Despite your claim, Falun Dafa is indeed a religion.

In my opinion, it is not.

I believe that again there may be a disagreement in terms. While Falun Dafa may not include worship of any god or gods, it certainly includes teachings and practices that ignore reality. (as an aside, do you consider Buddhism a religion? They have no god.)

Here are a list of beliefs outlined in the book China Falun Gong that you had mentioned:...

I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say "rules of behavior", unless you're talking about thinking of others before one's self, maintaining virtue and avoiding things that create karma, and following "Truthfulness, Compassion, Forbearance" to the best of one's ability and understanding. IMO, these are not exactly "rules of behavior." To me, they seem more like guide lines based on moral principles. I'm sure you don't find fault with that.

I do find fault, as that is exactly what I mean. You follow this behavior because you are afraid of Karma coming back to get you. You think that by being good, you can cultivate supernatural powers. This is no different than doing it for fear of retribution in an afterlife.

In addition, the "Karma" section quoted above mentions that you can gain karma from the actions of ancestors and family. Being blamed for actions of people who lived long before you? That sounds awfully familiar...

The thing I find most problematic with your comment is that you're blaming the victims. It is irrational to say that if Falun Dafa did not exist there would be nothing for the CCP to persecute. They do persecute others as well, just nobody stands up against it on the scale we do. I'm sure you don't find fault in standing up for one's rights to freedom of belief, without the threat of violence from the central government of a country with 1.2 billion people.

I am aware of the actions of the Chinese goverment. As I stated before, what they are doing is wrong. There is no debate about that.

I am not blaming the victim. Is saying that it's a bad idea to walk down a dark alley by yourself at night blaming the victim?

Of course everyone should stand up for the right to believe whatever nonsense they want. However, you seem to be missing the point that I, and others in this thread, have made. Religions like Falun Dafa create differences. By separating the "enlightened" from the rest of us, it creates an artificial, unnecessary divide in people, and such divisions often lead to violence, as is the case here. The Chinese government is wrong, and their actions are deplorable, but they still use the religion as an excuse. Religion is a powerful excuse because people tend to rally behind them easily, and tend to be far less suspicious or questioning of the actions required of them.

The argument that is made is that without religion (which is unnecessary), there would be fewer excuses for violence in situations like this.

Talk25 wrote:

Here you are claiming to know why I "follow this behavior". Again, I find this irrational. How could you possibly know why I do something, if I have not told you the reason? It seems to me that you are making things up to support your preconceived ideas.

Fish wrote:

In your initial post, you claimed to practice Falun Dafa. You also named two books that outline the beliefs of Falun Dafa. I quoted the books and assumed that, since you are a practictioner, the quoted sections applied to you. Which part am I making up? The only ideas that I presented are the ones I took from the books you mentioned. I don't understand what you mean by saying you practice Falun Dafa if you don't follow the writings of the books.

Fish wrote:

In addition, the "Karma" section quoted above mentions that you can gain karma from the actions of ancestors and family. Being blamed for actions of people who lived long before you? That sounds awfully familiar...

Ok, it sounds familiar. But, what do you think is wrong with that idea?

I think it is wrong for someone to be held responsible for the actions of someone else. The only exception I know if would be if that person tricked or coerced the other person. Seeing as how my ancestors died before I was born, I hardly see how I could have influenced their actions. Please explain to me why I should be punished for the actions of someone else.

No, that's not blaming the victim, but you did not say it that way. You said something like 'if Falun Dafa did not exist there would be nothing to persecute.' Would you also say that if women didn't wear short skirts, there would be no one to rape? Your analogy leaves open the possibility that there may be a safer place to walk. That's not the reality in China for Falun Dafa practitioners.

A woman has a choice. She decides what kind of clothes to wear. In an ideal world, she could run around naked and live happily and unmolested. We do not live in an ideal world.

However, let me be perfectly clear. There is no excuse for anyone to rape anyone else. I am not "lending justification" to criminals. Please stop saying that. It simply is not true.

I do understand your point about beliefs making people different. I disagree with your contention that the differences or divisions caused by "religion" are artificial and unnecessary.

How are they not artifical? The teachings are something made up by someone. I'm not sure how they're not unnecessary. What function do they serve?

The fact is that everyone on earth is different from everyone else anyway. These differnces naturally cause divisions among people. It is not only "religions" that cause divisions, and there is nothing inherently wrong with there being divisions between people. For instance, Doctors can be separated from lawyers who can be separated from farmers, etc., etc., etc.

Everyone is different, but in many ways these are "natural" differences, by which I mean the person had no choice. You cannot choose where you were born, or to what race, what gender, etc. I will admit that you also can't decide what religion your parents are, so your upbringing is also not your choice. However, as an adult, your religion is your choice. You can decide what religion to follow. When these choices cause dischord between people, isn't that a bad thing? The difference between a lawyer and a doctor is useful because I can go to one when I'm sick and one when I'm arrested. However, the differences between religions are not useful. If you know of a time when different religions created a mutually beneficial reaction between people, please let me know.

You seem to be focusing on people who believe differently from you, suggesting that they might not be persecuted if they didn't have those beliefs, which you insult as being nonsense and unncessary; as though you have superior knowledge. Do you think that you are more "enlightened" than people who believe differently from you? Be honest. Where are we going with this?

Do I believe that I am more "enlightened" than people who believe in intelligent universes living in their guts and that they can heal people with their minds? Yes, I do. I know that wisdom is not directly related to knowledge or intelligence, but I don't think that I could ever consider someone who is willfully ignornant to be wise. Perhaps I am too pragmatic.

I also disagree with your contention that it is the differences or divisions between people that lead of violence. Again, I assert that it is intolerance of those differences and divisions that is to blame, not the differences and divisions themselves. Of course I also recognize that some religions do promote the idea of "superiority", and they use that as an excuse for violence.

I hope to assure you that that is quite the opposite of what is taught in Falun Dafa. I am a Falun Dafa practitioner and that is my understanding.

I don't understand how you feel that Falun Dafa doesn't support the idea of superiority. The religion claims to have the only moral standard. The religion commonly refers to "ordinary people" as opposed to the "enlightened." If someone is happy working for money as opposed to "englightemenet" I would not judge that person. Let's take another look at the book (pg 81) :

Quote:

The main goal of Falun Dafa cultivation is to guide people up to high levels. It's not about doing that kind of thing, but it can do a lot to promote better civility in society.

Fish wrote:

Why do you think that Falun Dafa has the ultimate knowledge of what is good and bad? What evidence do they present to support the idea that people should follow their standards? Why should I submit myself to their teachings?

Why isn’t it an evil practice? This is because it also has strict xinxing [moral character, T25] requirements. Its cultivation practice also follows the characteristic of the universe. It does not violate the characteristic or the law of the universe, and neither does it engage in committing wrong deeds. Therefore, it cannot be called an evil practice. The Buddha School and the Tao School are orthodox schools, not because the characteristic of the universe conforms to their practices, but because the practices of both the Buddha School and the Tao School observe the characteristic of the universe. If the Qimen School’s cultivation practice also complies with the characteristic of the universe, it is not an evil practice, but a righteous school as well. This is because the criterion for discerning good or bad and benevolence or evil is the characteristic of the universe. Its cultivation abides by the characteristic of the universe, so it is also a righteous way, despite that its requirements differ from those in the Buddha School and the Tao School.

It sounds to me like you're lending justification to the perpetrators of violence, as though it can be expected. What if someone turned it around and said something like: "Non-believers are nonsensical, their beilefs are unnecessary and if they didn't exist, there would be fewer excuses for us to commit violence against them." Would it be ok to then say what you did? To me, that sounds irrational and irresponsible.

It would be fine for you to say that IF you back up your claims. I have shown why Falun Dafa is nonsensical, since it makes claims that have no basis in reality. Show me how a naturalistic view is nonsensical.

Religion is like a monarchy. If the king truely loves and cares about his people, it's possible for the people to be happy and peaceful, but if the king doesn't it's simple for him to take advantage of them. Religion isn't necessary for people to be good. I prefer to promote morality on its own merits without invoking "supernatural" effects.

It almost sounds like we're talking about Dungeons and Dragons.

Religion is certainly the worst thing humans ever invented. Falun Gong is relatively benign, but it tends to piss of the Chinese government (who call themselves Communist but tend to be extreme capitlists!)

As for this Fulun Gong, I agree with Mr Shizzle, it seems fairly benign

Question: Why is homosexuality considered immoral?

Teacher: Think about it, everyone: Is homosexuality human behavior? Heaven created man and woman. What was the purpose? To procreate future generations. A man being with a man, or a woman with a woman - it doesn't take much thought to know whether that's right or wrong. When minor things are done incorrectly, a person is said to be wrong. When major things are done incorrectly, it's a case of people no longer having the moral code of human beings, and then they are unworthy of being human.

Let me tell you why today's society has become how it is. It results from there not being an upright Fa to keep human beings in check. This Dafa is taught right in the most chaotic environment, at a time when no religion can save people, and where the circumstance is that no god takes interest in people anymore. The Fa is almightly. The best time periods wouldn't require such a great Fa to be taught. Only in the worst time periods can the power of the Fa manifest. There are other reasons, too.

 

Question: Why is it that homosexuals are considered bad people?

Teacher: Let me tell you, if I weren't teaching this Fa today, gods' first target of annihilation would be homosexuals. It's not me who would destroy them, but gods. You know that homosexuals have found legitimacy in that homosexuality was around back in teh culture of ancient Greece. Yes, there was a similar phenomenon in ancient Greek culture. And do you know why ancient Greek culture is no more? Why are the ancient Greeks gone? Because they had degenerated to that extent, and so they were destroyed.

When gods created man they prescribed standards for human behavior and living. When human beings overstep those boundaries, they are no longer called human beings, though they still assume the outer appearance of a human. So gods can't tolerate their existence and will destroy them. Do you know why wars, epidemics, and natural and man-made disasters happen in this world? They're precisely because human beings have karma, and those events exist to remove it. No matter how wonderful a time period my be in the future, there will still be wars, epidemics, and natural and man-made disasters on earth. They are a way of eliminating karma for people. Some people who have sinned can have their karma eliminated through the death of the flesh body and suffering, and then they'll be free of that karma when they reincarnate Their lives don't really die and they reincarnate again. But the karma that some people have accrued is too much, in which case the fundamental elements of their existence will be implicated and destroyed.

Homoesexuals not only violate the standards that gods set for mankind, but also damage human society's moral code. In particular, the impression it gives children will turn future societies into something demonic. That's the issue. That kind of destruction, however, isn't just about disappearing after they're annihilated. That person is annihilated layer after layer at a rate that seems pretty rapid to us but in fact is extremely slow in that time field. Over and over again, one is annihilated in an extremely painful way. It's terribly frighteing. A person should live in an upright manner, living honorably like a human being. He shouldn't indulge his demon-nature and do whatever he likes.

I did indeed use the words "ultimate knowledge of what is good and bad" because Falun Dafa does make that claim. The misunderstanding is that I would't say that Falun Dafa would say it is the only good religion. However, the fact that they can judge other religions, and that they can claim knowledge of the "law of the universe" is what I find fault with. Even the existence of such a law, much less having complete knowledge of it, has not been shown.

As for "guide people up to high levels", I don't see what could be wrong with that. It's up to individual people if they want to cultivate that way. I never suggested that you should do it.

What is wrong with it is the idea that there are people at higher levels. You say that there is nothing wrong with being ordinary, but if practitioners are at higher levels, wouldn't that put everyone else at lower levels? If there is nothing wrong with being ordinary, why aren't you just an ordinary person?

Perhaps I was being too sensative and not really thinking about the point you were trying to make. I do, however, feel that your statement here would be well served with a qualifier as what follows in parentheses. "I have shown why Falun Dafa is nonsensical, since it makes claims that have no basis in (the) reality (that I, Fish, understand)."

The part you are making up is claiming to know why I practice Falun Dafa. I don't blame you for having a widely different understanding of the teachings, as you are not a student of Falun Dafa (as I understand it). Even practitioners have different understandings of Dafa. I certainly do not practice out of fear of karma or some desire to obtain supernatural powers, as you claim. In fact, it is my understanding that doing it that way is not in compliance with the teachings.

Ok. I understand your point. Please understand that I cannot explain one bit of Falun Dafa to you. I am not the Master. I would only confuse you (not that I haven't already). Another way to look at what you quoted is as an incentive to follow moral principles, kind of like not creating polution for your children's generation to have to live with.

I am frustrated by this part of the conversation. You are correct in that I don't understand how you practice. The only information I have is the information you give me, including the information from the two books. I have quoted the books, which seem to clearly state that good behavior is used to aviod karma and to aid cultivation. If you could explain how they actually say otherwise, that would be helpful.

How is your reality different from mine? Are you saying that we live in different universes? I don't understand.

An "incentive to follow moral principles"? That's what I said Karma was initially (the incentive to be good is to avoid karma and help you gain supernatural powers (i.e. cultivation)). So which is it?

Actually, I didn't say that Falun Dafa does not promote the idea of superiority. I intended to say that it does not use any such thing as an excuse for violence.

Of course I also recognize that some religions do promote the idea of "superiority", and they use that as an excuse for violence.

I hope to assure you that that is quite the opposite of what is taught in Falun Dafa. I am a Falun Dafa practitioner and that is my understanding.

So does Falun Dafa promote superiority or not?

I would say that it does: (China Falun Gong pg 30)

Quote:

The path of cultivation is the most correct one, and practitioners are actually the smartest people. The things that everyday people struggle for and the minute benefits they gain are fleeting.

Is that how you feel? If it is not how you feel, please explain to me why the book (which I understood to contain the teachings of Falun Dafa) makes that statement. They seem to be directly conflicting.

Certainly discord between people does not seem good if it goes too far. Disagreement is ok, and agreeing to disagree is ok. There is a story about Ghandi. I don't know the details but it goes something like this. Ghandi went on a hunger strike until the people from two different religions stopped killing each other. One man came to Ghandi and begged him to eat. He felt guilty and did not want Ghandi's death on his conscience, because he had killed someone from the other religion. Ghandi agreed to eat if the man would adopt an orphan from the other religion. Different religions, peaceful resolution. Is this the exception to the rule. I can't say, but I doubt it. It's just something that rarely makes the 6:00 news or major chapters in history books.

I wasn't aware of this story. Do you know where I could read more about it? I am very interested in the details.

However, even so, it seems to me that it was the hunger strike and the guilt that coerced the people to stop fighting. I don't see how their different religions helped them to settle the issue. I didn't say that there can't be peaceful resolutions between people of different religions. I said "If you know of a time when different religions created a mutually beneficial reaction between people, please let me know." The idea being that being of two different religions hasn't ever made a situation better (as opposed to being neutral or actually worse). I don't see how that applies here, so if you could explain that would be helpful.

Indeed. Why would I subject myself to the pain of cultivation? Perhaps I see a benefit in it that others do not understand. BTW, I have no idea what level I am at. Just like I don't know what level you are at. It would be irrational for me to claim to be at a higher level than you or anyone else. So, I don't make any such claims. JMO.

If you'll re-read what I said you'll see that I was talking about our perceptions of reality, not reality itself. How could two people experience it the same way?

Sorry I confused you. The only way to understand Fa is to genuinely study Fa, not interpretations. JMO.

Actually, I didn't say that Falun Dafa does not promote the idea of superiority. I intended to say that it does not use any such thing as an excuse for violence.

So does Falun Dafa promote superiority or not?

I would say that it does: (China Falun Gong pg 30)

Quote:

The path of cultivation is the most correct one, and practitioners are actually the smartest people. The things that everyday people struggle for and the minute benefits they gain are fleeting.

Is that how you feel? If it is not how you feel, please explain to me why the book (which I understood to contain the teachings of Falun Dafa) makes that statement. They seem to be directly conflicting.

Fish wrote:

The very idea of levels exists only within the religion.

Not true. Unless one lives on a communistic society then levels are obvious and are used commonly. To assume all human life is equal is to assume that the presidents life is equal to bums... which is not the case.

If we experience the same reality we should experience in the same way.

We can see that Teacher Li did not say it quite the way Fish has characterized it. Let's note that Master Li did say "... if I weren't teaching this Fa today,..." and "It's not me who would destroy them, but gods."

Fortunately for humanity he is teaching this Fa today. Also, note that Falun Dafa is completely peaceful. While I understand homosexuality to be something that causes karma, as a Dafa practitioner, it is not my place to tell others how to live their lives. Nor has Master Li ever said that anyone has to follow his teachings. Nor has he ever said anything about him or Falun Dafa doing anything to prevent or hinder anyone from living their lives how they see fit (except with regard to the persecution). So yes, it is benevolent, especially if you consider that he is explaining to people one way that they can avoid creating karma which will have to be repaid later.

Fish wrote:

Tell me why homosexuality causes karma. How is it that you understand that? If you understand it, you'll be able to explain it, right?

Way beyond my ability to explain. I do have a limited understanding of it. But of course, you're just looking for something to argue about. Which is what would happen if I tried to describe my understnading. Sorry, I've got better things to do.

In everything you've quoted and analysed in such great detail, did you find anything that made you feel that Master Li was calling for anyone to take any kind of action against homosexuals?

When normalizing how humans should be, they discussed this very seriously. And there are other problems nowadays, such as organized crime, homosexuality, and the worship of violence. What we’ve mentioned are only phenomena, yet they reveal the state of society. People tolerate violence and indulge in it, they look up to mobsters, and they even worship the pirate leaders of the past who killed people and set fires. It means that people are no longer able to tell good from bad; they can no longer tell good from evil.

The evil ones should think twice about their flagrant savagery,
When Heaven and Earth are bright again, down to the boiling cauldron they go;
Punches and kicks do little to change people’s hearts,
Violent winds usher in an autumn with even harsher chill.

I'm guessing you don't have any gay friends with whom you have discussed this. If you did, you would understand that it's not a choice.

I have a lot of friends who have gone through the proverbial hell trying to deny their sexuality as youngsters and teens. Trust me, they didn't choose it.