difference between law and morality



visit the world famous network ...

nude celebrities



 

"How to Generate Bodhicitta" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2008-10-22 07:30:58

How to Generate Bodhicittaby Venerable Ribur Rinpoche(Source: )The essence of Buddha's 84,000 teachings is bodhicitta: the awakening mind that aspires towards enlightenment so as to have the perfect ability to free all beings from suffering and lead them to peerless happiness. On his two visits to Singapore in 1997. Venerable Lama Ribur Rinpoche taught extensively on how to generate that precious bodhimind. Using scriptural understanding and his personal experience. Rinpoche also gave insightful teachings on lo-jong (thought transformation) the practice of which enables one to transform the inevitable problems of life into the causes for enlightenment. Source: Contents * Preface and Short Biograpy * The Seven-Point Cause-and-Effect Instruction * Exchanging Oneself and OthersPREFACEIn 1997 the students of Amitabha Buddhist Centre were blessed to receive teachings from the great master Ribur Rinpoche. Rinpoche visited us twice and stayed for a total of three and a half months during which time he taught lam-rim and lo-jong (thought transformation). This small booklet is extracted from Rinpoche's teachings. A Brief BiographyRibur Rinpoche was born in Kham. Eastern Tibet in 1923. He was recognized at the age of five as the sixth incarnation of Lama Kunga Osel a great scholar and teacher who spent the last twelve years of his life in strict solitary retreat. All five of the previous incarnations were principal teachers at Ribur Monastery in Kham. When Ribur Rinpoche was fourteen he entered Sera monastery one of the great Gelug monastic-universities in Lhasa to begin intensive studies in Buddhist philosophy which culminated in his receiving the Geshe degree at the age of 25. During his stay at Sera Monastery Rinpoche also attended many teachings and initiations given by his root guru. Pabonka Rinpoche the greatest Gelug lama of the time. After receiving his geshe degree. Rinpoche returned to Kham where he spent many years doing retreat in a small hut he had built in the forest. But after the Chinese Communist invasion in 1950 the situation in Kham became increasingly dangerous and in 1955 he was advised by one of his gurus. Trijang Rinpoche to return to Lhasa where he continued to take teachings and do retreats. Source: But Lhasa itself soon became unsafe. From 1959 (the year of the Tibetan people's uprising) to 1976. Rinpoche experienced numerous hardships and difficulties such as imprisonment and physical abuse and being a helpless observer of the terrible destruction of the Cultural Revolution. However during this time he was able to keep his mind peaceful and even happy by practising the teachings he had learned. As Rinpoche described his experiences. "I didn't really experience the slightest difficulty during those adverse conditions. This was due to the kindness of Lama Dorje Chang [Pabongka Rinpoche]. From him I had somehow learned some mental training and in those difficult times my mind was immediately able to recognise the nature of cyclic existence the nature of afflictive emotions and the nature of karma and so forth. So my mind was really at ease."Following the Cultural Revolution Rinpoche worked with the Panchen Lama to restore many of the lost spiritual treasures of Tibet as they could. His main accomplishment was recovering the two most precious statues of Shakyamuni Buddha: the Jowo Chenpo and the Ramo Chenpo. These two statues originally brought to Tibet by the Chinese and Nepalese wives of King Songsten Gampo (ca 617-698) were taken to Beijing during the Cultural Revolution and kept in various warehouses along with thousands of other statues for 17 years until Rinpoche found them and returned them to their respective temples in Lhasa. In 1987 Rinpoche left Tibet and travelled to Dharamsala. India to see His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Since then he has lived at Namgyal Monastery in Dharamsala where at the request of His Holiness he wrote a number of biographies of great lamas and an extensive religious history of Tibet. Rinpoche has also visted and taught in several foreign countries - Australia. New Zealand. America and around Europe. His warmth humour profound wisdom and practical down-to-earth teachings have endeared him to many students around the world. Source: Background of the TeachingsMore that 2,500 years ago. Shakyamuni Buddha attained enlightenment and then proceeded to teach the path to enlightenment so that others could follow. His teachings have been kept alive to the present day through the great kindness and efforts of an unbroken lineage of practitioners who learned them from their masters put them into practice then passed them onto followers. In Tibet the essential points of Buddha's teachings were formulated into a system known as the lam-rim or stages on the path to enlightenment which explaiins all the steps or practices one needs to follow in order to attain enlightenment. The lam-rim consists of three main stages or levels according to three different reasons or motivations for practising Dharma. The first level known as the "small scope," starts from taking an interest in one's future lives. This comes about when we realise that this present life could end at any time and that after death we will be reborn in an unfortunate state (as an animal hungry ghost or hell being) and to achieve a fortunate state (as a deva titan or human being) by taking refuge in the Buddha. Dharma and Sangha and by living our lives in accordance with karma the law of evolutionary actions and their results. The second or "intermediate scope" involves developing the aspiration to become free once and for all from the cycle of death and rebirth. Within this scope one focuses on the Four Noble Truths: the sufferings of cyclic existence the causes of suffering (delusions and karma) the state of freedom from all suffering (nirvana) and the means to achieve it by practising the three higher trainings of ethics concentration and wisdom. Source: The third level the "great scope," involves opening one's heart to consider the situation of all beings. Realising that all beings experience suffering that they don't want and they fail to find the peace and happiness that they wish for one develops the aspiration to attain full enlightenment in order to help everyone reach that perfect state as well. That altruistic aspiration is bodhicitta. This booklet contains extracts of ribur Rinpoche's precious teachings on how to develop bodhicitta and how to practise thought transformation through which we become less self-centred and more concerned for others. Numerous people contributed to this work. Rinpoche's teachings were beautifully translated into English by Fabrizio Pallotti. Several ABC students kindly transcribed the tapes and I edited the transcript with assistance from Doris Low and Rise Koben. Any errors in the text are entirely the fault of the editor. Sangye KhadroOct. 1998 Source: THE SEVEN-POINT CAUSE-AND-EFFECT INSTRUCTIONBodhicitta the aspiration to attain enlightenment in order to benefit all sentient beings is something that is truly inconceivable truly splendid and marvellous. One of the great gurus of Lama Atisha told him that an attainment such as clairvoyance or a vision of a deity or concentration as stable as a mountain is nothing compared to bodhicitta. For us these attainments seem amazing. If we ourselves or if someone we heard of had a visioon of a deity achieved clairvoyance or through practising meditation attained concentration as stable as a mountain we would think this to be unbelievably wonderful. However. Atisha's guru said to him: "These are nothing compared to bodhicitta. Therefore practise bodhicitta."Even if you practised mahamudra or dzogchen or the two stages of highest yoga tantra [generation stage and completion stage] and even if you achieved the vision of many deities these are not beneficial if you do not have bodhicitta. As the great Bodhisattva Shantideva said. "If you churn the 84,000 teachings of the Buddha their essence is bodhicitta." By churning milk we get butter which is the very essence of milk. In the same way if we examine and churn all the 84,000 teachings of the Buddha their very essence is the practice of bodhicitta. Therefore it is extremely important for us to strive to achieve the uncontrived effortless experience of bodhicitta. At the very least we should try our best to generate the contrived experience of bodhicitta the bodhicitta that arises through effort. There are two main lineages of instructions on the basis of which you can practise and generate bodhicitta. The first is the seven-point cause-and-effect instruction on exchanging oneself and others. Source: The first the seven-point cause-and-effect instruction by which you generate bodhicitta on the basis of developing affectionate love towards all sentient beings is a practice which was used by such great Indian pandits as Chadrakirti. Chandragomin. Shantarakshita and so forth. The second the instruction on exchanging oneself with others comes mainly from Shantideva. Whether you choose to train your miind in the seven-point cause-and-effect instruction or in exchanging oneself with others the result is that you will generate bodhicitta in your mind. The great saint Atisha showed extraordinary interest in bodhicitta. In order to obtain the complete instructions on the practice of bodhiciita he embarked on a long journey to the Indonesian island of Sumatra to study with the great master Serlingpa not caring about the many hardships he endured on the way. Today we can travel to Indonesia by a very fast ship or by airplane but at that time it took Atisha thirteen months to reach Indonesia. Once he arrived he received the complete expereintial instruction on both the seven-point technique and exchanging oneself with others from the master Serlingpa. He then practised for twelve years at his master's feet until he fully developed bodhicitta. Thus Lama Atisha came to possess both instruction lineages: the seven-point technique and exchanging oneself with others. Although he held both lineages. Atisha would teach only the seven-point technique in public to large assemblies of disciples and would teach instructions on exchanging oneself with others secretly to a select group of qualified disciples. When Atisha went to Tibet he gave the instructions on exchanging oneself with others only to his principal disciple. Dromtonpa. Later the great Lama Tsong Khapa the Protecor of all beings incorporated the two sets of instructions into a single practice consisting of eleven points. When you are receiving teachings on bodhicitta you receive the two sets of instructions separately but when you are actually meditating on bodhicitta—training your mind—then you combine both instructions and meditate on the eleven points. Combining the two instructions into a single practice for the purpose of training the mind in meditation is said to be a particular greatness of the Gelugpa tradition. In a prayer composed by Lama Pabongka Dorje Chang requesting to meet the doctrine of Lama Tsong Khapa he wrote: "By merging the practices of the seven-point mind technique and exchanging oneself with others of the precious mind this greatness which is not shared by others may I thus be able to meet the doctrine of Lama Tsong Khapa." "Not shared by others" means that this merging of the two practices devised by Je Rinpoche is a unique approach which is not found in other traditions. I first received these teachings from the holy mouth of the incredibly kind Lama Pabongka Dorje Chang when he taught the eight great lam-rim texts over a period of four months at Sera Monastery in Tibet. At that time I was very young. When he reached the point of explaining exchanging oneslef with others he gave teachings on The Seven-Point Thought Transformation. Later I received these teachings twice from the late Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche. Source: The Seven-Point Cause-and-Effect InstructionAs for the seven points of the cause-and-effect instruction one begins by meditating on equanimity and then proceeds through the following steps: 1. Recognising all sentient beings as one's mother 2. Recognising the kindness of mother sentient beings 3. Repaying their kindness 4. Affectionate love 5. Great compassion 6. The extraordinary intention 7. BodhicittaThe first six points recognising all sentient beings as one's mother and so forth are the casues which give birth to the result bodhicitta. The way in which these realisations come about step by step is that bodhicitta the thought of attaining enlightenment in order to benefit all sentient beings arises from and must be preceded by a sense of responsibility. In Tibetan the term is lhagsam which is sometimes called "extraordinary intention" or "exceptional attitude or "universal responsibility"—it is a feeling of responsibility to benefit all sentient beings. For this intention to come about you must have a powerful wish for all sentient beings to be free from suffering—that is great compassion. For that to arise you must have developed affectionate love towards all sentient beings. At the moment we have affectionate love for our dear ones but we don't have affectionate love for those who are not dear to us. In order to generate this affectionate love for everyone you must develop a deep sense of closeness toward sentient beings and the way to do that is by recognising all sentient beings as your mother recognising their kindness and generatiing the wish to repay their kindness. This instruction is called the cause-and-effect technique because the later points arise after genterating the preceding points. You should not approach this practice with a short-sighted mind thinking. "Oh this practice is too advanced for me. It will require so much time and energy. I will not be able to develop such a precious mind." This is not the right attitude. You should not have such fears because these instrtuctions are very profound and powerful. If you continuously train your mind step by step with persistence there is no doubt that you will succeed. Generally speaking all the instructions from the old Kadampa tradition are very powerful and effective. On top of that there are the instructions combined by the great Lama Tsong Khapa whose experience was based on his special relationship with Manjushri with whom he had direct communication. These instructions are extremely powerful and effective so you should not think they are too advanced for you and that you will not be able to develop bodhicitta. Source: EquanimityBefore beginning to train your mind in the first step recognising all sentient beings as your mother you should develop the thought of equanimity. It is similar to painting a picture: if you want to paint a picture on a surface you must first make sure that the surface is smooth and even and has no rough or uneven spots on it. In the same way before you can train your mind in the meditation on recognising all sentient beings as your mother you must make your mind even with equanimity towards everyone. In other words you must learn to stop discriminating among sentient beings feeling close to some and distant from others and the way to do this is by developing equanimity. Now I will explain the way to meditate in order to develop equanimity. Those who are familiar with these instructions please meditate while I am explaining. Those who are new please pay special attention and try to retain the instructions in your mind. All of you please try to have the intention to develop bodhicitta thinking that you must generate this realisation in your mind. As I mentioned before these instructions of the Kadampa lamas are so powerful and effective especially the instructions on merging the seven-point cause-and-effect technique and exchanging oneself with others as taught by Lama Tsong Khapa. So please be attentive and generate this strong intention: "I am definitely going to practise and develop bodhicitta in my mind."Visualise in front of you three people: first someone who upsets you—just by seeing or thinking about him or her your mind becomes unhappy. Next to him or her visualise someone you love and are close to—just by seeing this person your mind becomes happy. And next to that person visualise a stranger someone who is neither beneficial nor non-beneficial. When you think about these people you feel aversion towards the person you dislike attachment towards the person who is close to you and indifference towards the stranger. Now thinking about the person you dislike ask yourself. "Why do I dislike this person? What is the reason I get so upset? What has he done to me?" You will realise that this is because he has harmed you a little bit in this life. At this point you should think about the uncertainty of friends and enemies as explained in the lam-rim in the section for the person of intermediate scope. This is one of the disadvantages of cyclic existence: you cannot be sure of friends and enemies; sometimes a friend becomes and enemy and sometimes an enemy becomes a friend. Think in this way: "Although this person has given me a small amount of harm in this life for a very short time in many previous lifetimes since beginningless time this person has shown me great affection and has been very close to me for a very long time. The harm he has given me in this life is so small compared to the closeness and affection we have had since beginningless time yet I treat him like my ultimate enemy the ultimate object to be avoided. This is completely wrong!" You need to think in this way again in order to subdue your feelings of aversion for this person. Source: Next to him is the person you feel close to who makes you feel so happy as soon as you see him or her. You regard this person as your ultimate friend the person who is closer to you than anyone else. You have so much attachment for this person you may feel that you don't want to be separated from him or her for even a moment. If you examine the reasons why this is so it is because in this life he has benefited you in some way such as with resources and so forth. On the basis of some very small benefits and for very limited reasons your mind becomes so happy and excited. However you should think. "Although in this life he has benefited me a little he has not always been my friend. In many previous lifetimes since beginningless time he has been my enemy. He harmed me so much that just by seeing him I felt very strong aversion. It is not reasonable for me to have so much attachment and desire for this person just because he has benefited me is beneficial to me and will benefit me because he has also been the opposite." By thinking in this way over and over again you can subdue your feelings of attachment. Now turn to the stranger. The attitude you have toward this person is: "I don't know this person and I don't care about him. He hasn't connected with me in the past he is not connecting with me now and he will not connect with me in the future so who cares." This attitude is also completely wrong so you should think. "In this life this person is neither an enemy nor a friend but in previous lives he was my enemy many times and also many times he was my dearest friend someone I was very close to. Therefore it is completely unreasonable to be indifferent to this person." Just as you equalised your feelings towards the friend and the enemy you should equalise your feelings towards the stranger by thinking this way again and again. Therefore when you meditate you first think that there is absolutely no reason to be so upset and feel so much aversion towards the enemy who has been your dearest friend so many times. You need to think about this again and again in order to subdue your aversion and equalise your mind towards this person. Likewise think that there is no reason to be so attached to the person you are close to your friend because he has been your enemy so many times. Think about this again and again to subdue your attachment and equalise your mind towards this person. When we perceive these three different people we perceive them in terms of these three categories: friends enemies and strangers. However none of them exists in this way forever—no one is a friend enemy or stranger for all time. Therefore they are all the same. There is absolutely no reason to feel attachment towards one person to feel aversion towards another and to feel detached and indifferent towards yet another. Source: If we examine what they actually are from their side they are sentient beings. And they are all exactly the same in that they all wish to be happy and free from suffering. Thus there is not the slightest reason to discriminate between them with attachment aversion and indifference. They are all exactly the same. You must come to this conclusion and meditate on it again and again. By meditating on this over and over again you will reach the point where you actuall develop equanimity towards all sentient beings. You will feel that they are all the same to you; your feelings towards them will be equal. This is the result that should come about. Although you might recite every day the prayer of the Four Immeasurable Thoughts "May all sentient beings have happiness and its causes; may all sentient beings be free from suffering and its causes" and so forth—until you have actually developed equanimity in reality it will be as though you are saying. "May all sentient beings have happiness and its causes and be free from suffering and its causes—but only those I like and not those I dislike." No matter how frequently and fervently you recite the Four Immeasurable Thoughts until you have developed equanimity they are only words. They don't become the actual Four Immeasurable Thoughts. Therefore it is extremely important to develop equanimity and even if you spent months and years meditating solely on equanimity in order to develop this realisation it would be an extremely worthwhile method of practising meditation. If you can pacify your feelings of attachment and aversion towards friends and enemies it will be very beneficial to your mind. Recognising All Sentient Beings as One's MotherThe next point recognising all sentient beings as one's mother is actually the first step in developing bodhicitta. Lama Pabongka Dorje Chang said that this point is not easy and takes quite a long time to develop. However it is crucial and indispensable because only on the basis of this recognition can you develop the following steps. We cannot progress without it so it is very important to give it a lot of attention. In general when you meditate you use perfect reasoning as well as quotations. Here with this point of recognising all beings as your mother it is very important to use reasoning. Although you can also develop the same understanding on the basis of quotations there is a difference in the way the mind is activated on the basis of quotations and on the basis of reasoning—it is more powerful on the basis of reasoning. The specific reasoning to be relied upon here is the beginningless continuity of mind. Source: First you have to establish that the continuity of the mind is beginningless. Start by thinking that your mind of today is the result of the mind of yesterday. And yesterday's mind came from the mind of the day before yesterday. In that way you go back day by day. Each day's mind is the result of the mind of the preceding day. Also the mind of each moment is the result of the preceding moment. Continue to go back all the way to the moment of conception and think about how the mind of the newborn baby is also a continuity which needs a preceding moment of mind in order to be generated. The mind of the newborn baby is the continuation of the mind of the fetus which was in the womb of the mother. And if you go back in this way you will not be able to find a beginning.1 You cannot find a moment which you can point to as the beginning of the mind and say. "The mind began there." this is because any moment of mind would need a preceding moment in order to be generated. In this way you can establish that the continuum of the mind is beginningless. There is no single moment of mind which you can point to as being the first. Following these reasons you conclude that the number of times you have taken rebirth is countless. Not only that but in all those rebirths just as in this life you needed a mother. For one hundred rebirths you would need one hundred mothers; for one thousand rebirths you would need one thousand mothers and so forth. Sinceyou have had countless rebirths you have had countless mothers. So if you think very carefully about these points you will realise that not only have you had countless rebirths you have also had countless mothers. Furthermore although sentient beings are also countless the number of sentient beings that exist is fewer than the number of mothers you have had. You have taken rebirth countless times in all different types of bodies and the number of sentient beings you need to have been your mother is greater than the number of sentient beings in existence. Therefore since the number of times you have taken rebirth and the number of mothers you have had is greater than the number of sentient beings it means that every single sentient being has been your mother not just once but countless times. Source: Start with your own mother thinking that you mother of this life was your mother countless times in previous rebirths. When you have gained some expereince of this idea such that your mind is transformed towards your mother then think about it in relation to your father—that your father has been your mother countless times. Following that think about how your friends have been your mother countless times. Then think about your enemies—even your enemies have been your mother so many times. Finally widen your scope to include all sentient beings—meditate on how all sentient beings have been your mother. You have to meditate on this subject again and again over a long period of time. While you are training your mind in this subject you should rely on different lam-rim scriptures which explain various points and ways of meditating and can give you a lot of inspiration. You should request your spiritual teacher to give you explanations to help clarify your mind and you should also discuss the subject with your Dharma friends. By thinking in this way again and again you will reach the point where you realise that all sentient beings have been your mother even down to a tiny insect like and ant. Even when you see a tiny insect you will feel certain that many times this being has been your kind mother who took the greatest care of you and in whom you placed your trust. It is said that the great Atisha—who completely realised this point —would be immediately filled with a deep sense of respect whenever he met any sentient being. He would fold his hands and say. "Precious sentient being so kind."Recognising the Kindness of Mother Sentient BeingsThe next step in the meditation is recognising the kindness of mother sentient beings. It is not enough just to recognise that all sentient ebings have been your mother you must also recognise the depth of their kindness. For example your mother of this life was so kind carrying you within her for nine long months from the time of conception always being very careful about what she ate and drank and doing everything with the sole thought of taking care of you. Even the fact that you are alive and are able to learn and practise the Dharma is completely due to the kindness of your mother who caried you in her womb and took such good care of you since the time of conception. She took care of you while you were in her womb and also after you were born. When you were born you were completely helpless like a little bug unable to do anything. Nevertheless your mother treated you as if you were a priceless jewel—continuously taking the greatest care of you day and night with no other thought in her mind than concern for your welfare. She fed you bathed you dressed you in soft clothing took you here and there to make you happy and even made funny faces or gestures to make you smile. Becasue of her constant feeling of love and concern for you her mind was always full of worry that you might get sick or hurt—so much so that she would have difficulty sleeping at night. Source: You learned how to walk because of the kindness of your mother—she would help you stand up and take your first step then the second step and so forth. You also learned how to pronounce your first words because of the kindness of your mother and also your father. As time went on you were able to study and learn many other things but only on the basis of knowing how to walk and speak which you learned because of the kindness of your mother. In the preceding step you realised that all sentient beings have been your mother and with this meditation you realise that not only has your mother of this present life been incredibly kind to you but all the countless sentient beings have been just as kind. Repaying their KindnessThe next step is generating the wish to repay the kindness of all mother sentient beings. Ask yourself. "Am I able to repay their kindness?" Then think. "I should be able to repay their kindness because I'm in such fortunate circumstances: I have met the Dharma. I have met perfect teachers. I have met the path and I have all the right circumstances to practise. Therefore I must do as much as I possibly can to liberate them from their suffering and to bring them the happiness that they wish for. I must do this in order to repay their kindness."Of course repaying the kindness of sentient beings includes helping them on a conventional level by doing as much as you can to give food to those who are hungry drink to those who are thirsty clothing and other material things. But the most important way of helping is by completely relieving all sentient beings of all their sufferings and giving them all the happiness that they could wish for. You should bring this thought to your mind again and again. Source: Affectionate LoveThe next step affectionate love is the kind of love that a mother feels when looking at her only child. When a mother looks at her child he appears to her in a very beautiful way and she feels great love for him. Here you generate this same kind of affectionate love towards all sentient beings perceiving all beings in a beautiful glowing way. Actually if you generated to previous step of recognising all sentient beings as your mother recognising their kindness and wishing to repay their kindness then you won't need extra effort or extra thought in order to develop affectionate love. It will arise spontaneously due to the force of the preceding realisations. When you meditate on affectionate love you also need to reflect on the fact that all sentient beings although wishing to be happy are completely devoid of happiness especially pure uncontaminated happiness. By meditating in this way you generate the strong wish that all sentient beings posess happiness and its causes and that they actually abide in happiness. On top of that you should also generate the wish that you yourself will make that happen. From the depths of your heart request your lama to grant you blessings to be able to do this. Source: Great CompassionThe next step is great compassion. This is one of the special characteristics of the Buddha's teachings and Lama Tsong Khapa in particular placed a great deal of emphasis on it as a very special cause that gives rise to very special effects. Also the great Chandrakirti in the introduction to his Entering the Middle Way pays homage to great compassion saying that it is extremely important at the beginning in the middle and at the end. At the beginning it is the seed which enables you to enter the Mahayana path. In the middle while you are engaging in the bodhisattva's practice of the six perfections it is the very soul of your practice. At the end it causes the result. Buddhahood to ripen and makes possible all the Buddha's wonderful deeds for the benefit of sentient beings. Therefore great compassion is praised as being extremely important at the beginning in the middle and at the end. It is said that in the beginning in order to develop great compassion it is very beneficial to observe and reflect on the way a butcher slaughters an animal—cutting the throat ripping out its insides pulling off its skin. Using this as an example is an easy and powerful way to meditate on great compassion. Here in Singapore,there is a market where we go to buy animals to liberate. It would be extremely beneficial to go there and observe the situation reflecting both on the animals which are being slaughtered and those who are slaughtering them. Source: Once you have started to generate great compassion then you reflect on the same meditations that you used while training your mind in the small scope section of the lam-rim by thinking in detail about the sufferings of the three lower realms the hells and so forth.2 However this time you generate compassion by thinking of the sufferings of the specific sentient beings: the sufferings of extreme heat and extreme cold of the hell-beings the sufferings of extreme hunger and thirst of the pretas and the sufferings of the animals. What is the measure or sign of having generated great compassion in your mind? It is that you feel towards all sentient beings the same wish for them to be free of suffering that a mother would feel for her only child. When a mother sees her child going through intense suffering she feels an unbearable wish for the child to be completely free from this suffering. Feeling this same strong wish towards each and every sentient beings is the sign that you have generated great cmpassion. The Extraordinary IntentionThe next step is the extraordinary intention. This is when you have the feeling that you yourself alone have the responsibility of eliminating all the sufferings of all sentient beings and bringing to them all the happiness that they wish for. It is the same sense of responsibility that a child would feel towards his or her mother—feeling responsible to make her happy and free from suffering. So when you feel that way towards all sentient beings and feel that you yourself alone will achieve this goal then you have generated the extraordinary intention. It is "extraordinary" because it is more exceptional or supreme than the intention of the Hearers and Solitary Realisers those who practise the individual vehicle. The extraordinary intention is similar to being in the position of saving someone from falling off a cliff where you feel responsible to save the person. In the same way when you feel a deep sense of responsibility for eliminating the suffering of all sentient beings and for giving them all the happiness they wish for that is the extraordinry intention. It can also be called the "exceptional attitude" or "universal responsibility". Source: BodhicittaThe next step is the actual generation of bodhicitta also called "the generation of the mind". This comes by reflecting. "Do I really have the capacity to accomplish this goal of eliminating all the suffering of sentient beings and bringing them to happiness? Actually at this point I can't accomplish that even for one sentient being. And if I check who does have the complete capacity to accomplish this goal it is only the Buddha. Only the Buddha has the right qualities because of his power his knowledge and his capacity to accomplish spontaneously the benefit of all sentient beings." At this point you have to reflect on the qualities of Buddha as a worthy object of refuge as you did in the lam-rim meditation of the individual of the small scope. Following this you generate the thought that you will accomplish the benefit of all sentient beings by achieving the qualities of the Buddha yourself. This means that you generate the mind of bodhicitta thinking. "I must achieve the supreme enlightenment in order to benefit all sentient beings." This wish to become a Buddha is not just to abandon whatever has to be abandoned in order to achieve the complete purpose for yourself. Previously you generated great love and great compassion in order to achieve the benefit of all sentient beings therefore it is for that purpose that you now generate the wish to become a Buddha. You must also check: "Am I actually able to do it?" Yes you are definitely in a position where you can become a Buddha for the benefit of all sentient beings. In fact there is no better situation than the one you are in now. You have a precious human rebirth and you have met perfect teachers and the Mahayana path. This means you are actually in the best situation to achieve Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings. Furthermore you have met the perfect teachings of the great Lama Tsong Khapa. By relying on these incredible teachings many practitioners of the past on the basis of having achieved a precious human rebirth were able to achieve the supreme realisation in that very lifetime. Some individuals such as the omniscient Gyalwa Ensapa were able to achieve this realisation in an even shorter period of time—twelve years or even three years. These practitioners had the same basis—the precious human body and other conditions— that you now have. Therefore you should feel a sense of confidence in having the basis that enables you to become a Buddha. Source: The contrived form of bodhicitta—the experience of bodhicitta which arises through effort—is known in Tibetan as "the bodhicitta which is like the outer layer of the sugarcane". The uncontrived form of bodhicitta is when the thought of wanting to achieve supreme enlightenment for the benefit of sentient beings arises spontaneously in your mind as soon as you meet any sentient being no matter who he or she is. Having the uncontrived effortless experience is the sign that you have achieved the actual realisation of bodhicitta. And once you have generated the realisation of bodhicitta you earn the name "Child of the Victorious Ones". This concludes the explanation on how to generate bodhicitta by way of the seven-point cause-and-effect instruction. Notes1. The implication here is that the mind of the newly-conceived child is the continuation of the mind of a previous life which in turn came from another life and so on without beginning. [Return to text]2. In the small scope section of the lam-rim one imagines being reborn in the lower realms so as to generate a healthy fear and the determination to avoid such rebirths by taking refuge and living in accordance with the law of karma. Source: EXCHANGING ONESELF AND OTHERSThe second method of generating bodhicitta is that of exchanging oneself with others. The practice of equalising and exchanging oneself with others combined with the practice of tong-len or giving and taking is known as "training the mind" (lo-jong). If we look at the lineage of these instructions they began with Buddha Shakyamuni and Manjushri and were handed down from them in an uninterrupted lineage of great masters including Shantideva. The great master Atisha received the lineage from Lama Serlingpa. When Atisha went to Tibet he taught the seven-point cause-and-effect instruction publicly and gave the instructions on exchanging oneself with others only to Dromtonpa because he felt that his other disciples were not fit vessels for such instructions. Dromtonpa himself kept this lineage very secret—among his many disciples he gave it only to his spiritual disciple the foremost Kadampa virtuous friend. Geshe Potowa. Geshe Potowa also kept this instruction very very secret. Although he too had many disciples he gave these instructions only to the great Langri Tangpa and Geshe Sharawa. Geshe Langri Tangpa on the basis of having received and realised these instructions composed the renowned text. The Eight Verses of Thought Transformation. Because these instructions had been put into writing they became more widespread and many people were able to learn and practise them. Later the great master Chekawa came to know them. Geshe Chekawa was a scholar learned in all the five sciences but was not satisfied with his knowledge and wished to learn the Dharma. One day he heard two lines of The Eight Verses of Thought Transformation which said. Give to others all gain and fortunes. And take on yourself all loss and defeat. Geshe Chekawa was intrigued by these lines and wanted to understand how to actually practise giving to others whatever victory and goodness there is and taking upon oneself all loss and defeat. Thus he went in search of these instructions. He traveled to the region of Penbo in Tibet where Geshe Langri Tangpa lived but discovered that this great master had already passed away. Fortunately he met a disciple of Geshe Langri Tangpa the master Geshe Sharawa who gave him the complete instructions on exchanging oneself with others. By practising these instructions. Geshe Chekawa gained the full realisation of bodhicitta in his mind. He taught these instructions to many lepers who were able to cure themselves of leprosy by practising exchanging oneself with others and tong-len. These instructions thus came to be known as "the Dharma of lepers." Meditating extensively on tong-len with clear and powerful visualisation is actually the supreme treatment for leprosy. Source: Geshe Chekawa thinking that it would be a great loss if these instructions were kept secret began to teach more publicly the practices of exchanging oneself with others and giving and taking. The practice of tong-len giving and taking is indeed an inconceivably wonderful practice. In the past when someone was sick or had a spell cast on him or was experiencing obstacles of some kind he would seek the help of a Kadampa lama. The Kadampa lama would do the tong-len practice taking upon himself both the suffering of the one who was being harmed and the one who was causing the harm meditating on compassion especially toward the harm-giver. The lama would take upon himself all these sufferings with great compassion and with great love would give away all virtues and benefits. The Kadampa lamas considered this practice to be the best remedy against spells obstacles sickness and so forth. The instructions on exchanging oneself with others consist of five main points: 1. Equalising oneself with others 2. The disadvantage of cherishing oneself 3. The advantages of cherishing others 4. The actual thought of exchanging oneself with others 5. The meditation on giving and taking (tong-len) Source: Equalising Oneself with OthersAt what point should you begin to meditate on the first subject equalising oneself with others? Prior to this meditation you should meditate on the first five steps in the seven-point cause-and-effect instruction: equanimity recognising all beings as your mother remembering their kindness wishing to repay their kindness and the affectionate love which sees them as beautiful. Thus you begin to meditate on equalising yourself with others after having gone through these five steps which I already explained. How should you equalise yourself with others? First of all you need to understand what you mean by "self" when you think in terms of yourself. When we think "myself and others" this "myself" has a sense of great importance whereas "others" has a sense of much less importance. So when you think in terms of "me" or "myself" there is a much greater sense of importance than when you think in terms of others. Whatever concerns you becomes extremely significant—whether you feel good or bad whether you are cold or hot—it is always more important than how others feel. Also everything related to you—"my body my possessions my friends my family my kids," everything which is part of your life yourself—has a much greater sense of importance than the same things related to others—"their bodies their families," and so forth. Source: Thinking in this way you can see how you do not regard self and others as equal—you esteem yourself much more than others. However consider it from the point of view of numbers: you are just one whereas others are countless. So there is a discrepancy in the way you regard yourself and others: although there are so many more others than yourself you regard yourself as more important than others this is completely wrong. You should decide that your objective in this meditation is to correct this discrepancy and learn to equalize yourself and others. The way to do this is by thinking that you and all other beings are exactly the same in wanting to be happy and free from suffering. You need to think over and over again about the fact that there is not the slightest difference between yourself and others in terms of wanting to be happy and wanting to be free from suffering. In this regard you and others are exactly the same. If you compare the instructions of the seven points of cause-and-effect and exchanging oneself with others the five points of recognising all beings as mothers remembering their kindness wishing to repay their kindness the extraordinary intention and bodhicitta are the same. However there is a difference when we come to the two points of affectionate love and great compassion. The strength of these feelings is different in the two practices. How is that? It is because when you meditate on the kindness of sentient beings according to the seven-point cause-and-effect instruction you recollect how kind they were when they were your mother whereas when you meditate according to the instructions on exchanging oneself with others you recollect their kindness not only when they were your mother but also at other times when they were not your mother. This meditation is more extensive. Therefore when you train your mind in the instructions of exchanging oneself with others the strength of your affectionate love and great compassion will be greater than when training the mind in the seven-point technique of cause-and -effect. The aim of these instructions is to train your mind in actually exchanging yourself with others and the way to push the mind in that direction is by contemplating both the faults of cherishing oneself and the advantages of cherishing others. Therefore the next step in the meditation is contemplating the many faults or disadvantages of cherishing oneself. Source: The Disadvantages of Cherishing OneselfThe sources of these instructions on recognising the disadvantages of the self-cherishing thought or egoism are texts such as Shantideva's Bodhisattvacharyavatara (A Guide to the Bodhisattva Way of Life) and The Guru Puja. There is a verse in The Guru Puja which says: This chronic disease of cherishing ourselves Is the cause giving rise to our unsought suffering; Perceiving this we seek your blessings to blame begrudge And destroy the monstrous demon of selfishness. A verse from the Bodhisattvacharyavatara says: "All the suffering in the world comes from the desire for one's own happiness" and so forth. In the root text of The Seven-Point Thought Transformation it says: "Banish the one to blame for everything." This means that all suffering—whatever unwanted problems obstacles shortcomings and sufferings that exist—should be blamed on the self-cherishing thought alone. "All suffering" includes not only the problems that you yourself experience in your life but from a larger point of view it also includes wars between countries disagreements between the leaders of different countries disagreements at work arguments within a family such as husband and wife fighting or parents and children fighting and so forth. All these unwanted experiences come from egoism the thought of cherishing oneself and thus they should be blamed on the self-cherishing thought. As another example of the disadvantages of the self-cherishing thought let's say you eat too much and get indigestion and maybe even die from indigestion. Although it may seem that the cause is some kind of digestive ailment in fact the real cause of the problem is that your self-cherishing mind was not satisfied but wanted more and more food. So you died not from indigestion but due to the self-cherishing thought. Even in situations where it seems you are not responsible—for example you are falsely accused of having done something wrong or you are robbed of your possessions or killed—even in these situations the cause is the self-cherishing thought. These experiences are the result of your past evolutionary actions [karma] which were motivated by the self-cherishing thought. In past lives due to egoism wanting happiness just for yourself you harmed others robbed and killed. In this life you are experiencing the results of those actions therefore those sufferings are to be blamed only on egoism the self-cherishing thought. Source: In the past you were born countless times in the three lower realms and this too is due to self-cherishing. The self-cherishing thought motivated you to create the causes to experience the sufferings of rebirth as a preta [hungry ghost] as a hell being and as an animal. For example being born as a preta is the result of miserliness which in turn comes from egoism cherishing yourself more than others. Also if out of self-cherishing you point out the physical faults of someone saying that his face resembles that of an animal you create the cause to be born as an animal. Therefore all the sufferings you experienced in countless rebirths in the three lower realms come from nothing other than the self-cherishing thought. Even from an ordinary point of view the egoistic self-cherishing thought causes us so much harm. For example because of holding yourself in high esteem feeling that you are so great when you meet someone who seems better than you you become miserable with envy. When you meet someone who is equal to you you will want to compete with that person. For example you could be a businessman who always wants to be on top—that competitive attitude leads to so many problems. Then when you meet people who are lower than you you bully them put them down and point out their faults. All this comes from the self-cherishing thought feeling that you are so important so high so good. Because of these actions you create a great deal of problems in the present as well as the causes for future suffering. Actually if you really think about all the disadvantages of egoism the self-cherishing thought they are inconceivable. In brief all the sufferings and difficulties you have encountered from beginningless time until now all the unwanted experiences in cyclic existence are caused by egoism the self-cherishing thought. In fact all the sufferings of cyclic existence are caused both by self-grasping ignorance and the self-cherishing thought. From the philosophical point of view these are two different things but in the context of mind training they are considered to be the same. On the one hand there is self-grasping—grasping at a true identity a true I—and on the other hand there is a mind that instead of letting go of the I cherishes it thinking. "I want to be happy. I need this. I need that." That is the self-cherishing thought and on that basis all suffering all unwanted experiences and all negativities are generated. Therefore it is the one to blame for everything. Those of us who practise the Dharma must think continuously over and over again about the disadvantages of the self-cherishing thought and the advantages of cherishing others—taking care of others rather than oneself we also need to consider the disadvantages of taking care of this life and the advantages of preparing for the next life. These are things that we need to do. Source: The Advantages of Cherishing OthersThe next point is contemplating the advantages or qualities of cherishing others or altruism. This point is clearly stated in the Bodhisattvacharyavatara by Shantideva which says. "All the happiness of the world comes from altruism." Also there is a verse in The Guru Puja which says. I see that cherishing these beings my mothers. Is the thought that leads to happiness And the door leading to infinite qualities. The root text of The Seven-Point Thought Transformation says. "Meditate on the great kindness of all sentient beings."On the basis of these quotations you should realise the advantage of cherishing others. For instance all the happiness of the human rebirth and other fortunate rebirths—having perfect wealth surroundings relations and so forth—comes from altruism cherishing others. Why? Due to cherishing others' lives you abandon killing and the result of abandoning killing is a fortunate rebirth and also a long life. So having a long life and a fortunate rebirth come directly from having abandoned killing because of cherishing others' lives. Also having perfect wealth and surroundings is the result of abandoning stealing and practising generosity both of which are done on the basis of cherishing others. In brief as it says in the Bodhisattvacharyavatara. "There is no need to elaborate more than this; just look at the childish beings who work for their own benefit and the Buddhas who work for the benefit of others." And there is a verse in The Guru Puja which says. "In short childish beings work only for their own welfare while Buddha Shakyamuni acted solely for the benefit of others." Source: Childish beings act solely for themselves thinking of their own happiness in the same way that a child thinks only about himself. On the other hand the Buddhas became enlightened by cherishing others. Without needing to go into detail just by looking at the differences between these two types of beings and their actions we can clearly recognise the differences between self-cherishing and cherishing others. Consider Buddha Shakyamuni—in the past since from beginningless time. Buddha Shakyamuni had been like us trapped in cyclic existence. Then at some point. He began to cherish others and on the basis of practising altruism was able to fulfill the two purposes [of attaining enlightenment and leading others to enlightenment]. Now look at ourselves—because of continuously caring for ourselves alone cherishing ourselves we haven't been able to achieve even our own purpose but have been wandering in cyclic existence and the three lower realms again and again since beginningless time. We don't need to go into much detail just compare the results of Buddha Shakyamuni's actions and our own—one comes from cherishing others and the other comes from egoism cherishing ourselves. Therefore by following the self-cherishing thought no good will come about—only the three unfortunate rebirths. At this point. Lama Dorje Chang Pabongka would tell stories from the life of Drukpa Kunley a great meditator of the Drukpa Kargyu tradition who was famous for having an unusual way of speaking which made people laugh. One day Drukpa Kunley went to Lhasa and paid a visit to the Jokhang the main temple of Lhasa where you find the Jowo a very famous statue of Buddha Shakyamuni. Normally you enter and pay homage to the Jowo then you circumambulate and take blessings. Drukpa Kunley did this—he circumambulated the statue and took blessings—but then he stood directly in front of the Jowo and said. " In the past you and I were the same but then you began to practise altruism and to take care of others so you have become a perfect Buddha. I have been taking care only of myself and I'm still in samsara. Indeed I should now prostrate to you."Drukpa Kunley was an unconventional yogi; he would express the Dharma truth in a very humorous way. It is said that he once visited the Bodnath Stupa in Nepal which has an unusual shape unlike other stupas which are built in one of eight standard designs. When he arrived at the stupa he prostrated and said "Although you look like a round heap and unlike one of the eight stupas gone to bliss. I still prostrate to you." Source: Another time he said. "I've lost three important precious things." When asked what it was he had lost he said. "One precious thing which I lost is called ignorance another one is called desire and the third is called aversion. I have lost these three things which others regard as important and cherish so much." This shows his achievements but it was expressed in an unusual funny way. At any rate. Drukpa Kunley was a great adept and I think that there is a translation of his biography containing all these stories.1Therefore we should consider what Buddha Shakyamuni achieved by cherishing others and compare this with the difficulties we are still experiencing because of cherishing ourselves alone. It is very useful to read the stories of Buddha Shakyamuni's previous lives when he was still practising on the path as related for example in The Jataka Tales. These stories show how he performed many incredible deeds in order to cherish others and thus they can inspire us to practise thought transformation. It is at this point in the meditation that you reflect on the kindness of sentient beings both when they were your mothers and when they were not. This reflection becomes very helpful because you realise even more reasons to cherish others rather than to cherish yourself. To give an easy example of the kindness of others when they were not your mothers: the simple fact that we are able to gather in this room and enjoy listening to the Mahayana Dharma is completely due to the kindness of others. Many people put in a great deal of effort so that we can be here. First of all there may have been another building here that had to be torn down and that required a number of workers. Then other people worked to design the new building and buy the materials such as bricks cement and so forth. Other people were needed to operate the machines since machines don't work by themselves and to do the actual construction work on the building. Then when the building was finished people worked on decorating the interior and collecting the representations of the Buddha's Body. Speech and Mind to place on the altar. Therefore the fact that we can enjoy coming together here today and listening to the Mahayana Dharma is entirely due to the kindness of others isn't it?The same applies to your own home your belongings the things you enjoy—all of these are due to the kindness of others. You might say. "No this is not true. I bought my house with my own money; I bought my clothes with my own money." Yes that is true but you earned your money on the basis of others. "Okay. I got the money from others but this is because I worked hard: I did something to receive this money in return." Yes but the fact that you are able to work is because of others isn't it? If you think about it carefully you will see that whatever happiness you now enjoy comes exclusively from the kindness of others. When you reflect on the advantages of cherishing others it is very effective to incorporate all these different thoughts. You can also contemplate that all the benefits right up to the attainment of Buddha's state come about because of cherishing others. How is this? If you want to become a Buddha you must generate the precious mind of bodhicitta because without bodhicitta there is no Buddha. The generation of bodhiciita comes about because of the wish to benefit others: "I must achieve the state of Enlightenment in order to benefit others." Also the exceptional cause of bodhiciita is great compassion and great compassion comes from cherishing others. Therefore it is because of others that you generate great compassion. Source: Furthermore the practice of the six perfections depends on others. For example you practise morality in relation to others and in order to practise generosity and patience you need an object and these objects are others. It is so true what Shantideva taught in the Bodhisattvacharyavatara when he says. Both the Victorious Ones and sentient beings are indispensable to achieving the supreme enlightenment and since I pay homage to the victors why don't I pay homage to sentient beings as well?This is saying that the achievement of supreme enlightenment is half due to the kindness of the Buddhas and half due to the kindness of sentient beings. When we give so much importance to honouring the Buddhas why don't we give the same importance to honouring the sentient beings who are equally indispensable to our achievement of enlightenment? As the great master Langri Tangpa says in his Eight Verses of Thought Transformation. I can achieve the supreme state of enlightenment due to the kindness of sentient beings therefore they are more precious than a wish-fulfilling jewel and I should cherish them to that extent. There are so many heart-warming instructions on the kindness of sentient beings. Source: This great master Tangri Langpa was so exceptional he was truly a superior being. (By the way he is in the line of the previous incarnations of the late Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche.) It is said that Langri Tangpa was always very serious and smiled only three times in his whole life so he was known as "Langri Tangpa of the black face" (in Tibetan the term "black face" means "serious"). He spent all of his time meditating on the disadvantages of cyclic existence and bodhicitta and that is why he didn't find many occasions to laugh. I'll tell you the story of one of the three occasions when Langri Tangpa laughed and what made him laugh. This story is about his mandala set. In the Kadampa tradition and in the tradition of Lama Pabongka Dorje Chang the practice of offering the mandala is very much emphasized. When I was young in Tibet most of us would bring our mandala sets to teachings so that at the point of offering the mandala very few would be without one. In the row of the tulkus [reincarnated lamas] each tulku would have his own beautiful mandala set—some made of gold some of silver—but the top would always be of gold. It was quite scene when all the tulkus offered their mandalas! But that was in the past and then at a certain point everything was taken away. My own mandala set was taken away. There is also a particular implement used to offer the hundred tormas which is a kind of flat container decorated with symbols. I had one of these because the Kadampa tradition places so much emphasis on the practice of offering tormas but that was taken away as well. By "taken away" I mean confiscated by the Communists. Nowadays. I use something very simple. Anyway one day Langri Tangpa was meditating and he had his mandala set on the table next to him. It was probably a simple mandala set not a beautiful or elaborate one. As he was meditating he noticed that a mouse had come and was eating some of the grains of his mandala. Among the grains was a big turquoise and for some reason the mouse was attracted to the turquoise and started to pick at it trying to get hold of it but it was too big for him. Then another mouse came and began helping the first one so both of them were trying to get hold of it. Pretty soon there were five mice and they devised a way to get the turquoise: one mouse laid on his back and held the turquoise on his stomach and the other four mice held his head and legs and were pulling him along. Langri Tangpa had been watching the mice and when he saw this he broke into a slight laugh. Why did he laugh? Because he thought that in cyclic existence when it comes to fulfilling one's needs animals are more clever than human beings. It's true sometimes animals can be smarter than human beings in taking care of the needs and happiness of this life. The Actual Thought of Exchanging Oneself with OthersSo now we come to the fourth step in the meditation which is the actual thought of exchanging oneself with others. What is meant by exchanging oneself with others? Prior to this we contemplated deeply the disadvantages of cherishing oneself realising that all unwanted experiences and bad things come from egoism. Like a chronic disease which slowly gradually destroys your health and physical form the self-cherishing thought has from beginningless time been the source of all your suffering and problems. On the other hand all the good things—good qualities happiness advantages and so forth—derive from cherishing others from altruism. Realising this you now begin to train your mind in exchanging the thought which cherishes oneself and disregards others for the thought which cherishes others and disregards yourself. Source: Until now we have been disregarding others and taking care of ourselves but from now on

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"Take a little time to say Hi to Carli" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2008-09-09 21:15:34

difference between law and morality bloggers, take a bit of your day to say Hi to Carli Banks. She has a nice new teaser video for you.
~Ray



comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"difference between law and morality need more free adult websites to visit" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2008-08-31 08:40:28

difference between law and morality visitors may need more sites to be happy.
Here are more adult websites to visit that are free for you...
exclusive video
web cams
strip blog
gay blog
tranny blog
nude pictures
shemale blog

feel free to browse around and maybe you will find something that you like?

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"Libertarian Bookworm" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2008-08-24 20:51:55

I evaluate it’s time I revived my old “Libertarian Bookworm” series. The index of previous entries is Given my other commitments. I can’t make it weekly as the previous Bookworm was but I will try to make it as regular as possible. It was only this year that I finally read which is on the short list of contenders for the call of greatest work of legal theory in the 20th century. I think it would come up deserve such a call. Hart’s book really is a masterpiece of precision patience logic and realism and it is easy to see why it is such a favorite among legal academics. More importantly. I agree strongly with his thesis: that the simplistic account of law that goes by the ridiculous euphemism “realism” is absolutely inadequate and that natural law theory does carry weight if we ordain not overload it with supernaturalism and appeals to clarify mystical structures. Many alleged natural law writers locate their arguments on such things and of course that renders their systems subjective or runs the risk of doing just what the Pragmatist critics claimed: of misinterpreting what is really just conventional as eternal and natural. But there certain universal factors in human life—things like “limited resources”—which are dictated by nature and these give rise to universal rules of conduct that exist in societies not as a matter of mere convention. Hart writes: “Such universally recognized principles of care which have a basis in elementary truths concerning human beings their natural environment and aims may be considered the of Natural Law in contrast with the more grandiose and more challengeable constructions which have often been proffered under that name.” For an Objectivist like myself this seems elementary because Hart’s naturalism fits very come up with the Objectivist believe of natural law: that it is rooted not in any mystical order of the universe but in the teleology which human nature itself reveals. The positivist argues that morality and law are based solely on convention and are wholly subjective and that any attempt to base rules on human nature is flawed because evolution and other modern sciences have demonstrated that human nature is malleable. The pseudo-natural law theorist on the other hand argues that human nature is not malleable it is eternal part of an unchanging universal order—and this is one reason he tends to shy away from. But there is “a third category of statements: those the truth of which is contingent on human beings and the world they live in retaining the salient characteristics which they have.” Natural law politics can therefore rest on an be of human nature change surface if that nature is the product of a long-term process of evolution that is still going on. Hart fits very well with writers like Harry Binswanger ( law—instead of mere force—must be general; that is it must be addressed to society at large and not to a particular person under a particular circumstance and still is in those areas where substantive due process is comfort taken seriously: government should not act to deprive us of life liberty or property merely The second and related point inspired by Hart is that our commitment to procedural fairness is based on our substantive commitment to fairness. If we decide that a good legal system is one that treats populate fairly. The content of the rules we devise matters if we are committed to fairness. A command that says “every Tuesday we will denounce an innocent person” could be applied with absolute precision and be in that sense “fair,” but it would not really be “bring together” in that it would not provide equal justice—which was the commitment that led us to value precision in the first place. Any legal system that sets out to be “bring together” or “equal” commits itself to substantive rules as well as procedural ones because procedural rules substantive rules. And that means that we cannot avoid the deep questions or shuffle them off to the electorate as positivists would like to do. Moreover it means we cannot avoid inquiring into the substance of laws as as their formal validity. There’s no difference between our rejection of the command “every Tuesday we will condemn an innocent person” and our rejection of the rule that government can take Susette Kelo’s house away and give it to whatever interest assort has persuaded the legislature to do its bidding. In both cases the substantive rule is not fair even if it is applied with precision. That is why I say procedural due process is a





Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?!
Brit sex tape Britany sex tape Britney sex tape Brits sex tape
Download and enjoy this hot video right now!



Related article:
http://sandefur.typepad.com/freespace/2007/10/libertarian-boo.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"Teaching Sorcery" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2008-04-20 03:11:53

ET is an English teacher who has come up with a vocabulary apply in which students were given a enumerate of latin ‘evince parts’ that they could use to construct ‘spells’ – desire those that Rowling used in the annoy Potter series. They then used these spells in a ‘mock’ contend. However a parent apparently complained to the school that ET was teaching witchcraft to the students. If someone were to describe a situation in which they had been hauled into an alley by somebody with a gun and demanding his money. I would of course write that the robber was behaving immorally. However that should not be confused with practical advice that the victim should not turn over the money. The teacher threatened with the loss of a job can find himself in a situation like that of the person hauled into the alley by the robber coerced into doing something that morally he ought not to be coerced into doing. Also. I do not change surface belie to offer legal advice. There is often a significant difference between what the law is and what the law ought to be. The question of obeying or disobeying an unjust law is sometimes a difficult question to say. When the Nazi soldiers show up asking if you know of the location of any Jews the decision to disobey the law and refuse to report the Jews hiding in a neighbor’s attic is not an easy decision to alter. I am also going to add a third caveat simply because it is a point that a concerned reader or writer must consider. These types of questions are necessarily one-sided. They are like the prosecutor offering evidence to a grand jury – who has absolutely no opportunity to hear the other side. No fair and just verdict can be rendered under these circumstances. However the case can be used to discuss the principles under which a fair and just (moral) verdict can be rendered by those who have more information. With these caveats in object the enjoin answer to this challenge is that there is a cerebrate to be upset over these events. Let us be honest about what has happened here. A teacher has discovered a way to communicate certain ideas to students that would help those students in the art of communication. The understanding of Latin prefixes and suffixes makes it easier to determine the meanings of words and phrases that they have never heard before by understanding the meanings of these parts. The very art of understanding the meanings of terms by understanding its parts is what this lesson aims to teach. However because of the foolish beliefs of some parents of some students no student is permitted to obtain the benefit of this plan. There is no such thing as a magic recite no consorting with demons no way for the utterance of words to alter the world by altering the laws of physics. Words are powerful tools. However their powers bring home the bacon according to the laws of physics allow one person to alter the physiological structure (usually hit structure) of another by promoting certain beliefs on the move of the listener or reader. None of this involves the use of supernatural powers. Pandering to these types of idiotic beliefs directly violates the answer of a educate (and the objectives of a teacher) in two ways. The first is because it prevents the teacher using tools that effectively teach the relevant concepts to students. The second is that it panders to superstition – telling the students in cause that unfounded superstitious myth such as belief in magic spells is something that one has to take seriously. In both cases students end up dumber than they would have otherwise been. This as I said runs contrary to the primary function of the teacher and the educate in which he teaches which is to make students smarter than they would undergo otherwise been. In counter to this it is sometimes argued that we need to respect other people’s beliefs. However the idea that we should respect other beliefs also runs counter to the primary answer of the school. Every time a teacher marks an answer as incorrect and degrades (lowers the evaluate) of the student who gave that say he is showing a lack of respect for those who might hold that the answer is change by reversal. Those who put down the answer marked wrong are in some sense of a displace evaluate than those who put down the correct say. If we act the idea of ‘respecting’ other answers too seriously we have teachers giving ‘consider’ to the students who believe that 12 * 12 = 140 and who evaluate that the sum of the angles in a triangle equals 212 degrees. There undergo to be some do by answers in an education system (or there is no be for or intend to education) – and those answers must be wrong change surface if there is a parent out there who thinks that it is change by reversal. Parents who evaluate that these answers are correct must recognize that there is a distinction between believing something and holding it to be something that should be integrated into a educate’s assign of educating children. I direct that desire utilitarianism provides a better be of morality than any other theory. Yet my believing this is not sufficient to demand that it be a part of the school curriculum. Making it a move of the school system requires that it adopt enough ‘street credibility’ that there is sufficient public backing to alter it a part of the school system. Until then teachers are remove to teach theories other than desire utilitarianism giving each theory whatever decide of consider it has in the intellectual community. In this our government was written to alter an exception for whatever is classified as ‘religion’. Our government is prohibited from passing laws that seek to promote the idea that a specific set of religious beliefs are ‘adjust’ and others are ‘false’. align note: Some individuals proving themselves to be amazingly skilled at deception – including self deception – hold that a national Pledge to ‘one nation under God’ and a motto of ‘In God We Trust’ – does not disrespect this restriction. Yet both presume that the proposition ‘God exists’ is true. So both bear on teaching children that the official government lay is that the advise ‘God exists’ is true. Anyway at least with the blatant exception of atheism which the government may compel its citizens – including (as especially children) into pledging to evaluate – the government is not permitted to choose policies that back up any religion over any other. The reason for this is because religious beliefs can neither be defended nor attacked through the compel of reason. They can only be defended and attacked through the compel of arms. To the degree that the government takes it upon itself to promote one religion over another it puts itself at risk of creating a contrast of arms that as our founding fathers knew particularly well (given the Catholic/Protestant wars of Europe for the last two hundred years) is detrimental to the well-being of any nation. I can evaluate of no clearer violation of this peace treaty among the different religions than for members of one religion to say. “You must send your children to our perform to say there 6+ hours per week where they will be told that our religion is change by reversal and yours is mistaken.” This is not a relationship among equals. These are the terms under which masters compel their will on subjects. This agreement states that the parent who believes in a real Satan that one can discuss with through magical powers that are triggered through the use of Latin prefixes and suffixes on words shall not be required to send their children to an institution that tells her children. “Your religious beliefs are a clump of nonsense.” So yes the terms of this peace treaty say that the proper ends of a educate system (education) must be frustrated in some cases for the purpose of keeping the peace among religious factions. This means that education in some areas must be prohibited in government funded schools. This does not imply that there is no reason to be frustrated or disturb. It means that we need more out-of-school activities to alter up for the forms of education that public schools are not permitted to furnish. We need organizations outside of schools – a ‘private supplemental education system’ that ordain alter the education gap that this peace treaty among religions requires that we exclude from school curriculums. It is an outside system where a teacher such as this can volunteer some time to teach students without worrying about public-school restrictions on religion. In the convey time to the degree that religions that accept in witchcraft become less common to that degree public schools and public school teachers can exceed do their job of educating students. However the defeat of these religions must come outside of school by the private confrontation of those who hold such absurd beliefs using peaceful methods of private words and private actions until a sufficiently large be of people have abandoned this absurdity that it is no longer a threat. This agreement states that the parent who believes in a real Satan that one can negotiate with through magical powers that are triggered through the use of Latin prefixes and suffixes on words shall not be required to send their children to an institution that tells her children. “Your religious beliefs are a bunch of nonsense.”Said parent can decide to send his or her child to a private school or attempt to provide homeschooling. Schools can and do inform things that are inconsistent with various religions. They are comfort supposed to teach evolution in biology class even though it contradicts many religions. They also inform that the Sun is a feature composed primarily of hydrogen and helium which also contradicts many religions. The school administration would be well within its rights to tell the parent to shut up. doug s. Yes. I am aware of the need in science classes for teachers to say things that contradict certain religions. I said as much in the affix However we are not talking about a science class here. And if an English teacher can express this parent to 'shut up' they can say the same to the Jewish parent who protests that an English teacher uses the New Testiment to 'inspire' her students or a educate board that uses tax revenue to move public schools into effectively. 'church' - run schools. We could of course drop the restriction on public schools being used to back up a particular religion - and see where that gets us.





Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?!
Brit sex tape Britany sex tape Britney sex tape Brits sex tape
Download and enjoy this hot video right now!



Related article:
http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2007/10/teaching-sorcery.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"Teaching Sorcery" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2008-04-20 03:11:26

ET is an English teacher who has come up with a vocabulary exercise in which students were given a enumerate of latin ‘evince parts’ that they could use to construct ‘spells’ – desire those that Rowling used in the Harry Potter series. They then used these spells in a ‘do by’ duel. However a parent apparently complained to the school that ET was teaching witchcraft to the students. If someone were to exposit a situation in which they had been hauled into an alley by somebody with a gun and demanding his money. I would of cover write that the robber was behaving immorally. However that should not be confused with practical advice that the victim should not turn over the money. The teacher threatened with the loss of a job can find himself in a situation like that of the person hauled into the alley by the robber coerced into doing something that morally he ought not to be coerced into doing. Also. I do not even pretend to offer legal advice. There is often a significant difference between what the law is and what the law ought to be. The challenge of obeying or disobeying an unjust law is sometimes a difficult challenge to answer. When the Nazi soldiers show up asking if you experience of the location of any Jews the decision to disobey the law and react to report the Jews hiding in a neighbor’s attic is not an easy decision to alter. I am also going to add a third caveat simply because it is a point that a concerned reader or writer must consider. These types of questions are necessarily one-sided. They are like the prosecutor offering evidence to a grand jury – who has absolutely no opportunity to hear the other side. No bring together and just verdict can be rendered under these circumstances. However the case can be used to discuss the principles under which a fair and just (moral) verdict can be rendered by those who have more information. With these caveats in mind the enjoin say to this challenge is that there is a reason to be disturb over these events. Let us be honest about what has happened here. A teacher has discovered a way to communicate certain ideas to students that would back up those students in the art of communication. The understanding of Latin prefixes and suffixes makes it easier to determine the meanings of words and phrases that they undergo never heard before by understanding the meanings of these parts. The very art of understanding the meanings of terms by understanding its parts is what this lesson aims to teach. However because of the foolish beliefs of some parents of some students no student is permitted to obtain the acquire of this plan. There is no such thing as a magic spell no consorting with demons no way for the utterance of words to affect the world by altering the laws of physics. Words are powerful tools. However their powers work according to the laws of physics accept one person to alter the physiological structure (usually brain coordinate) of another by promoting certain beliefs on the part of the listener or reader. None of this involves the use of supernatural powers. Pandering to these types of idiotic beliefs directly violates the answer of a school (and the objectives of a teacher) in two ways. The first is because it prevents the teacher using tools that effectively teach the relevant concepts to students. The second is that it panders to superstition – telling the students in effect that unfounded superstitious myth such as belief in magic spells is something that one has to take seriously. In both cases students end up dumber than they would have otherwise been. This as I said runs contrary to the primary function of the teacher and the educate in which he teaches which is to make students smarter than they would have otherwise been. In answer to this it is sometimes argued that we need to consider other populate’s beliefs. However the idea that we should respect other beliefs also runs answer to the primary answer of the educate. Every measure a teacher marks an answer as incorrect and degrades (lowers the grade) of the student who gave that say he is showing a lack of respect for those who might hold that the say is change by reversal. Those who put drink the answer marked do by are in some sense of a displace grade than those who put down the change by reversal say. If we take the idea of ‘respecting’ other answers too seriously we have teachers giving ‘respect’ to the students who believe that 12 * 12 = 140 and who evaluate that the sum of the angles in a triangle equals 212 degrees. There undergo to be some wrong answers in an education system (or there is no need for or purpose to education) – and those answers must remain do by even if there is a parent out there who thinks that it is correct. Parents who think that these answers are correct must accept that there is a distinction between believing something and holding it to be something that should be integrated into a school’s assign of educating children. I direct that desire utilitarianism provides a better be of morality than any other theory. Yet my believing this is not sufficient to demand that it be a part of the school curriculum. Making it a part of the educate system requires that it adopt enough ‘street credibility’ that there is sufficient public backing to alter it a move of the school system. Until then teachers are free to inform theories other than desire utilitarianism giving each theory whatever measure of respect it has in the intellectual community. In this our government was written to make an exception for whatever is classified as ‘religion’. Our government is prohibited from passing laws that seek to promote the idea that a specific set of religious beliefs are ‘true’ and others are ‘false’. Side note: Some individuals proving themselves to be amazingly skilled at deception – including self deception – direct that a national assure to ‘one nation under God’ and a motto of ‘In God We believe’ – does not violate this restriction. Yet both anticipate that the proposition ‘God exists’ is adjust. So both involve teaching children that the official government position is that the proposition ‘God exists’ is true. Anyway at least with the blatant exception of atheism which the government may coerce its citizens – including (as especially children) into pledging to reject – the government is not permitted to adopt policies that back up any religion over any other. The reason for this is because religious beliefs can neither be defended nor attacked through the force of reason. They can only be defended and attacked through the force of arms. To the degree that the government takes it upon itself to promote one religion over another it puts itself at risk of creating a contrast of arms that as our founding fathers knew particularly come up (given the Catholic/Protestant wars of Europe for the last two hundred years) is detrimental to the well-being of any nation. I can evaluate of no clearer violation of this peace treaty among the different religions than for members of one religion to say. “You must displace your children to our church to say there 6+ hours per week where they ordain be told that our religion is correct and yours is mistaken.” This is not a relationship among equals. These are the terms under which masters compel their will on subjects. This agreement states that the parent who believes in a real Satan that one can discuss with through magical powers that are triggered through the use of Latin prefixes and suffixes on words shall not be required to displace their children to an institution that tells her children. “Your religious beliefs are a bunch of nonsense.” So yes the terms of this peace treaty say that the proper ends of a educate system (education) must be frustrated in some cases for the purpose of keeping the peace among religious factions. This means that education in some areas must be prohibited in government funded schools. This does not evince that there is no reason to be frustrated or disturb. It means that we need more out-of-school activities to make up for the forms of education that public schools are not permitted to give. We be organizations outside of schools – a ‘private supplemental education system’ that will fill the education gap that this peace treaty among religions requires that we do away with from educate curriculums. It is an outside system where a teacher such as this can volunteer some time to teach students without worrying about public-school restrictions on religion. In the mean time to the degree that religions that believe in witchcraft become less common to that degree public schools and public school teachers can better do their job of educating students. However the blackball of these religions must go outside of school by the private confrontation of those who direct such absurd beliefs using peaceful methods of private words and private actions until a sufficiently large be of people have abandoned this absurdity that it is no longer a threat. This agreement states that the parent who believes in a real Satan that one can discuss with through magical powers that are triggered through the use of Latin prefixes and suffixes on words shall not be required to displace their children to an institution that tells her children. “Your religious beliefs are a bunch of nonsense.”Said parent can decide to displace his or her child to a private educate or attempt to provide homeschooling. Schools can and do teach things that are inconsistent with various religions. They are still supposed to teach evolution in biology class even though it contradicts many religions. They also teach that the Sun is a feature composed primarily of hydrogen and helium which also contradicts many religions. The educate administration would be well within its rights to tell the parent to change state up. doug s. Yes. I am aware of the be in science classes for teachers to say things that contradict certain religions. I said as much in the affix However we are not talking about a science class here. And if an English teacher can tell this parent to 'change state up' they can say the same to the Jewish parent who protests that an English teacher uses the New Testiment to 'excite' her students or a school come in that uses tax revenue to move public schools into effectively. 'perform' - run schools. We could of course drop the restriction on public schools being used to promote a particular religion - and see where that gets us.





Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?!
Brit sex tape Britany sex tape Britney sex tape Brits sex tape
Download and enjoy this hot video right now!



Related article:
http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2007/10/teaching-sorcery.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"Liberating Differences? Where I?ve Been - Final" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2007-12-20 23:28:19

New pledge Theology differs from “Covenant Theology” (what we’ve primarily heard in the PCA) and Dispensationalism (What Baptists and Pentecostals tend to think). In regards to Covenant Theology the NCT view asserts that the much-popularized idea of the “Covenant of Works” and “pledge of alter” cannot be found in Scripture. NCT agrees that God had a Gracious Purpose in placing the nation of Israel under the law as a covenant. However this does not make the Old Covenant a covenant of grace. Scripture indicates that the intend of the Mosaic Law was to carry deep conviction of sin to those under that covenant to lead them to Christ (Gal 3:23-25–which brings up an excellent question: Should we try to reason with unbelievers on the basis of the Ten Commandments/Old Testament that they are sinners and be Jesus? Can/does this convince people who undergo not grown up with these values?) God’s purposes not for them! Yet if the Ten Commandments were still “in effect,” then Paul would be guilty of gravest sin–violating one of the commandments quite willfully and dogmatically—“bequeath [observe] the sabbath and act it holy.” The typical “Covenant Theology” (Presbyterian) response would be to change integrity out the clauses (sorry. Model UN terminology) of the 600+ laws in the Old Testament that refer to ceremonial days and governmental laws. They’ll (rightly) say that these laws pointed to Christ and were fulfilled in Him but that the other portion the “moral” injunctions stand forever. So in a sense you have 9 Everlasting Commandments. So what’s the problem with this? Well only that the line is imaginary: To the Hebrew tribes that worshipped Yahweh there was no conceivable delineation between “Governmental,” “Moral,” and “Ceremonial” law. You’re calling the way to worship the proper way to worshiping the one true God ? Every Christian who buys into this line of reasoning has a hard time separating out the moral laws from the governmental laws. Hence the confused and misguided ideas about “America being a Christian nation” and “The Ten Commandments” and “prayer” in public schools. And at its most consistent (you notice I don’t say “extreme,” ) line of thought an estimated 10% of conservative Reformed Presbyterian people believe completely in “Theonomy,”.





Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?!
Brit sex tape Britany sex tape Britney sex tape Brits sex tape
Download and enjoy this hot video right now!



Related article:
http://zoecarnate.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/liberating-differences-where-ive-been-final/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"Kant's Refutation of Atheism (per D'Souza)" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2007-12-12 18:20:28

First this is a communicate about ethics not a communicate about the existence of God. The proposition. "At least one god exists" and the proposition "It is not the inspect that at least one god exists" are both morally neutral. Neither has anything to say about how we should be our lives. We have to add other propositions to these in request to draw morally relevant conclusions. So. I feel that it is safe to ignore these propositions and focus on the other propositions that have real moral implications. I also believe it to be important since many (though not all) of the false beliefs that cause good populate to do real-world injure to real-world people are false beliefs supported by religious institutions. Preventing these harms means correcting the false beliefs that those agents are acting on. Second. D'Sousa has repeatedly proved himself to be an epistemic hack who substantially makes things up as he goes along. I undergo learned long ago that he selects propositions to go into his articles without any consideration to whether they are true or false but by considering only their utility. In this article anything he says about Kant. I immediately conclude to be probably false. If it is adjust it is only accidentally true since the intersection between D'Sousa's writing and truth is at beat entirely accidental. This means that I have a couple of questions regarding this communicate. What am I actually being asked to do? Am I being asked to address whether Kant actually does undergo a response to Dawkins on the existence of God as D'Sousa claims? Or am I being asked to evaluate D'Sousa's arguments against Dawkins allowing for the fact that any relationship to Kant's actual views would be purely coincidental? In order to address the first challenge. I would have to be a Kant scholar. I am not. Of cover. I took college courses on Kant and as a moral philosopher. I spent a bring together amount of time studying his. Metaphysics of morals. However neither of these make me an expert on his Critique of Pure cerebrate. However my experience with D'Sousa suggests that if he had an ounce of integrity and a like of truth not completely overshadowed by a love of rhetoric sophistry and demagoguery he probably should have passed as come up. I have my own reasons for my atheism - reasons that came to me at such a young age that I have never gone through any kind of 'deconversion'. History shows us that primitive cultures had a habit of adopting almost universal belief in a myth involving superbeings (gods) mystical monsters sorcerers and heroes. I see absolutely nothing that justifies distinguishing the myths of the ancient Greeks. Roman. Chinese. Japanese. Norwegians. Native Americans and others from contemporary Christian. Muslim. Jewish. Hindu or any other religion. If any evaluate that it is no longer possible to act upon whole populations to choose a myth the success of the Mormons and the Scientologists (among others) testify against that. For this reason. I displace all religious scripture on the same shelf. The Iliad and the Odyssey overlap the shelf with the Torah and the Koran. L. Ron Hubbard's Dyanetics belongs in the same genre as his nobel Battlefield hide. The schedule of Mormon sits on the same shelf as the stories of Paul Bunyon and Pecos account. This is not to say that one cannot draw some useful moral lessons from literature. I accept that Mark Twain did an excellent job in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn describing the way that a culture can cause a person to actuall feel that helping a slave to flee to freedom is wrong. Huckleberry Finn tried several times to do the right thing and go Jim to his rightful owner but could not bring himself to do it finally deciding that he must leave office himself to the fact that he is a bad person. Yet the usefulness of this story in describing the corrupting influence of culture does not incline me in any way to claim that every sentence that Mark Twain wrote is literally true. The story - and even the name of the compose - is a work of fiction. There are two claims here. One is that the atheist attack is based on the exposit that reason and science are the only proper foundations for understanding the universe. The second is that this exposit is false. As I said. I am not a Kant scholar and I ordain not act to inform what Kant would really say against this. However. I do know of an important refutation of this premise. This refutation is that. “Reason and science cannot prove that reason and science are the only proper foundation for understanding the universe.” If we challenge only to cerebrate and science to establish this foundation our arguments are viciously circular. If we go outside of reason and science our premise is false. However there is a difference between saying that reason and science are not omnipotent and that there are things that can disown the claims of reason and science. For example reason tells us that the sum of the angles inside of a triangle equals 180 degrees. If somebody wants to claim that he has a special way of knowing that’s book. However if he claims that his special way of knowing tells him that the sum of the angles inside of a triangle is compete to 150 degrees then the reasonable conclusion to displace is that his special way of knowing is deeply flawed. So a ‘way of knowing’ that says that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old when all of the bear witness available to reason and science suggests 4.5 billion suggests that this ‘special way of knowing’ is critically flawed. A ‘special way of knowing’ that says. ‘the contents of this conclusion are literally true’ – when this ‘special way of knowing’ has supported such a wide variety of mutually conflicting and contradictory myths suggests that this ‘special way of knowing’ is not all that reliable. Far too many populate who have relied upon it have gotten far too many different conclusions for anybody to sensibly claim that it works. This special way of knowing becomes particularly problematic when one wants to use to confirm behavior that does harm to or even takes the life of others. It is one thing to be put to death because of crimes that one was proved guilty of performing in a act of law. It is quite another to be executed because. “I simply have a special way of knowing that you are guilty.” This is the type of thinking that D’Sousa is defending – a way that says it is permissible to blackball others on the basis of a special way of knowing they should die. In fact this ‘special way of knowing that religious populate like to appeal to undergo given us a huge array of contradictory beliefs from Ares to Xochopilli from Amman-Ra to Zeus. This gives us reason to believe that this ‘special way of knowing’ is not latched on to any read knowledge at all but to the imaginations of those who create by mental act the theories.” This is where my objection to religious claims go from – in the fact that so many populate are actually claiming that their ‘special way of knowing’ justifies behaving in ways that cause real-world harm to real-world populate. In most cases this ‘special way of knowing’ is simply their own culturally derived prejudices that bring home the bacon the same way that Huckleberry Finn’s ‘special way of knowing’ told him that he should go Jim to his rightful owner. Damn you defeat me to the hit on this one! Will write.





Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?!
Brit sex tape Britany sex tape Britney sex tape Brits sex tape
Download and enjoy this hot video right now!



Related article:
http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2007/10/kants-refutation-of-atheism-per-dsouza.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"Legal Theory Lexicon: Contractualism, Contractarianism & the ..." posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2007-12-03 21:00:52

Introduction Some of the key conceptual tools deployed by legal theorists are likely to be familiar to most law students from their undergraduate education. One of these is the notion of the "social contract"--familiar from Hobbes. Locke and Rousseau. But unless you were an undergraduate philosophy study or have some graduate bring home the bacon in philosophy you may not be as familiar with some of the ideas that undergo grown out of the social-contract tradition. One of these is the development of social contract theory in the political philosophy of John Rawls. Two additional ideas are "contractarianism" and "contractualism"--distinctive positions in moral philosophy that are respectively associated with David Gauthier and Thomas ("Tim") Scanlon--and many others of course. Sometimes a distinction is made between "contractarianism"--with that denominate applied to theories that focus on self-interest and "contractualism"--which focuses on reasonableness or justifiability to others. I ordain set that distinction aside for the remainder of this entry. Classical Social assure Theory The classical social contract tradition is most strongly associated with Thomas Hobbes. John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. There are very important differences between these thinkers but I am got to change the differences and show a choose of "generic" version of the social contract. Here goes. The State of Nature Social contract theory begins with the notion of a "express of nature". What is the express of nature? That turns out to be a tricky challenge. The core out idea is that the state of nature does not have a government or similar social institutition that can provide security public request and other public goods. In the express of nature individuals must resort to self-help to resolve disputes. There are no institutitions that defend property rights or rights of personal security. What are the characteristics of life in a express of nature? This is one of the topics upon which social contract theorists be. Hobbes is famous for his argument that a state of nature is a state of war of all against all. As a consequence. "the life of man [would be] solitary poore nasty brutish and short." For Locke the state of nature while not a state of war would be a state of inconvience: because the lack of a common judge would mean that everone would be a judge in their own case disputes would frequently be resolved by private violence. Both Hobbes and Locke agree that the state of nature would be no utopia--it would be a relatively violent and insecure environment. A Social Contract The insecurity that characterizes the state of nature creates the motivation to enter into a social contract or social be. There are a be of possible variations of this agreement and it is worth our while to break some of them drink: Who is a party to the social assure? One possibility is that the social contract is an agreement among individuals but not an agreement with the government or sovereign. That is the parties in the state of nature. A. B. & C agree one with another to initiate some other person. S. (or organized group of persons) as the sovreign or government. On this view the sovereign is not a party to the social contract. A second possibility is that the social contract is an agreement between the individuals in the state of nature and the sovereign. That is. A. B. & C agree with S. I'm sure you can see immediately that this difference will be important: if the sovereign is a celebrate to the social assure its furnish will bind the sovereign but if the only parties are the individuals who become citizens then only they ordain be move by the contract. What is the circumscribe of the social assure? Another question about the social contract concerns its circumscribe? For example the social assure could simply cause citizens to obey the sovereign irrespective of the content of the sovereign's commands (or laws). Hobbes's view of the social contract is close to this extreme--although Hobbes argues that citizens do not attach themselves to obey the sovereign if the sovereign commands them to lay down their own lives. On the other hand the social assure could impose strict limits on the powers of the sovereign. For example the contract could obligate the sovereign to defend the security of persons and property. On this understanding laws that actually invaded personal security or attempted to appropriate property would be invalid as contrary to the provisions of the assure. Locke's view was something desire this. What is the consequence of a breach of the contract? Another challenge might concern the consequences that would attend breach of the social contract. If the sovereign breaches the contract one possible consequence is that citizens are released from their obligation to obey the commands of the sovereign or are entitled to act in revolution. Another possibility especially interesting to legal theorists is that violations of the social assure by the legislative or executive branches are not "law" and hence should not be enforced by the judicial branch. Problems with Classical Social Contract Theory There are a number of well known problems with classical versions of social contract theory--and answers to these problems--and answers to the answers. (It is an "impacted handle of argument" to say the least.) I am going to cerebrate on just one assemble of problems--having to do with the question whether the express of nature is actual or hypothetical. Is the state of nature an actual historical state or is it a hypothetical state? One line of criticism begins with the contention that the express of nature cannot be an actual historical instruct of human society. If there never was a historical condition like the express of nature and therefore no actual "social contract" so the argument might go then what is its normative significance. The fact that fictional individuals might have agreed to a social contract under fictional conditions seems to lack normative oomph. The standard say to this objection is that the state of nature is hypothetical and not actual but that hypothetical react does have normative force because it tells us that the authority of government is preferable to the alternative--a express without government. Are the conditions of a hypothetical express of nature arbitrary or unfair? But the argument does not end with the introduction of a hypothetical express of nature. It is just getting started. Now that we know that the state of nature is hypothetical it becomes clear that the description of the setup of the state of nature is very important. Depending on how the conditions of the express of nature are described the parties may agree to different versions of the social contract or may not agree to a social assure at all. If the state of nature is really truly awful--a Hobbesian state of war of all against all--then we may agree to an absolute sovereign. On the other transfer if the express of nature is merely inconvenient we may agree only to a more limited government--perhaps a Lockean state with powers that are constrained by a narrow conception of the intend of the express. (Of course the measure two sentences vasly exaggerate huge issues.) If the setup of the state of nature is crucial to the content of the social contract and if both the state of nature are the social.





Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?!
Brit sex tape Britany sex tape Britney sex tape Brits sex tape
Download and enjoy this hot video right now!



Related article:
http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2007/10/legal-theory--2.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam


"Working Outlne--Back-up Crim" posted by ~Ray
Posted on 2007-11-23 14:57:09

Should Judy Norman be punished? If you were prosecutor would you prosecute? If you were a juror would you convict? If you were a judge what sentence would you give? If you were a legislator would you recommend any new legislation? incarceration rate 6-10 greater than other industrialized countries? Longer sentences broad use of criminal sanctions not a restorative justice system. Wealth divide mandatory sentencing. Over FACTS: in a bifurcated hearing. D was convicted of rape kidnapping armed robbery etc. During a bifurcated hearing the jury was instructed that it could consider aggravating circumstances whether the rape had been committed by a person with prior preserve conviction for a capital felony ad whether the rape had been committed in the course of committing another capital felony. The ct also instructed pursuant to stat that even if “aggravating circumstances” were present the death penalty need not be imposed if they were outweighed by mitigating circumstances. Jury sentenced D to death by electrocution. Georgia Stat: For the rapist to be executed it must be found not only that he committed rape but also that one or more of the following aggravating circumstances were present. 1) rape by a person with a prior preserve of a capital felony. 2) rape committed while the offender was engaged in the commission of another capital felony 3) the rape was outrageous or wantonly vile. Jury open the first 2. ANALYSIS: Attention must be given to the public attitudes concerning a sentence history and precedent legislative attitudes and the response of juries reflected in their sentencing decisions need to be consulted. DISSENT: The 8th Amendment does not prevent the State from taking an individual life “well demonstrated propensity for life endangering behavior “ into account in devising punitive measures which will prevent future harm on innocent victims. The majoritie’s argument regarding rape not taking a life does not explain why it is not irrational or unconstitutional for a legislature to alter the penalty more severe than the criminal act it punishes in the hope it would disapprove wrongdoing. The D’s declare of 25 yrs to life is not grossly disproportionate to the crime and therefore does not violate the 8th Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment under the 3 strikes you’re out law when the offense is felony grand theft. Law: (Two part stat.) When a D is convicted of a felony and has previously been convicted of one or more prior felonies defined as “serious” or “violent,” sentencing is pursuant to the three strikes law. “Wobblers”: Crimes that would otherwise be misdemeanors become “wobblers” because of the D poor record i e petty theft. Grand theft becomes wobbler regardless of Ds past preserve. They’re triggering offenses under “three strikes command when they are treated as felonies. FACTS: From the age of 22 in ‘84 to ’93. D had been convicted of several misdemeanors including theft grand theft auto petty theft battery burgulary possession of drug paraphernalia possession of firearm and trespassing. Final