Any Buddhists out there?

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Burning ghost »

Heidegger "amazing on death"? How so?
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Hereandnow »

Burning Ghost:
Most people? Doesn't matter how much you dodge around there is simply no denying that Buddhism is about attaining nirvana and breaking the karmic cycle of suffering. If a Buddhist doesn't meditate are they really Buddhist? What defines their belief? I can tell you now quite clearly "meditation" is not one of those of things, although it may be for some.

What is a fallacy?

I have attained nirvana before so I think that means I "believe" it. Lets face it though, "nirvana" is just a fancy term for a state of consciousness. You won't believe me and I cannot describe it to you. Yet you're willing to believe some guy that lived hundreds of years ago didn't eat meat and you should do what he did blindly? How do you know he didn't eat meat? Nah! Not buying into that kind of fanaticism because it is utter nonsense.
You could argue they are not Buddhists, that the word is passed through culture and language and is reduced to a ritual, the putting of hands together and bowing (as the Thai do) and relic worship, and so on. Again, who cares what passes for Buddhism in the public sphere? Uninteresting. Belief is not the issue, not is faith, here. It is liberation and enlightenment and nirvana.

Who cares who ate meat? Who cares about the particular legends of the ancient world? Are you being flippant? Sounds like you're pi**d about public religions. But why bring that here? You need to focus. And what do you mean you've attained nirvana? Explain pls.

-- Updated July 26th, 2017, 12:04 pm to add the following --

Burning Ghost:
Heidegger "amazing on death"? How so?
Heidegger tries to understand dasein as time, as a dynamic of preontology pressing on to the future through anticipatory "not-yetness" Human dasein has its Being is the fluid not-yetness of becoming the next possibility. Amazing because it makes for a very strong case for interpretation being at the heart of Being. It puts the conceptual side,to use Kant's terms, IN the object. This is Husserl, of course, but Heidegger places this Heraclitean feature into death: our ceasing to be is built into our Being; we live death, so to speak, in each moment of Being coming to be. It is a structural feature of dasein, death is.

And the reason why Heidegger is so important is his emphasis on caring. He puts before us a model of dasein in death that moves into possibility through caring. That is death. We are time, and death is time. From here it gets technical, but if you want specify, details can be discussed.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Burning ghost »

By saying I've 'attained nirvana' I mean just that.

What "fallacy"? You said I said something false? What was it?

As for Dasein go for it PLEASE! Make sure you give citations so I can refer to my copy please. There is another thread on Heidegger somewhere so we better go there for that. Will post on it soon so we can continue.
AKA badgerjelly
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Fooloso4 »

I am not a Buddhist but it looks to me as if it has as one of its goals direct, unmediated experience. In this sense it is freedom from attachment to the the work of the conceptual mind. I do not know if this is possible, but, for what should be obvious reasons, we cannot think our way to an answer.

I say “one of its goals” because there are various schools of Buddhism and as with any teaching that has been around long enough there are factions and disagreements as to what Buddhism is and what Buddhist practice is, as well as different terminologies and techniques.

While we might make interesting comparisons with Husserl and Heidegger and Levinas and Kierkegaard and others, this gets us further away from an understanding of Buddhism because we are now confronted with the interpretive challenge of understanding them and on this there will be disagreement.
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Hereandnow »

Fooloso4:
While we might make interesting comparisons with Husserl and Heidegger and Levinas and Kierkegaard and others, this gets us further away from an understanding of Buddhism because we are now confronted with the interpretive challenge of understanding them and on this there will be disagreement.
Unless you're interested in characterizing what it is that holds a person in fixity. What I find interesting is the detachment that is made th ecornerstone of moksa is not to be construed so simply as in, just relax, put your thoughts aside, and so on. It rather goes to the relationship with the world at the perceptual level; and whereby the normal perceptual act "sees" the concept in the object (an object is the fusion of thought and intuition), the enlightened yogi does not have this dynamic in place. If for Kant intuitions with concepts are blind, for the yogi, blindness is enlightenment. Those philosophers you mention put analysis to perception and therefore to process detaching oneself from perception.

How is the tree before me not a tree (a Zen question might go)? How about when that enigma that begins Kierkegaard's Sickness Unto Death is made clear perceptually?

-- Updated July 26th, 2017, 5:26 pm to add the following --

I should say "...that is part and parcel of moksa..." or the like.

-- Updated July 26th, 2017, 8:17 pm to add the following --

And it's "intuitions withOUT concepts." I know, proofread.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Fooloso4 »

Hereandnow:
Unless you're interested in characterizing what it is that holds a person in fixity.
Attachment differs from person to person. Ch’an master Lin Chi, for example, said he first determined what a disciple was dependent on in order to cure their sickness and free them from bondage.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Spectrum »

Greta wrote:Everyone knows the benefits but how can they understand them if they haven't felt them? So what keeps people motivated to meditate when they know, but don't understand, the benefits? It requires a leap of faith - that one isn't just wasting their time sitting around repeating a mantra, watching an apple or focused on breathing.
True and I agree.
It is like convincing someone who has AHDD [or someone not studious] to study hard for 10+ years so that will enable one to get a very good job to live a reasonable life in our modern society. Another is recommending regular exercise to maintain good health.

Other than obtaining a sense of calmness for beginners the other benefits take a reasonable time to achieve and one has to be patient. This is why there are usually many drop outs after a few months especially when the benefits are oversold.

Those who meditate are;
  • 1. Has a natural inclination for it,
    2. Understand the benefits in the longer term via education and then are convinced.
    3. Pressured by someone or group then get the benefit,
    4. Suffered psychological/medical problems and look for solutions, then found meditation.
    5. Experienced sudden epiphany and take to meditation to repeat such experiences or the likes.
    6. Ex drug addicts who are informed meditation can be an alternative without side effects
As for those who do not has any inclinations for meditation or similar self-development techniques, it is difficult to convince them to start or continue. One way is to wait for a sufficient critical mass to pull the others in.
I understand there will be a percentile of hardcore anti-meditation who will never do it regardless of the evidences of benefits.

I believe the most effective is to make an objective presentation connecting meditation and its benefits and the opportunity lost without doing meditation [proper].

-- Updated Wed Jul 26, 2017 9:54 pm to add the following --
Fooloso4 wrote:I am not a Buddhist but it looks to me as if it has as one of its goals direct, unmediated experience. In this sense it is freedom from attachment to the the work of the conceptual mind. I do not know if this is possible, but, for what should be obvious reasons, we cannot think our way to an answer.

I say “one of its goals” because there are various schools of Buddhism and as with any teaching that has been around long enough there are factions and disagreements as to what Buddhism is and what Buddhist practice is, as well as different terminologies and techniques.

While we might make interesting comparisons with Husserl and Heidegger and Levinas and Kierkegaard and others, this gets us further away from an understanding of Buddhism because we are now confronted with the interpretive challenge of understanding them and on this there will be disagreement.
As mentioned [noted Atreyu] all religions has the same fundamental goals, i.e. tackling and soothing the existential crisis. In Buddhism this is reflected in the Buddha Story [a myth].

As you had mentioned 'freedom from attachment to the the work of the conceptual mind,' that is only a method to achieve the main purpose of religion by Buddhism.
Btw, attachment to the processes of the conceptual mind is critical to facilitate survival in various circumstances of reality, thus one must be very selective when it comes to its detachment to avoid dukkha [sufferings]. This is why a balance between attachment and detachment is necessary to sustain optimality, thus the Middle-Way.

In the past many seekers found 'detachment' to be beneficial for them to the extent they ended up with asceticism. Gautama tried this method and found it to be self-destructive and do not recommend asceticism for Buddhists.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Fooloso4 »

Spectrum:
As mentioned [noted Atreyu] all religions has the same fundamental goals, i.e. tackling and soothing the existential crisis.
There are many religious people who would disagree. For them the purpose of religion might be to serve God, or to glorify God, or to live in accord with or in harmony with nature or the universe, to rejoice and celebrate life, or to wonder at the wonder. Not everyone turns to religion to sooth an existential crisis, not everyone suffers from an existential crisis.
As you had mentioned 'freedom from attachment to the the work of the conceptual mind,' that is only a method to achieve the main purpose of religion by Buddhism.
Freedom from attachment is not a method. There are, however, methods aimed to aid one in freeing himself from attachments. I would say that the main purpose of Buddhism is to realize or actualize one’s Buddha nature. To be a Buddha. But this in not the goal of many who practice the religion of Buddhism.
Btw, attachment to the processes of the conceptual mind is critical to facilitate survival in various circumstances of reality …
Freedom from the conceptual mind does not mean abandoning or obliterating the conceptual mind.
This is why a balance between attachment and detachment is necessary to sustain optimality, thus the Middle-Way.
This is what some schools of Buddhism teach.
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Hereandnow »

Fooloso4:
Attachment differs from person to person. Ch’an master Lin Chi, for example, said he first determined what a disciple was dependent on in order to cure their sickness and free them from bondage.
But the question I ask is, what is the nature of dependency as such? One may have, say, an emotional dependency on others as an issue; but once the dependency is overcome, is there liberation? Is addressing neurotic pathologies what this is about? No. It goes tot he very core of the way reality is perceived.It's a structural matter, an ontological matter, to use Heidegger's word, since it is not about existentiell affairs, but existential ones (borrowing from Hubert Dreyfus' Being in the World).

I do think it wrong to reduce what Eastern yoga is about by referring to things in every day life. I know that is the tendency.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Spectrum »

Fooloso4 wrote:Spectrum:
As mentioned [noted Atreyu] all religions has the same fundamental goals, i.e. tackling and soothing the existential crisis.
There are many religious people who would disagree. For them the purpose of religion might be to serve God, or to glorify God, or to live in accord with or in harmony with nature or the universe, to rejoice and celebrate life, or to wonder at the wonder. Not everyone turns to religion to sooth an existential crisis, not everyone suffers from an existential crisis.
There are some people who turn to religion so that they can marry their girl and there are many other reasons why people turn to reason. Many are born into a religion.

However for the majority, the reason why they turn to religions or become religious is ultimately due to the subliminal drive arising from an existential crisis or dilemma.
The existential crisis manifest in many forms and in many degrees and the majority veered toward religion to seek consonance from the dissonance of the existential crisis.

Thus to veer towards a religion "to serve God, or to glorify God, or to live in accord with or in harmony with nature or the universe, to rejoice and celebrate life, or to wonder at the wonder," these are all intents and acts to flow toward consonance to relieve the dissonance from the existential crisis bubbling from the basement of their brains.

Btw, are you familiar with subliminal effects, e.g. as in subliminal advertising. A person in a supermarket may have weighed and thought s/he buy a bottle of 'coke' out of his/her freewill but not realizing s/he had been brainwashed by subliminal advertising to influence him/her to buy that bottle of coke.

DNA wise, ALL humans has inherited a 'religious'-zombie-meme and those with an active zombie meme will veer towards theism without being conscious of this zombie meme driving them at the subliminal /unconscious level.

Many are not religious for various reasons, but one of the reason is they have stronger inhibitors to suppress the 'religious'-zombie-meme.

-- Updated Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:49 pm to add the following --

Correction!
'why people turn to reason' should be
'why people turn to religion'
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Burning ghost »

Hereandnow -

You make a reasonable connection between language and attaining nirvana in the OP. You then go on to say Buddhist philosophy is the best? If Buddhism drives you toward a place where language is useless then what is this to philosophy?
AKA badgerjelly
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Fooloso4 »

Hereandnow:
It goes tot he very core of the way reality is perceived.
Right. The connection with attachments or dependencies is that the way we perceive is based on how we structure the world. Kant claims there is a universal structure, others claim that the structure itself is structured historically or culturally, and still others claim that there is an idiosyncratic element. To cut the attachment would be to stop structuring in order to perceive the world such as it is directly and unmediated.

Spectrum:
However for the majority, the reason why they turn to religions or become religious is ultimately due to the subliminal drive arising from an existential crisis or dilemma.
The problem with your simplified over generalization is that it can be made about almost anything. The reason you are on a philosophy site is ultimately due to the subliminal drive arising from an existential crisis or dilemma. The reason one rejects religion is ultimately due to the subliminal drive arising from an existential crisis or dilemma. The reason one loves or hates whatever it is one loves or hates is ultimately due to the subliminal drive arising from an existential crisis or dilemma.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Spectrum »

Fooloso4 wrote:The problem with your simplified over generalization is that it can be made about almost anything. The reason you are on a philosophy site is ultimately due to the subliminal drive arising from an existential crisis or dilemma.
The reason one rejects religion is ultimately due to the subliminal drive arising from an existential crisis or dilemma.
The reason one loves or hates whatever it is one loves or hates is ultimately due to the subliminal drive arising from an existential crisis or dilemma.
The above is true, but whatever acts or intents humans have had and has are certainly reducible to two primary drives;
  • 1. The avoidance of the threat of premature death - the existential crisis

    2. The drive to procreate the next generation.
Since nature is never perfect there will always be a small percentile exceptions, i.e. those risk takers who are not fearful and those who prefer to commit suicide. These exceptions can be easily explained.

The issues of 'hate' abhor, detest are normally associated with 1 above.
The issues of 'love' preference, bonding, and the likes are related to 2, i.e. procreation and protection of the next generation.

The reason [generally] why people are in a philosophical is they are looking [nb: subliminally driven] at new and more advance views to improve the fundamental elements of 1 and 2 above. As usual there will be a small % of exceptions.

The default of humanity is towards religiosity. Those [presently the minority] who reject religion [in general] are the ones who are looking for improvements in the methods to deal with 1 and avoiding the side effects [negative baggage, violence, suppression, evils] that come with religion.

In general whatever one loves, it is for the positive towards survival but there are exceptions, i.e. there are those who love to hate. Whatever one's 'hate' it has something to do with negativity to survival. Note minor exceptions.

Give me whatever acts or intents of humans have had and has, I will reduce them to the two primary drives above, if not, it is a natural exception.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Parsifal
Posts: 11
Joined: November 11th, 2022, 4:20 am

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Parsifal »

Present awareness wrote: July 21st, 2017, 7:34 pm I feel that Zen comes closest to the truth, in regards to how things really are! Words and intellection are just pointers, not the thing itself. An interesting device used in zen is called a koan. It is basically a riddle which may not be solved with the intellect, however a solution is still required.

A dog may chase his tail for years and never catch it and then one day it becomes completely unimportant.
I happened to see your messages yesterday and I felt having a similarity to your opinion somewhat. As a matter of fact, I am an old Japanese and I have somewhat faith to Zen and Pure Land. I recently began to read some books relevant to western philosophy like existentialism I have once tried to read almost a half century ago when I was a student. As a result, I feel like losing my confidence in my faith to Buddhism due to incompatibility between philosophical logic between the west and the east especially what you meant. However, yours is too short for me to understand well, so please add some explanation for my better understanding. Especially the phrase referring to "Words and intellection are just pointers, not the thing itself." is the most focal point I want to know, because I think the incompatibility between the both world is significantly reflected on it. Thank you very much in advance.
Parsifal
Posts: 11
Joined: November 11th, 2022, 4:20 am

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Parsifal »

Hereandnow wrote: July 21st, 2017, 11:59 am It is well know that Buddhists (and thoughtful Hindus) call for a detachment from desire and a way to liberation; not as a way to conceptual understanding, but then, as, let's us agents of detachment, or, agents for who detachment is a possibility, we have to ask, detachment from what? Our desires, of course, and our cravings, appetites, yearnings, longings, and so forth. Lift the mind out of this quagmire of attachments and we will find our true selves, and our always-already-there Buddha nature. But this seems almost impossible to do and there are so many Buddhists out there who spend their lives never achieving nirvana. Ironically, stroke victim Jill Bolte Taylor, a Harvard neuroscientist seems to have found it when her language centers were damaged by a blood clot in her brain.

Now, I do not doubt her testimony, ad I am confident she attained nirvana--kind of difficult to mistake such a thing that requires nothing more than experiencing absolute bliss with no real interpretative component. And this is a point of insight: it implies that language occludes happiness, not to put too fine a point on it.

I actually think this is right, and that the reason Buddhists have such a hard time (even the dalai lama says he has not gotten there) is that meditation is monumentally difficult. Of course, it can be relaxing and free, granted, to sit quietly and do nothing, but what good is this. the idea is not to feel better for a while, just ask Hesse's Siddhartha. The idea is a kind of wordless enlightenment, a perfect and complete state, the kind Christians talk about when they talk about heaven.

But I want to understand this idea of yoga: detachment from what and to what? And I have no interest in Eastern metaphysics, or really, analyses of what that man said 2500 years ago. I want to look at this thusly:

I am not in agreement with Kant of lots of things, but he has me on the matter of how reason works:it is this synthesizing faculty, bringing particulars under generalities as in the existential quantifier "all x's are y". I don't want to go into the Critique any more than to say that understanding the rigors of Buddhism can be found here: these quantifiers that we wake up to in the morning when we look out the window, read the morning paper, etc., are the deepest condition of attachment. If you want true liberation, you have to liberate yourself from the assumptions built into language that things ARE what language tells you they are. For language carries caring and value; that is, we care about particulars and things being particular at all because our logic divides the world into parts. I

This why the best yoga is probably jnana yoga, i.e., philosophy. Phiosophy is essentialy destructive (as opposed to augmentative, like most fields of knowledge): it examines issues at thelevel of basic questions and assumptions, and inquiry is destructive, analysis takes apart what is otherwise established and fixed. Ask questions about what is real, what value is, and the tacit background of confidence begins to falter, the beginning of enlightenment.
Hello, I am an old Japanese man having an interested in Buddhism and some western philosophy. You may forget posting an interesting comment on such topic over 5 years ago, mayn't you? The reason why I am writing to you is I am looking for a hint or something to solve a sort of contradiction between Buddhism and so-called existentialism. I have somewhat faith to Buddhism and I began to get interested in the existentialism a little bit recently. You may know, most of Japanese people do not show an interest in this sort of matter and have an enough opportunity to learn it. As for me, only books relevant to this field I already have read are ones Albert Camus wrote. It was almost half a century ago when I was a student. So my knowledge around this field can be said as almost nothing, but my interest still vigorous regardless of old age.

To be honest, what you mentioned in this column is too complicated and difficult for me to understand well in addition to my poor English ability. Nonetheless, it seems very interesting, and I feel like its referring to just what I want to know regardless of your showing only little interest in Buddhism. More concretely saying, I would like to know if it is possible to form a compatible relationship between Buddhistic enlightenment and project into the future Sartre suggested. Buddhism argues enlightenment can come true after integrating a subject and an object together with abandoning a discretion, whereas Sartre argues one must keep the project into the future based on an individual firm intent, as far as I learned so far. These two perspectives are absolutely incompatible and opposite.

If possible, could you give me any suggestion on this relation?
Thank you very much in advance.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021