Brane

Tashi Delek, dear Ani Chodron! Can you tell me something more and wide about eliminated from the New Testament, Nag Hammadi manuscript, Gospel of Aposthol Thomas? And what about locked out from the gaze of public, safely kept in the Vatican library? Namely, nowadays we can hear or read beside objective and truth, even a lot of unobjective, speculations, untruth or halftruth about topics you written above. All the very best and thank you very much for your answers. Brane

Tashi Delek, Lillipooh asked: I would like to know what was before the wooden logg fell into the river? What 'constituted' that tree at that point of being outside the water? Was there a pre-samsaric period and what caused that 'we' fell into it? Do you have possibility to get a book of Dalailamas words? Spiritual message for today and tomorrow, selection done Gilles Van Grasdorff. The book is translated into the Slovenian language at the book Paroles des Dalai- Lamas, Editions Ramsay, Paris, 1996. On a page 96 you can find a quotation on your question written by his Hollines Dalai Lama. If you have no possibility to find or get a book then I can borrow you. All the very best, Brane

Tashi Delek! Frederic, and also Draftsman, thank you very much for your knowledge and thinking that you gave me into the answers. Once more new topic, knowledge and thinking for a develop my mind.

Tashi Delek! Ani Chodron, Khyenrab and draftsman, firstly I woud like to thank you for your effort and work that you put in thinking and words into the answers. Before I started with countinuation of prewius topic, I woud like to say you-because of misunderstandigs which can be appers of the different reasons-that I am just that kind of human being who want to learning, working, listening, curiositing...who want to put effort and will in that way to be a better and more educated person like I am now, who could be able to help others now and in the future. And this palet include also answering on a different questions that is maybe not important, nonsensical. Ok? Ani Chodron wrote: If God created everything, who created God? Draftsman wrote:Was not this proof invented by Thomas Aquinas?... This philosophy and theology-about creating everything and who create God-were very intensively done in the Middle Age, more exactly in the 13 century-when different theologists on a rationaly way disscused about God, eshatology, creating everything and God etc. They disscused for an example how many Angels could seat on a tip of the needle.But we must now something; theologists are used also an old Greec philosophy when formed a particular parts of theology, specially Thomas Aquinas. This is mean that origin idea about chain creating of everythin and God and who created God, is exactly idea of Aristoteles. Aquinas just borrowed and upgraded Aristoteles idea. We must now also that Aquinas a few mounts to his death fallen in a deep silent. When he passed it said:" All my philosphy and theology, everything what I wrote, looks like a tresh empty straw." Theologists nowadays teach that God is uncreated creator. He exist from ever and ever. He is absolutely unconditioned, unlimited, Love...Mysticists also use this expression besides others for description of the God. Aquinas model is the just one of the historical models description of God. My question was not about Thomas Aquinas philosophy either who create God. You very heelped me with the answers you made but maybe I was not very clear with the asking of my question about begining of counsciousness. I will ask in other form: Why I am exist-in material form; my body and in ontological form; my consciousness-namely, it could be that I not be exist neither material nor ontological form? With best regards, Brane

Tashi Delek! I woud like to put you a two questions and ask you for answers: At the principle of the Karma all of our acts, thinking and words although done negative or positive to the others sentient beings will come back in that or another optios, forms in our life. What and how we are "sowed and cultivated" in our own life and how we influented and worked on an enviorment and with the other sentient beings around us we will reap, sooner or later. How is it possible that people who reap fruits of the good karma planty, acts also planty in a way where the results is bad consequences for them for other people and etc. It is logically that in the past lifes are collected a lot of good merits and now come the moment of pay day for them. But it is happening what I wrote yet, that those people in present life done and do a lot of negative acts, how it is possible this? It is seems to me contradictory or understandable that they acting negative now-in present life, or in one of the lifes- because before they efforted maybe eons of years that they collecting merits and come to the relative very high state of mind and that good acts might (must be) stay in mind or consciousness of the people. Men with mind like this could say, that we dare not thinking something about what is conecting with the bad acting, what even done some bad act. But the fact is... The second question is: Can you tell me something about the begining of the consciousness?A begining consciousness of the all sentien beings? On a university profesor taught me and also when I read books about Budhism that the Buda do not answered on a question about the begining of the consciousness. On the other hand I also read and heard that Buda spoken about this topic and that he said that is very complicated to understand this.I heard a lot of time of the diferent people that this thema is not important for our every day life, thinking and acting but I thing that is very important. Thak you for your answers, Brane

Tashi Delek. I ask myself if somebody of us realy now such a well C. G. Jung-his life work, his thinking, books...totality or christyanity- whole, that could be able to given objective interpretation or judgement about them. I mean Simona, that you expose very deep and complex topics which demand a realy deppening knowledge that later not be done some generalizing or simplifay sentence, view. This sentences that I wrote are not jump or something like that on you, ok? Good, let go ahead: "If we look from psihologicaly poin of wiev, religion is psihological phenomenon which is present here on a iracional way and also it is the fact our philosophy or anatomy. When this function is not present the human kind is like a individuum without balance because religion experience is expression for existence and function of unconsciousnes. It is not true that is enough racio and will. Indeed, on the contrary, we are permanent under influence forces which disturb and go along and crosswise through racio and will, this is mean that are strongest. Therefore happening that supreme intelligent (reasonable) people, and exactly those kind of people, suffering from disturbings in which they can not help themselves neither will neither intellect. Inside humen being is from ever something what he/she feel and experience strongest than is her/hisself alone and this call divine or demonic. God is this strongest inside him/her. This psihological definition of God of course have not nothing common with christian-dogmatic but it give us a description about something uneasiness in front of us. This is the most compose with our stories about "experience of God"." C.G.Jung VON RELIGION UND CHRIESTENTUM, Letters II, 512. Religion symbols do not come from the head but from somewhere else, maybe from the heart, in all cases from some deep psihological layer which have lack analogy with the consciousnes that always stay just on a surface. Therefore religious symbols have distinctive "notification character", this is mean that in principle are spontanious products unconsciousnes soul (mind) act. They are all and everything, but not considerate before that they are slowly grow throughout milleniums like stalk, like natural notification human being soul (mind). And nowadays we can observe how spontanously arise true religious symbols, how growe from our unconsciousnes like unusual kind of flowers but consciousnes stays beside them and wonder it and do not now exactly what to do with that birth. We do not need experienced some big troubles that confirm how this individual symbols at the capacity and form takes its source from the same unconsciousnes "spirit" (or what ever could be) like great humen being religion. In all cases, experience prove that religions are not at all capable invention, but arrive from natural life of unconsciousnes soul (mind) and in a certain way they adequate express it. With this themselves explain (interpret) own universal spread and own pure historrical influence on a men. Such a influence will be ununderstandable when religious symbols can not be at least psihologic natural truths. C.G.Jung, VON RELIGION UND CHRISTENTUM, Main work 9,83.