now, in my case, this process has a long way to go; but I have for example through the practice eradicated, or largely eradicated, deep conditioning from childhood trauma which had led to my life being dominated by fear of rejection, and a reluctance to make a commitment. I have seen many people more developed than I whose lives are filled with love, compassion and service to others, most notably S N Goenka of Burma/ India and the late Achaan Cha of Thailand.

All spiritual practices and most major religions aim to help individuals to attain this state, to develop wisdom, love, compassion, purity. It’s so simple – why do people feel the need to dress it up and add complexity?

David, Jesus said that the Kingdom of Heaven lies within you. I’m sure he wouldn’t mind if you use this technique to take a look inside. Nothing in the technique contravenes Christian teaching; but it does help you become a better Christian. More info: www.dhamma.org

There's a beginning in chronology of molecular existence, the Chaldean account in the Bible stating “Let there be light” identifies that beginning for both processes of time and space. As molecular existence occurs there's ignition in the interactivity within and between the molecular structures formed. Without molecular existence there's no measure of space and without molecule ignition there's no light. Our universe is not an inert design; it's an igniting molecular design so change creating structure and the breakdown of those structures is constantly occurring. God did not create the universe with eternal plastic or gold or silver, which are relatively stable [inert]. Change, ignition, decay, death of living species are the very nature and design of our universe.

Genesis first chapter in the Bible predates Moses by at least a thousand years (2,000BC) and formed the basis of ancient Chaldean science and religion. The Chaldean account captures the concept of ordered design as created and overseen by spiritual minds forming a changing and developing universe. For man the chronology of his molecular structure ends the same, it constantly decays and takes new forms. However as in all life man reproduction that allows the continuum; but in the thought capacities of man there is intelligence that reflects the spirit designer of the universe that is able to abstractly reason, design and prepare for his future. The ancient sciences may have been to our mind primitive but they captured the essence of what the universe was about. Molecular change is seen as the nature of being and man is designed with that programme ending with his own demise and decay. That is why the spiritual aspects of his existence are so important, aspects like education to the new generation, faith and purpose in a future.

-------

The human psyche is not a vacant slate upon which external stimuli develop our reactions and responses. We are an already programmed psyche and experiences may affect us. No two persons respond or react identically because of our pre-programming. The pain and pleasure response mechanism is already pre-programmed in our design.

Dear Faustino
I read your post closely, and it seems to me that in terms of psychology I can't find fault with what you present. It all seems reasonable.

I find no difficulty in the idea of peace, love and compassion emerging from within us as we 'detach' ourselves as you put it from the 'reactionary' side of existence. Something 'bad' happens, (maybe more accurately stated "unpleasant" from someone) so, by your thinking we then realize our natural reaction might be to 'strike back', then detach ourselves from this, (knowing that our normal human reaction would create further conflict within ourselves) and go about our business as if it didn't happen. We emerge as the victor rather than the victim, the perpetrator has to live with the emotional consequences of his/her actions.

I would prefer to view this condition as 'peace based on the absence of conflict' and I think is part of our nature. No threat/pain='happy'.

But I don't think Buddhism will leave it at that point, because without a context/framework within which people can have a sense of meaning,purpose,direction and hope its just good psychology in an absurd universe. Is not the concept of 'Karma/reincarnation' that framework ?
This is where 'popular' Buddhism departs from 'good psychology' and becomes 'religion'.
If pure Buddhism does not teach the Karma/Reincarnation cycle, then would you share with me what the actual framework is which gives hope ?

The hebrew idea of 'Shalom' is much deeper than 'peace based on the absense of conflict'. It is that special overwhelming peace that one experiences by knowing that a personal loving God is actually interested in our affairs and lives.

The kingdom of God is... 'within'. This is sometimes translated "in your midst" but in fact both are true. Christ, the King, moved among them during his earthly life, and now dwells 'within' our hearts.

Can I recommend a reading of John's gospel chapter 14 to 16 ? You will see there the relationship between the historical Christ, the outpoured Holy Spirit and our own peace and joy in daily life.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=50&chapter=14&version=31

I agree with Sells that the author should read some proper theology. It is misleading to say that god is a "supernatural being". God is not *a* being in the sense of being an object. This reification is a modern conceit. God is noumenon, not phenomenon. As Martin Buber said in "I and Thou," we have direct access to the noumenal in relating to another object/person in the mode of "you" rather than of "it". In love, silence, or contemplation with another we apprehend the essence or spirit of that thing. This is a sort of enchantment, because revelation comes as "giftedness". The prayerful person therefore "personalises" the whole world, and the whole world is incorporated in her self. (Religion is the mode of ego-expansion and liberalism is the mode of ego-annihilation.) But this radically empathetic mode of relating tends "upwards" to the Transcendent Source, which is the Creator Spiritus, or God. God is the Source of spiritual gift (grace). However, since God is spirit and not object, God is not "here" or "there" but interfuses all things, even as God is beyond them.

As William Temple said in Mens Creatrix, it is correct to analogise the spritual with the mental, for the mental is the highest form of being which we know. Mind animates Life with animates Matter on a scale of being: but Spirit animates Mind and brings it to wholeness. So we can hypothesise that the Creator Spirit is a mysterious personality, and beyond personality. Absolute Spirit is apprehensible in the created order as Truth, Beauty, and Goodness, which are forms of Transcendent Love: so Value proceeds from the divine life itself, even as does Being.

In the end metaphyics trumps science, because only metaphysics can answer the question "why should anything be?" The answer is an original will, or god: the first mover, the first cause and so on.

I could go on but it seems that the church must return to metaphysics in this vein if it is to defeat the claims of the materialists.

It is not possible to respond within 350 or even a thousand words to the various ideas which have been generated by my original article. I can only attempt to clarify my position:

Every image of the real world, that is the world from which we get our food and shelter and handle every day, is generated in our brain by inputs from our sensory organs.

We can only confirm whether the things pictured in those images really exist is by trying to act on the image. For example if you see a pool of water ahead while in the desert and you try to put your bucket in only to see the water recede you know that the water is only an image, not real. In the same way fairies and ghosts do not exist outside the brain, they are images generated by the brain’s physiological processes.

How can one judge whether there exists a supernatural world governed by a trinity with an all-powerful Supreme Being? Only by trying to interact with one’s perception. Millions of people have prayed to that image for peace without any effect. Every drought has prayers for rain, again with no effect.

All those failures of response are explained away by those who insist that, nevertheless, there is a Being, outside the brain, with whom one can communicate. But those explanations are only arguments within oneself, an attempt to reconstruct the image to solve the obvious failure of the image to reveal itself as representing a reality.

In reply to Philo, I base my understanding on the remarkable research done by James Frazer and presented in his book “The Golden Bough”. One may disagree with his interpretations, of course, but only if one has a better explanation.

John,
We as mortal creatures of this design believe we have an ear and affinity with the designer, so prayer is natural. For you to simply identify the God of Creation as just human immagination is naive. The human psyche cries out for a sense of justice, a sense of purpose, and personal value in this Creation. This is what faith in God is about. There is more to our being than physical existence. The greatest experiences of the mind are spiritual, and essential to sound mental health.

Without faith life has no meaning beyond our sensory feelings. Fulfilling one's feelings then becomes the goal. Christianity is personal denial of immoral feelings for the greater benifit of corporate society. There is a reckoning of our moral accountability to the designer of human society. Your understanding of God is shallow, as true faith deals with coming to terms with reality and real prayer helps the mind to relate to reality. Faith keeps one sane when all seems unjust in our experiences.

You talk about God in spatial political terms like human government, handing out welfare to pleading souls. Sells has said God is not being, he is Spirit.

Quote, "How can one judge whether there exists a supernatural world governed by a trinity with an all-powerful Supreme Being? Only by trying to interact with one’s perception. Millions of people have prayed to that image for peace without any effect. Every drought has prayers for rain, again with no effect.

All those failures of response are explained away by those who insist that, nevertheless, there is a Being, outside the brain, with whom one can communicate. But those explanations are only arguments within oneself, an attempt to reconstruct the image to solve the obvious failure of the image to reveal itself as representing a reality."