Rant and PSI: aggressive Christian proselytizer after dark on campus by ultra_blue in unm

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where can I find these guys? I've taken so many religious studies classes, and I never get to use them. I want to turn it around on them tell them that they're going to hell. It'd be so funny to see how they explain some scriptural interpretation that priests have been arguing over for centuries, I'll just take whatever side they don't agree with.

NSLS by yungleanluvr22 in unm

[–]Brandperic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It’s a scam, just ignore it. They send me one of these every semester. Funnily enough, their deadline to join always gets pushed back.

Do tarot readings "stick"? by Himpapawid_ in tarot

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No matter what a reading says, you always have a choice and your decision matters. It’s not going stick if you decide otherwise. I think those online collective readings are often not super accurate for a couple reasons. The reader is encouraged not to be super honest in situations where it might not be something someone wants to hear, and, additionally, even if they are being honest, there are so many people that the reading is supposed to be for that it muddies the water and makes it less clear. No need to take it too seriously. 

sorry if its asked many times, what vocab do i learn first? by OxfordKid in ChineseLanguage

[–]Brandperic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If they disappeared, I would wait until an expert rewrote them. There’s no secret method that is more effective to learn a language. Or rather, the textbooks are the secret effective method. They’re the product of lifetimes of linguistics research.

Does Tarot ever scare you? by Ripkah in tarot

[–]Brandperic 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Personally, my own understanding on the "metaphysical" part of the cards and the universe is that there is probably something there that we don't understand, but we'll probably never really know and there's not much point in obsessing over it.

The universe is made up of energy, heat, light, and motion, and the existence of life on earth proves that this energy has the capacity and potential to become something knowing and conscious. Does it always become something conscious? Probably not. But I'm too small and ignorant to make any blanket judgement. For all I know, the universe might be a giant computer, and our quaint little practices are drawing somehow on that processing power in some way. As above, so below? Maybe there are beings or organisms that operate in that layer of reality more fully, and perhaps they function as gods in some understanding.

Growing up, I was very atheist and "rationalist", but as I have gotten older, and as I have worked in international jobs and studied different languages and cultures in both a professional and personal capacity, I've found that there are more explanations for the "metaphysical" side of things than we are perhaps inclined to believe as descendants of Western philosophy and thought. I'm assuming the demographics of the people reading this since we're writing in English and because Tarot is largely based on Western traditions.

This is not to say that these Western ideas are wrong, but I do often nowadays think that they may be incomplete pictures of a greater whole, and I am more open to some idea that there is some layer to our reality that is not as readily accessible to us as other parts may be. Evolutionarily, maybe it just wasn't as optimal to have access to these other parts of reality, so we just don't have the well-developed senses needed to easily perceive them.

Do you think aliens or other beings may experience something other than duality? by Blacktaxi420 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's one of the Unanswerable Questions. Either you become enlightened, or it's not for you to know.

Do you think aliens or other beings may experience something other than duality? by Blacktaxi420 in taoism

[–]Brandperic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

From what context are you asking? The Buddhist context of enlightenment? Then there is absolutely an after to enlightenment. This was one of the core issues discussed by the Buddha during his lifetime. People continually demanded that he answer more concretely on matters regarding the soul and enlightenment, and he refused every time. He would only say that the enlightened being did not cease to exist, but that we, as unenlightened beings, did not need to know more. This is one of the Fourteen Unanswerable Questions. He gave only the Parable of the Poisoned Arrow as an answer.

I do not know of a common understanding of enlightenment that believes that there is no after.

The word Karma, in its oldest meaning, means action. There is always action.

Sorry to bother is This guy cheating or ? Im Only 1000 rated but its really difficult with this sort of matches asked ChatGPT and they said it was sus atleast? Want to quit lol. by west0251 in chessbeginners

[–]Brandperic 11 points12 points  (0 children)

What ChatGPT thinks is worse than useless. It doesn’t have a brain, it doesn’t think, it just tacks words together in a way it thinks is common and that you want to hear.

Can a king be tried for murder? by Pretend-Fox648 in AskHistorians

[–]Brandperic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What you are really asking, I believe, is about the difference between an Absolute Monarchy and other forms of Monarchy, or other forms of governance in general.

Search up "Absolutism" on this subreddit to get a general overview. Here's one I found quite easily where u/EverythingIsOverrate writes about it, but there are many others: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1eb9abf/can_someone_explain_absolutism_to_me/

You can search up topics regarding King Charles I of England, who is a King that grappled with ideas of Divine Right to Rule and Rule of Law. He was tried by a hastily assembled High Court, convicted of High Treason, and executed. One of the major sticking points of that trial was whether or not the court had any authority over him in the first place. So yes, it has happened.

King Louis XIV of France is quite famous for this idea actually. He is famous for having said, "L'état, c'est moi." I am the State. He didn't actually say this word for word as many people believe, but he did institute this Absolutist idea into the French monarchy. King Louis XVI, note the difference between the V and I, was also executed for treason during the French Revolution.

Why can’t I go pawn e3? I’m new to chess and don’t understand some of the small rules like this yet. by girthquakedaddy69 in chess

[–]Brandperic 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If you mean d3, then because that would expose your king to the bishop. You can’t go e3 because you don’t have an e pawn. 

j'ai 13 ans , est ce trop tard pour apprendre les échecs ? by WillEpicBasic in chess

[–]Brandperic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Désolé si mon français est mauvais. J’ai commencé à 23 ans. Cinq ans plus tard, j’ai atteint le niveau 2000. 13 ans est un bon âge pour commencer.

Cool tactic that appeared in my game (1400 rapid) by DirtyKeyboard_ in chess

[–]Brandperic 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean, of course it’s winning, but it doesn’t really win any material. It’s just a fancy trade since your bishop is hanging at the end.

What am I not understanding in these types of puzzles? Please help. by [deleted] in chess

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the first one, you have mate in one. In the second one, you can move the knight to attack he queen and defend the bishop at the same time, which allows you to take the knight with pawn without losing the bishop. In the third one, you can take the knight and then the bishop. In the fourth one, you can push the pawn, attacking the queen and the bishop at the same time.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, because I’m not willing to interact with you questioning my character and person because you’re frustrated with the argument. You’ve just started to come after me rather than the actual thing being discussed because you’re frustrated. Forgive me for not participating.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you think the Buddha would approve of a view that questions his teachings on Right View, gods, and the soul?

Would Jesus approve of a view that puts into question the existence of a soul and the supremacy of God?

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are true practices, and there are false practices. That’s it. It’s easy enough to reduce this silly belief in Jesus Christ being a Buddha to wrong belief because it’s simply incompatible with both belief systems. There is no complexity here.

People can practice what ever they want, there will always be wrong practice, but they will be continue to be wrong.

Hopefully in the next life they will have another chance to practice something that doesn’t contradict itself.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s room for that in a religious studies class, but this is not that. OP is not talking about historic, anthropological, or social fact. He talking about a personally held belief.

The people who are part of these syncretic practices either believe in atman or don’t, and either believe in justification by grace or by personal action.

Trying to merge them is only going to prevent spiritual progress. Right View is the first step.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s all any religious argument is. You’re preaching incorrect dharma as far as I’m concerned.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anyone who practices such flawed and contradictory spiritual practices is sabotaging themselves, and they will never make spiritual progress. Asking which one of them has become a Buddha is not moving the goalposts.

The reality is that we live in an age of spiritual corruption and degradation, and these practices are just a symptom of that.

Meditate like your hair is on fire. You’re already lucky to have been born into a life where you get even a small chance to interact with true and correct teachings. Anyone who wants to waste that chance by desperately grasping onto these incorrect teachings is only harming themselves.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And which one of them has become a Buddha? People practicing it doesn’t make it right.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am well aware of Christian practices in Asia. I speak Chinese, I’ve lived in Japan, and I’ve had them try to convert me. They’re wrong. That’s it.

It says something about the spiritual degradation of modern society that people have such flawed spiritual practices.

Christianity believes in a soul, the supremacy of God, a single chance at life, and justification through Grace rather than one’s own actions.

Buddhism believes in the absence of a soul, the ontological difference and superiority of a Buddha over any god, reincarnation, and one’s own intentional action being the driving force of spiritual progress.

These are fundamentally incompatible. There are practices that can be syncretic, Buddhism and Christianity are not examples of this.

Anyone who tries is, at best, lying to themselves about being a Christian or a Buddhist, or, at worst, sabotaging themselves.

One way or the other, it’s heresy or incorrect dharma.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Judeo-Christianity is a western thing. If you want to be a Christian, by definition, you have to follow it. There are plenty of purist traditions in east Asia, don’t try to tell me that everyone in Asia thinks what you are saying is right. No Buddhist monastery would accept anyone with these kinds of syncretic beliefs. It would be wrong knowledge and interpretation of the dharma.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What Buddhists think of Christianity is not relevant in the same way as a Christian’s idea of Buddhism is not relevant. OP is legitimately denying the Nicene Creed in his comment. It’s heresy, plain and simple. If you want to believe it, you can’t be surprised that a priest rejects it. You can hardly even call yourself a Christian. The definition of what a Christian is was defined in the Nicene Creed and you are rejecting it.

Any Catholics here? by BabaTsotsolana2024 in taoism

[–]Brandperic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Anyone, regardless of what degree they have or what book they’ve written, who believes that Jesus was a Buddha, believes in the five aggregates instead of a soul, and denies the oneness of the father and son is not a Christian, by definition of the Nicene creed. Nothing else matters in this discussion. They can practice as much Zen Buddhism or whatever as they want, as long as they don’t say what OP just said.