|
|
Post by Rudy on May 22, 2013 19:01:43 GMT 1
I thought mainly of this when I mentioned about what kind of Buddhist you are: Three Kinds of Practitioners
There are three kinds of people [who practice Buddhism]. Like all other beings, the lowest person wants happiness and not suffering or rebirth in the lower realms of existence, so he practices Buddhism to create the causes of rebirth in the human realm or in the heavenly realms of the gods. He does not have the power or the courage to leave worldly existence completely. He only wants the best parts of worldly existence; he wants to avoid the worst parts, and that is why he practices the Buddhist religion—to gain a higher rebirth.
The middling sort of person understands that the whole of worldly existence, no matter where one is born, is suffering by its nature, just as fire is hot by its nature. He wants to get out of it altogether and attain nirvana, the state that is entirely away from suffering.
The highest person realizes that just as he himself does not want to suffer and does want happiness, so also do all living beings have the same fears and wishes. He knows that since we have been born again and again from beginningless time in worldly existence, there is not a single sentient being who has not been our mother and father at one time or another. Since we are that close to all sentient beings, the best person is one who practices Buddhism in order to remove all these countless beings from suffering. To me it sounds as if you do not fit in any of these categories. As for the afterlife. of course you can find that pure speculation and probably nonsense, but it seems to me that you can put just about all religions - certainly Buddhism - into that category... |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on May 22, 2013 19:38:11 GMT 1
Yes, that is my understanding as well. So you see, for a more exprerienced student of Buddhism, some of your attitudes present a problem for us, Brian. On the one hand we can sense your enthusiasm, which is a good quality, on the other, your enthusiasm is often for an idiosyncratic, that is personal understanding of what Buddhism is. While we all have a unique understanding of Buddhism, we began with the attitude that we are ignorant of the Buddha's teachings, and needed to learn about them from a qualified source. Then I think in order to progress, all students of the Dharma, including the High Lamas, work to maintain that attitude. For example, often times when the Dalai Lama receives a question, he answers by quoting the Buddha, or Nargarjuna or some other recognize authority.
I have heard Westerners express dismay at this, "but what does he think? this is what I want to hear," but your see, that is not the point, the point is a real Buddhist has tremendous humility and respect for the Dharma, and studies and practices it very seriously. Inventing your own Dharma, creating your own system, is considered a grave error. If our own attitudes and insights were in harmony with reality, then we would not need to study or practice Buddhism at all. But it is easy for any one of us to see that in fact they have caused us to suffer needlessly. They have not created the conditions of happiness at all.
On the other hand, it is unrealistic to expect someone who is new to Buddhism to believe in anything but a basically materialistic world view. Confidence in the Dharma is a very gradual evolution. So perhaps there should be a fourth motivation. A kind of pre-student, who is interested, and studying a little, and practicing sporadically, who really just wants to feel better in this moment. And I think most people who express an interest in Buddhism belong in that category.
And most of these people think they have an open mind. It is really easy to see that their minds are very closed though, but like all us of they are always changing and learning, so eventually they will have a more open mind and will gradually gain confidence in the Dharma too.
At any rate, you seem to be making progress, Brian. You discuss things in a softer and more intelligent way. But you are still unclear as to what is a teaching of the Buddha, and what you think should be a teaching of the Buddha, and is just your own opinion.
|
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on May 22, 2013 20:02:42 GMT 1
Now Takso, who unfortunately goes by BuddhaTakso, now, as if there is a whole new Buddha named Takso, has taken this attitude to an extreme, and really written his own Dharma, complete with a new and for me nonsensical dependent origination and a lot of idiosyncratic combinations of seudo-science and Buddhist terms. The problem is not that he is stupid. Takso obviously has a good intellect, the problem is he has overestimated his own capacity. The Dalai Lama teaches the Dharma he has studied and learned, and in my opinion managed to realize. He does not invent his own teachings. It is actually not uncommon in cases of the Kalachakra for example, for a hundred thousand people to get up at 4 in the morning in order to attend one of his teachings and initiations. And wherever he goes, Nepal, Austria, Kentucky, or anywhere else he can fill a hall of 20,000 immediately. Always there are many more people than seats to hear him. Takso can't give away his dharma. Even posting it here for free, where any of us can read it at our leisure, no one is interested. THis is the folly of the ego thinking it can invent a new Dharma. But if you believe, as most Westerners who first come to Buddhism, in materialism, (and Brian, whether you realize it or not, you often express a belief in materialism informed by a little Buddhism) then no problem. Take from Buddhism what you can embrace today and work with that. But be clear about what is a real Buddhist teaching, and what is your own opinion.  |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on May 22, 2013 20:16:56 GMT 1
Finally, I want to express my agreement with Rudy, that there are both great and essential differences between Taoism and the Buddha Dharma. As Rudy pointed out, genuine practitioners of the Tao take as an ideal the so called Eternals, who aspired to live forever. Buddhists embrace our own impermanence, and dedicate everything to the happiness of all sentient beings. We believe that grasping after an impossible eternal self or soul leads to tremendous and unnecessary suffering. I am not saying they have nothing in common, I am just saying it is better not to confuse the two. |
|
|
|
Post by buddhitakso on May 23, 2013 2:37:26 GMT 1
Now Takso, who unfortunately goes by BuddhaTakso, now, as if there is a whole new Buddha named Takso, has taken this attitude to an extreme, and really written his own Dharma, complete with a new and for me nonsensical dependent origination and a lot of idiosyncratic combinations of seudo-science and Buddhist terms. The problem is not that he is stupid. Takso obviously has a good intellect, the problem is he has overestimated his own capacity. The Dalai Lama teaches the Dharma he has studied and learned, and in my opinion managed to realize. He does not invent his own teachings. It is actually not uncommon in cases of the Kalachakra for example, for a hundred thousand people to get up at 4 in the morning in order to attend one of his teachings and initiations. And wherever he goes, Nepal, Austria, Kentucky, or anywhere else he can fill a hall of 20,000 immediately. Always there are many more people than seats to hear him. Takso can't give away his dharma. Even posting it here for free, where any of us can read it at our leisure, no one is interested. THis is the folly of the ego thinking it can invent a new Dharma. But if you believe, as most Westerners who first come to Buddhism, in materialism, (and Brian, whether you realize it or not, you often express a belief in materialism informed by a little Buddhism) then no problem. Take from Buddhism what you can embrace today and work with that. But be clear about what is a real Buddhist teaching, and what is your own opinion. Hi, Matt. It's nice to hear from you once again. I have absolutely no doubt against your integrity in keep the teachings of the Buddha as original as possible. And I have deep respect in you for reminding oneself to feel with humility at all times. You have my honour in this aspect. But the world is not a closed one. Those who see, read, hear and evaluate for themselves can find the truth they seek. Sharing information here is not a sin. I have purely shared out what I have learned and realised. If you buy it, then take it as a reference. If you don't, why be bothered? There is no need for a brain-washing ceremony. Perhaps, you may need to realise that Buddhism is never about personality arising. People can name themselves anything they wish to, position themselves in ivory towers, whatsoever, etc. but have all these acts got to do with one's spiritual liberation? The role of religion in this era is not as a blockage but to help explain and educate in a mature manner. Nowadays, we are born into a free world and all sorts of information are circulating everywhere! The readers here are not brain-dead, perhaps. They are wise to think and know what is right, what is not, what is suitable and what is not. So may I repeat, the ultimate truth does not require any labels for its revelations and therefore, one has to let go and blow away the mindset that is associated with the '-ism' or '-ology', for these are the systems of stereotyping or pre-conditioning. Liberation is the only right potion to the ultimate truth discovery. Be bound-less, be stereotype-less, be label-less. Mould a right attitude and it would open up a new horizon of things. Have a nice day! |
|
brian
Senior Member
Posts: 83
|
Post by brian on May 24, 2013 2:36:54 GMT 1
Thx Rudy and Matt for your input. I see what you mean about the trap of creating your own dharma. This is something I need to be wary of in all honesty. I def can see the many pitfalls in that.
I think the biggest part of Buddha's teachings I have accepting are the parts that aren't verifiable, such as reincarnation or anything dealing with the afterlife. I just don't know. I can't know and won't know until I meet the Grim Reaper myself.
Yet when it comes to things like meditation, teachings of impermanence, emptiness and interdependence etc.., they are all testable and possible to be realized. I accept these more "present moment", worldly and even materialistic concepts that Buddha teaches. Any talk of afterlife inevitably involves a leap of faith, but for me, it is not important. I have no problem with my body decaying into the soil being totally brain dead. It would be like a deep sleep. A neutral place, called death, the fullest emptiness. If I'm reborn, great, but I'm not putting too much hope into something as "magical" as that. Rebirth into a higher celestial realm or whatever never has been and never will be my own personal motivation to follow and practice Buddhism. I just feel attracted to it at an intuitive, gut level.
Buddhatasko, I see where you are coming from in relation to what matt said. I like your "liberal" and non-grasping approach to buddhist practice. Buddhism is an evolving, living force to be reckoned with lol. Yet I find my biggest challenge to be discipline and maintaining moral guidelines. I don't want to pervert or tarnish what Buddha said by imputing my own prejudices or opinions.
What I try to do now when discussing a topic is separate what I've learned from Buddha from my own opinions. I might say for example....
Buddha remained silent when questioned whether God exists or not. This is usually interpreted as meaning that any concept of God is not necessary or irrelevant in order to attain enlightenment; liberation.
Then I will add...But I myself, PERSONALLY think a belief in God is a delusion, amongst many, that causes greater suffering. It is a distraction, misleading away from self reflection and responsibility, causes confusion,etc,etc,etc. So I would say that God is not just irrelevant, as Buddha's silence is interpreted, but I speak from my own experience and secular education that faith in God is ironically detrimental and psychologically destructive DESPITE general concensus.
But I make it clear that Buddha remained silent so that I am not putting words into his mouth. Some people will agree with me, most won't.
|
|
shaun
Full Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by shaun on May 24, 2013 8:38:15 GMT 1
Brian, I can empathise with you to a certain degree. I'm going to try & address certain points as best I can & tell you how I deal with them.
1. The afterlife & re-birth.
Like you I don't know either & there's only 1 way to find out for sure. I'm not in a rush to do it & I couldn't recommend it to anyone either. Personally I've studied a few other speculative theorys & what buddhism teaches is as good as any of the others. I just hope that the atheists are wrong, I don't want to be a brain dead decaying body in the soil.
2. Other realms of existence. Much the same as the above. It can't be proven one way or another. The buddha in many of his sutras had contact with devas & deities. I suppose in the catholic church this would translate to the angels & saints. Personally I believe it & find it quite comforting to know/believe that there's help outside of me & my world I can go to for help. Many buddhists pray to Amitabha & kuan yin in much the same way many catholics pray to Jesus & Mary.
3. Teachings of impermanence, emptiness, interdependance & the law of dependant origination.
With all respect to everyone here these laws can all be learned by watching nature. As many of you know I keep poultry & a vegetable patch. To me these hobbies are much more than some eggs & tomatoe for a sunday breakfast. They're an educational tool for me & my family. Many buddhist teachings refer to the nature of life, well for me the nature of life & death is taught best through the observation of nature. We are all in samsara & while we breathe there is no escape. If the birds get mites I have to kill them. If I don't it's cruel to the birds. When there's bugs on the veges, I let the hens out to eat the bugs & if they don't my family goes short. There's just no escaping samsara, we can only try to minimise it.
4. Does God exist or not.
Does it matter? I believe in God, many buddhists don't. So what.
In conclusion. Follow the 5 precepts as best you can. Practise dana to the best of your ability & keep up your meditation. Brian you're sounding much better.
|
|
|
|
Post by buddhitakso on May 24, 2013 10:21:20 GMT 1
Perhaps, one has to be reminded that the Dhamma cannot be created! When the Buddha proclaimed the Dhamma, he did not invent it. What he did was simply proclaim the Truth, which he had realised through his own efforts and wisdom. His teachings represent the Truth, which is universal and timeless.
Once again, Buddhism is not about what to believe but instead, it is about how to find out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mandala on May 24, 2013 13:07:52 GMT 1
Excerpt: 15 Common Cognitive Distortions 1. Filtering 2. Polarized Thinking 3. Overgeneralization 4. Jumping to Conclusions 5. Catastrophizing 6. Personalization 7. Control Fallacies 8. Fallacy of Fairness 9. Blaming 10. Shoulds 11. Emotional Reasoning 12. Fallacy of Change 13. Global Labeling 14. Always Being Right 15. Heaven's Reward Fallacy psychcentral.com/lib/2009/15-common-cognitive-distortions/ |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on May 24, 2013 17:57:45 GMT 1
Perhaps, one has to be reminded that the Dhamma cannot be created! When the Buddha proclaimed the Dhamma, he did not invent it. What he did was simply proclaim the Truth, which he had realised through his own efforts and wisdom. His teachings represent the Truth, which is universal and timeless. Once again, Buddhism is not about what to believe but instead, it is about how to find out. Right, that is what I was referring to. No one says it is impossible to invent something and call it the Dharma, or the "Cycle of Dependent Origination, though." It is just said to be a bad mistake.
"Instead of explaining the Dharma, He creates his own system. Ego!!"-Wheel of Weapons And I gather you don't believe you have done this. But Takso, having an insight, and being a Tathagata are two different things. If you present yourself as a Buddha, of course we will know you are not. Why don't you find a copy of the 12 links of Dependent Origination and meditate on that? Then if you have an insight share it with us. Your are working too hard on the wrong things, in my opinion. Or try this, ask yourself, honestly, why do I want to share my ideas, is it to help others or is it to gain some recognition? O both? If you can be honest about your own motivation, your voice will be more clear. And I am not suggesting your motivation has to be perfect to post here. I am just saying if you are honest with yourself about it, then you will recognize where you are puffing up, and isolating yourself, and when you are just talking to us, human to human. |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on May 24, 2013 18:15:03 GMT 1
Shaun, Some of the best insights into interdependence I have had come from gardening, or reading about compost or hydration. I've said before that I think your little farm is the best place to study dependent origination. And emptiness? When you start to see that a living thing is just constant change... and dependent on everything, and you sense the potential freedom in that... Any way, I like what your write about it. It's good stuff. |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on May 24, 2013 18:30:06 GMT 1
Hi Brian, I think we have all pointed out that you sound a lot better. So that is what it is all about, right? making some progress. I have no problem with you telling us you do not believe in God, or why. I think when it becomes a problem is when you express an opinion that believing in God is delusional or worse. Remember what Jesus said, "before you talk about the splinter in your brother's eye, remove the pole from your own." None of us are in a position to deride the beliefs of others. Right? And Buddha was not always silent on the subject of God. Why don't you try to find everything he said about it. Or just five things. I have the feeling you underestimate how complex and subtle his teachings on the subject are. Like any genuine Buddhist text, you could meditate on them for the rest of your life, and get constant benefit. |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on May 24, 2013 20:21:01 GMT 1
Excerpt: 15 Common Cognitive Distortions 1. Filtering 2. Polarized Thinking 3. Overgeneralization 4. Jumping to Conclusions 5. Catastrophizing 6. Personalization 7. Control Fallacies 8. Fallacy of Fairness 9. Blaming 10. Shoulds 11. Emotional Reasoning 12. Fallacy of Change 13. Global Labeling 14. Always Being Right 15. Heaven's Reward Fallacy psychcentral.com/lib/2009/15-common-cognitive-distortions/That is a good article, Mandala. I have studied some cognitive therapy, and a lot of Western Buddhists find it really helpful. I put a lot more time and energy into studying Jung, when I was young guy, and his approach is more intuitive, more mysterious. But we all suffer those distortions to some degree, IMO. It is good to be aware of them. One thing that Buddhists emphasize is to accept responsibility for our own spiritual welfare. Taking that to heart can cut through a lot of the distortion too. And I think this relates to what Shaun was saying as well. Putting the chooks out to eat the bugs seems like a positive solution to me. A lot better than spraying pesticides. Is there karma in that? Probably, but how can anyone avoid all negative karma? I don't think we can escape karma. The more understanding we have, the easier it is to be a little more kind and positive every day, though. I am a person who will die one day. I am responsible for my own negative actions. No one else can suffer my karma. Starting with this is more realistic than a lot of the convoluted logic one encounters in our own minds and everywhere in society. Peace.... |
|
|
|
Post by buddhitakso on May 24, 2013 23:37:13 GMT 1
Perhaps, one has to be reminded that the Dhamma cannot be created! When the Buddha proclaimed the Dhamma, he did not invent it. What he did was simply proclaim the Truth, which he had realised through his own efforts and wisdom. His teachings represent the Truth, which is universal and timeless. Once again, Buddhism is not about what to believe but instead, it is about how to find out. Right, that is what I was referring to. No one says it is impossible to invent something and call it the Dharma, or the "Cycle of Dependent Origination, though." It is just said to be a bad mistake.
"Instead of explaining the Dharma, He creates his own system. Ego!!"-Wheel of Weapons And I gather you don't believe you have done this. But Takso, having an insight, and being a Tathagata are two different things. If you present yourself as a Buddha, of course we will know you are not. Why don't you find a copy of the 12 links of Dependent Origination and meditate on that? Then if you have an insight share it with us. Your are working too hard on the wrong things, in my opinion. Or try this, ask yourself, honestly, why do I want to share my ideas, is it to help others or is it to gain some recognition? O both? If you can be honest about your own motivation, your voice will be more clear. And I am not suggesting your motivation has to be perfect to post here. I am just saying if you are honest with yourself about it, then you will recognize where you are puffing up, and isolating yourself, and when you are just talking to us, human to human. It doesn't matter, Matt. It is your full right to think what you wish to think and say what you wish to say. This is what a discussion forum is always meant for - Ego twisting! Ha, if you say jump, I'll say how high, sir? |
|
brian
Senior Member
Posts: 83
|
Post by brian on May 25, 2013 5:02:54 GMT 1
Hey it's all good, hearty fun lol. We must test our selves.
Shaun wrote
"I just hope that the atheists are wrong, I don't want to be a brain dead decaying body in the soil."
I totally understand that. I feel that way sometimes. But...this "cold,dark, bleak" possibility has to be on the table in order for one to face his fears. Death many say isn't so bad. What we may consider "nothingness", bodies decaying, and materialism raining is actually what Buddha refers to as emptiness and hollowness of existence. You won't die because you were never born. It is water pouring into water. Just a different form. Your consciousness will still be alive but it won't be HUMAN consciousness but something simpler, like a plant, then a worm, then a squirrel, then a cat.
But as far as YOU, your memories and actions are concerned, they pass away. Your Self never existed in the first place so it won't exist in the afterlife. But your life and legacy does remain with the world, which really isn't such a bad deal considering. You live in your children and photographs.
I love what Mandala posted, I'm guilty of all of them except number 3 lol.
Matt is a good man from what I percieve. He is strong in knowledge and practice. I admire his commitment and practice. If there is "warriorship" in the Shambala as the late Chogyam Trunga Rinpoche talks about, and his son the "Earth Protector", then matt is the man. I have nothing but the highest respect for the individuals on this forum. No B.S.
I mainly believe God is a harmful delusion when it is literally taken. I believe it to be harmful in the sense of it's GREAT capability of being harnessed for well...basically anything. Think of evolution. I think it would be good for humans to evolve past the ghosts of God and see life AS IT IS. God is dangerous in alot of unstable people which are preodominately the ones who seek Him in the first place. If your livin the charmed life, you don't really give a s* about compassion for others, that's a buzzkill.
takso wrote
"It doesn't matter, Matt. It is your full right to think what you wish to think and say what you wish to say. This is what a discussion forum is always meant for - Ego twisting!
Ha, if you say jump, I'll say how high, sir?"
If I said jump, you better jump outta the way and recognize. Your purpose here is to gain and share wisdom, and find the Holy Grail of Nirvana for yourself. But the possibility of you achieving this goal ALONE is...well..according to the cycle of dependent origination...IMPOSSIBLE.
We are all enlightened..it's just a matter of letting it shine unhindered. Wisdom is only valid under the wing of compassion.
|
|
|
|
Post by buddhitakso on May 25, 2013 6:08:15 GMT 1
Thanks Brian, I've just been saved  |
|
|
|
Post by Mandala on May 25, 2013 23:36:53 GMT 1
Is there karma in that? Probably, but how can anyone avoid all negative karma? Excerpt: "When a bodhisattva's mind is like the empty sky, every-'thing' is entirely relinquished"; that is, no horizons remain, no possibility of marking some 'thing' or 'individual' off from everything else and saying what it 'is'. Then, there is nothing to grasp, nothing to push away. In accordance with the situation, you respond to things and 'agent' and 'acted upon' are both forgotten. This is great relinquishing.... t is like a blazing torch right in front of you so that there's nothing further of 'delusion' or 'enlightenment'. (T 2012.382a) With no shadow of 'self' remaining in what lies before us, enlightenment is simply the realization of true and clear relationship with others."
www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/Philosophical/Person_as_Narration_Hershock.html
|
|
