Do you have any links to some of that research?

Any help in the research department would be appreciated!!!

read of it in a book by a western author - Martin Caidin; an in-your face guy -- but pretty decent, under the gruff exterior. he had a talk show - where he would confront right-wing fanatics in debate. he appeared on episodes of the "6 million $ man"; and wrote a number of military histories & sci-fi novels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Caidin

the experiment is conducted with psi-wheels. it appears to show a form of very low level energy flowing between the palms of one's hands.
but, the results could also be caused by very minute fluctuations in the air flow; up-drafts & down-drafts caused by hot & cold air rising or falling, air conditioning, etc.. so the results are not definitive. James Randi of CSICOP, challenged Caidin to demonstrate the psi-wheels under radically controlled conditions -- but Caidin is said to have avoided the challenge; though Caidin had a different take on the matter.
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psi_wheel

I've been so busy I haven't even tried to follow up on my reference or any others.

Good and evil are not properties of matter, they are projections we attach to perceived stimuli.

Electromagnetic fields don't support those concepts in any way.

Additionally, the New Age version of karma and the Buddhist version of karma are very different things.

Last edited Mon Mar 19, 2012, 12:19 AM - Edit history (2)

after all, what are the concepts of good & evil, but positive & negative -- like protons & electrons.

sometimes, i think we get hung up on language & metaphysical speculation. but Buddhism is, first & foremost, a way of dealing with everyday life. this is shown in the story of one of the Buddha's followers, who was having a hard time understanding the concepts of Buddhism. in brief: The Buddha, sensing the monk's inability to grasp abstract ideas, took a clean white handkerchief & asked the monk to keep rubbing it between his palms, whenever he was due to meditate. after long hours of this process, the monk noticed how the clean white handkerchief became soiled & black, and, an instant of enlightenment occurred, allowing him to enter the state of an Arhat.

The Buddha's teachings state that consciousness & the self are purely a creation of the interaction of matter, energy, motion & time, without any existence apart from such interaction. which - in my opinion - is similar to a physicist saying that eveything which exists in the Universe is a construct of physical forces, whether electro-magnetic, or otherwise.

Newton's 3rd (i think) law of motion -- "every action has an equal & opposite reaction" -- states the same principle -- though applicable to different forces, as the law of Karma' (the actual term is 'Karma Phala' -- Phala = result; Karma = action in the form of thoughts, words, deeds). thus, i think there is a chance that Karma might very well be the action of some form of energy, set in motion by one's actions. for example: wouldn't there be a possibility that -if we kill an animal, the pain & suffering the animal undergoes at the time of death will create some form of energy, which will gather momentum over time & return in a circular path, to affect us?

in another vein, i saw your thread on dualism. if you would allow me to put my understanding of the matter -- in its primitive form: to my mind, what Buddhism teaches is that in a holistic sense, there is no duality. negative & positive are just two sides of the same coin: when the lion hunts the deer -- if the lion feeds - the deer is dead; but if the deer escapes to freedom - the lion starves.

the same man may treat his child with love & tenderness; yet may act with extreme vileness to torture & kill someone he hates. so, good & evil are two ends of a circular scale, which meet at some point & turn into the other -- in an individual's mind.

both the Yogis & the Taoists will have it that: when Yin reaches its limit, it becomes Yang; and when Yang reaches the end of the line, it turns into Yin.

just to add -- on a last note: The Buddha did state that, he only taught what is conducive to the eradication of suffering, the living of the holy life, and arriving at enlightenment. so, what i have indulged in here -- is of course speculation, outside the scope of Buddhism.

Positive and negative means something very different when discussing atoms rather than ethics.

I agree, and I currently believe one way to help overcome this is to determine the difference between fact and opinion.



Newton wasn't discussing ethics. Good and evil are imaginary concepts for the field of ethics.



I don't think so. Even if pain and suffering can create a migrating energy we can't detect, I don't see why that energy would be drawn the killer. And even if the pain and suffering energy did find its way to the killer, I don't see how that would affect the killer in any way.

Those who are responsible for the deaths of many, such as first world war mongers, don't seem to suffer any real negative effects from their actions. G.W.Bush lives a life of luxury while MLK was shot and killed.



I don't think love & tenderness is good, and I don't think torture and killing out of hate is evil or bad. I think we view those actions as good or bad, the actions themselves are free from those qualities. Good and evil are veils we drape over perceived stimuli. It's extra.



Most Buddhists, or those with sincere interests in Buddhism, don't consider themselves experts. I even once had a Buddhist nun tell me she was no expert on the subject of Buddhism. This is something I have always liked about Buddhism.

hope you won't mind my copying your form of response.

"Positive and negative means something very different when discussing atoms rather than ethics":

the point i was attempting to make here is: we don't know for certain, if they are different in reality. the difference is just a label we put on them, from our current state of knowledge. they may very well be different. on the other hand, it is a possibility that they are just two aspects of the same issue.

"Good and evil are imaginary concepts for the field of ethics" & " Good and evil are veils we drape over perceived stimuli":

this was exactly my point. what is defined as good by one entity - from its point of view - could be defined as bad by another entity - from its own viewpoint. on the other hand, if an action causes suffering to a single, minute entity, i would think that action is harmful - even if it benefits many other beings.

"Even if pain and suffering can create a migrating energy we can't detect, I don't see why that energy would be drawn the killer":

perhaps i misunderstand your meaning here; but, this is the basic concept of the operation of karmic results, in Buddhist teachings.

quotes from the Buddhist Dhammapada:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.05.budd.html

69. So long as an evil deed has not ripened, the fool thinks it as sweet as honey. But when the evil deed ripens, the fool comes to grief.
71. Truly, an evil deed committed does not immediately bear fruit, like milk that does not turn sour all at once. But smoldering, it follows the fool like fire covered by ashes.
119. It may be well with the evil-doer as long as the evil ripens not. But when it does ripen, then the evil-doer sees (the painful results of) his evil deeds.

Re. MLK:
according to the Pali literature -- The Buddha himself was attacked on a number of occasions by ill-wishers, including his own cousin & disciple, Devadatta; even to the point of having his (The Buddha's) leg significantly injured; he was also accused by an obsessive woman of seducing & impregnating her, in the court of the local ruler. The Buddha's own Shakya Clan & his City State, was attacked & decimated by the king of a neighboring state, in The Buddha's own lifetime. In Buddhist teaching, karmic results are only one of several possible reasons, for harm befalling a person.

"Most Buddhists, or those with sincere interests in Buddhism, don't consider themselves experts":

i am not sure if you are under the impression that i was setting myself up as an expert. if so, that is absolutely the wrong take on the matter. in the first instance, i haven't even read half of the Theravada scripts; much less those of other denominations. secondly, i would consider an expert to be someone who has -- not just studied the literature, but rather -- actually practised the Noble Eightfold Path of Buddhism & achieved at least some of its predicated results. in other words & in Buddhist terms, at the minimum: a Sotapanna, a 'Stream Entrant'.

hope this clarifies some of my statements -- which were not as clear as i would have wished.

I've enjoyed the discussion spurred by my simple new "news". I like the way each individual works to explain and clarify their own understandings based on what others perceive. I am slowly gaining a few insights, slowed only by my own lack of knowledge and understanding.

I guess trying counts.

we're trying to pull blindfolds off, with hands clasped behind our backs.
i think 'trying' not only counts; it is everything.
go down each dark alley; find a dead end.
come back & go down another.
until the last one left is the right one.
and if we're 'fortunate' enough, perhaps the first might be the last.
to paraphrase Edison: '1% inspiration & 99% perspiration'.

The Buddha said: it took his life force countless eons, to find the answer;
and the only thing that counted in the quest, was the unshakeable determination to find it.
Hopefully, following his lead, our trips may be shorter. or not.

It is called A Force for Good by Daniel Goleman-
The Dalai Lama has experts who tutor him in science and he is very interested in those places where science and spirituality intersect.

http://what-buddha-said.net/index.htm

(scroll down the web page, for the links on the lower right side)

One of the sayings within suggests that disillusionment allows the mind to be more free. We get clearer perspective and can see reality, is how I read this. This is useful to muse on in the context of politics.

wonderful science is showing wonderful interconectedness

I have been a classical musician all my life. I have performed a lot in orchestras when I was young. I have also been in two amateur plays and sung in one amateur opera. I would like to learn to do standup comedy that is not gross or hurtful.

I have always done it out of love and creativity. The aura that performers have is real, I believe. It's called "charisma" or "stage presence". I've seen famous performers in many different kinds of music and plays and musicals, and standup. There is communication between the audience and the performer(s). I've been told that when I get on stage, I have stage presence.

One person that I have met after a performance was Lewis Black. His image is that of an angry old white guy. But he isn't specifically aiming his rage at anyone in particular. He is pointing out absurdities in our society. I believe that because his anger is not personalized, that it is not destructive. He is not tearing anybody down, except for making remarks about politicians, which are standard objects of derision due to their phoniness. He is not as linguistically sophisticated as George Carlin was, but he is doing the same type of social commentary humor that should make you think.

People who ridicule others, for example, Don Rickles, are ugly on the inside, I believe.

I met Lewis after a show once for an autograph, and he had a really sweet and positive aura about him. I just wanted to hang out with him and soak in that aura. He is good to his fans and takes his time to talk to everybody in line. I thought he was positively adorable.

-----------------------------------------------------

Second story about the heart: I had been divorced from a guy I met in college. We were both string players and I met him in college orchestra. It only lasted a year and a half total, and he was emotionally and verbally abusive to me. He was unfaithful many times and bragged to me about it to hurt my feelings. I moved home to a different city and got a waiver divorce from him in 1980.

His brother died unexpectedly. I knew his brother as an artist in my home city, after meeting him when I was married to his little brother. The brother had a studio in the same building where I was working with a group of women artists. He always laughed a lot at the soap opera that was his family, and I think he was wise to do that. I went to the memorial service, not having seen my former husband since 1979. This was in about 2007, I think. I had not seen him in over 25 years. After it was over, I went up to him and asked him if he knew who I was. He knew who I was, but couldn't remember my name.

I talked to him for about an hour. We didn't discuss the divorce. He was raised Reform Jewish, and I found out during this conversation that he had become a good person, who cared about other peoples' feelings, and was now a Methodist minister. He was also a minister of music. His attitude was completely changed.

The weird part was that I felt two invisible hands open up my ribcage and open my heart chakra. I felt a whole lot of pain fly out of my heart while I was talking to him. This feeling continued for about an hour and a half after I left the memorial service. The only words I had for it were "healing" and "extraordinary".

I have also felt the presence of evil in my stomach which is the solar plexus chakra. I felt that when I was trying to type up sermons from a minister that were on tape. I could not go on typing and I was drained just listening to this man, even though I did not know what he looked like and never met him. I never got paid for the typing I did do, either.


Just my two cents' worth of experience.