|
Food for thought: The Buddha on the rarity of a human birth:Nakhasikha Sutta: The Tip of the Fingernail posted:Staying at Savatthi. Then the Blessed One, picking up a little bit of dust with the tip of his fingernail, said to the monks, "What do you think, monks? Which is greater: the little bit of dust I have picked up with the tip of my fingernail, or the great earth?" Chiggala Sutta: The Hole posted:"Monks, suppose that this great earth were totally covered with water, and a man were to toss a yoke with a single hole there. A wind from the east would push it west, a wind from the west would push it east. A wind from the north would push it south, a wind from the south would push it north. And suppose a blind sea-turtle were there. It would come to the surface once every one hundred years. Now what do you think: would that blind sea-turtle, coming to the surface once every one hundred years, stick his neck into the yoke with a single hole?"
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 07:58 |
|
|
Hey guys! I'm moving to NYC in September, and I'm wondering if any of you know some good dharma centers in the area, preferably in Manhattan or Brooklyn? I'm looking specifically for places that practice Tibetan Buddhism, preferably Kagyu or Nyingma but I'm interested in Gelug too. I've been with Shambhala for the last year or so, and while I love the practices and will probably keep doing retreats with them, I'd love to find a place where I can have direct access to a lama and learn from them if possible. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
So a relative has just gotten six months to live in a cancer prognosis. I haven't really internalized Buddhist practice or anything, but I find that reading Buddhist writings is really helpful to me in hard times when my brain isn't processing very well. If anyone has suggestions of something to read, that would be awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
I'm sorry to hear about your situation. I haven't had the same experience, but having successfully applied Buddhist writing and meditation to my own turmoil I can suggest a few things. There is a book called "How to live without fear and worry" that might be helpful. It doesn't specifically focus on end of life issues but deals with cultivating mental states that are helpful in dealing with this kind of stress. I'm not sure if you have a meditation practice, but if not it might be a good time to start. That of course depends on how severely this is impacting you. If you do have the ability to do meditation, I think the Brahmaviharas are a good antidote for this kind of things. Cultivating states of compassion and metta is of benefit for both you and the person who has been diagnosed. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel006.html There are also some good Dhamma talks that I'll try and link later once I'm at an actual computer. Ajahn Amaro has one that deals with this issue that I think would be helpful. People Stew fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Jul 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
The Dark Wind posted:Hey guys! I'm moving to NYC in September, and I'm wondering if any of you know some good dharma centers in the area, preferably in Manhattan or Brooklyn? I'm looking specifically for places that practice Tibetan Buddhism, preferably Kagyu or Nyingma but I'm interested in Gelug too. I've been with Shambhala for the last year or so, and while I love the practices and will probably keep doing retreats with them, I'd love to find a place where I can have direct access to a lama and learn from them if possible. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks! I don't know much about it, it's a Karma Kagyu center in New York, here. From Google. I suspect this center will have a resident lama, as it says it offers three year retreats and such. There is also a Drikung Kagyu (my lineage) center in Denville, NJ, with a very knowledgeable Khenpo and two Drikung Rinpoches who use it as their main center. Knockknees posted:So a relative has just gotten six months to live in a cancer prognosis. I haven't really internalized Buddhist practice or anything, but I find that reading Buddhist writings is really helpful to me in hard times when my brain isn't processing very well. If anyone has suggestions of something to read, that would be awesome. And again by way of second or third hand advice, I have not read the book but I know many people have found inspiration and strength in Pema Chodron's When Things Fall Apart. I don't know if it is something you are looking for, since you mentioned specifically the teachings of Buddha. Paramemetic fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Jul 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
The Dark Wind posted:Hey guys! I'm moving to NYC in September, and I'm wondering if any of you know some good dharma centers in the area, preferably in Manhattan or Brooklyn? I'm looking specifically for places that practice Tibetan Buddhism, preferably Kagyu or Nyingma but I'm interested in Gelug too. I've been with Shambhala for the last year or so, and while I love the practices and will probably keep doing retreats with them, I'd love to find a place where I can have direct access to a lama and learn from them if possible. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks! I listened to a few older podcasts by the Interdependence Project that were ok. Ethan Nichtern (a shastri from Shambhala) was one of their teachers and he started it. It seemed like a nice crowd back then but I'm not sure how it is now. It might be worth a shot. It was a much more secular peek into the Buddhist viewpoint when I last checked in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
The Dark Wind posted:Hey guys! I'm moving to NYC in September, and I'm wondering if any of you know some good dharma centers in the area, preferably in Manhattan or Brooklyn? I'm looking specifically for places that practice Tibetan Buddhism, preferably Kagyu or Nyingma but I'm interested in Gelug too. I've been with Shambhala for the last year or so, and while I love the practices and will probably keep doing retreats with them, I'd love to find a place where I can have direct access to a lama and learn from them if possible. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks! Jewel Heart (Gelug) has a New York Chapter in Manhattan: http://www.jewelheart.org/chapters/new-york/ I have been going to their Ann Arbor, MI center for a while and really like it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Knockknees posted:So a relative has just gotten six months to live in a cancer prognosis. I haven't really internalized Buddhist practice or anything, but I find that reading Buddhist writings is really helpful to me in hard times when my brain isn't processing very well. If anyone has suggestions of something to read, that would be awesome. Do you want sutras, or more of something like books written from a Buddhist perspective? Almost everything Thich Nhat Hanh writes is inspirational and also 'user-friendly'. He has a book called 'No Death, No Fear' , which I have not read, but intend to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Your karma. sorry to bump an old conversation but why aren't I experiencing other peoples experiences instead of only my own?? All minds are basically the same thing. When you take away stuff that fills up the mind like sex and suffering mind are all basically the same thing. I understand the karma results in my birth but why am I experiencing my experience all of the time instead of only some of the time??? I'd expect that I'd be switching from person to person. One moment I'd be Ivan and another moment I'd be some other dude or animal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:03
|
|
Frykte posted:When you take away stuff that fills up the mind like sex and suffering mind are all basically the same thing. I can't tell if you're having trouble distinguishing the idea of "basically the same" from "actually the same" or if you're thinking of Hinduism.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:I can't tell if you're having trouble distinguishing the idea of "basically the same" from "actually the same" or if you're thinking of Hinduism. Me neither! How would I know which one I'm doing
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
If you're thinking "All consciousness is one" then that's not Buddhism. If you're not thinking that then just because two things are similar doesn't mean they're literally the same.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:If you're thinking "All consciousness is one" then that's not Buddhism. If you're not thinking that then just because two things are similar doesn't mean they're literally the same. I don't think that all consciousness is one, but I do think that all consciousness is basically the same. What do you mean literally the same??? I get that things like my memories and thoguht patterns are results of my brain, but my question is like, let's say right now at this moment while typing this I'm somebody else. Why not?? I understand that while consciousness between people is really similar, what I can't wrap my mind around is the separation part of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
Frykte posted:Me neither! How would I know which one I'm doing I'm new to Buddhism and confused by this too sometimes when I think of it. I'm looking forward to the more experienced posters explanation on this. Another thing I am confused about that I have read about (in Tibetan Buddhism), high Lamas will go in search of a reincarnation of certain important people (such as the Dalai Lama). Yet I've read things that state individual 'souls' don't exist, and while our karma might go on to affect a next life, "I" only exist now. Is it that only highly accomplished practitioners are able to transfer consciousness from one life to the next? Or am I doing something like reading two different schools of thought and thinking them to be the same? Happy Chokhor Duchen! WAFFLEHOUND posted:If you're thinking "All consciousness is one" then that's not Buddhism. If you're not thinking that then just because two things are similar doesn't mean they're literally the same. Would a good analogy be that each individual consciousness is like a wave in the ocean? Dr.Caligari fucked around with this message at 05:40 on Jul 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Dr.Caligari posted:I'm new to Buddhism and confused by this too sometimes when I think of it. I'm looking forward to the more experienced posters explanation on this. Thank you new friend. It is good to know I am not alone on the path. Do you havea twitter account I can follow???
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
Frykte posted:I don't think that all consciousness is one, but I do think that all consciousness is basically the same. What do you mean literally the same??? I get that things like my memories and thoguht patterns are results of my brain, but my question is like, let's say right now at this moment while typing this I'm somebody else. Why not?? I understand that while consciousness between people is really similar, what I can't wrap my mind around is the separation part of it. Everyone who is alive and awake has a consciousness, and for everyone the job of consciousness is to know things. If I have a Volvo and you have a Range Rover, our cars are basically the same in the sense that they both take us from A to B and they work respecting the same principles, but they're separate because I can drive mine to C and you drive yours to D. Rhymenoceros fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Jul 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
Frykte posted:sorry to bump an old conversation but why aren't I experiencing other peoples experiences instead of only my own?? All minds are basically the same thing. When you take away stuff that fills up the mind like sex and suffering mind are all basically the same thing. I understand the karma results in my birth but why am I experiencing my experience all of the time instead of only some of the time??? I'd expect that I'd be switching from person to person. One moment I'd be Ivan and another moment I'd be some other dude or animal. I'm not sure how to answer your question adequately and to the point. All minds are exactly the same thing (arisen from emptiness). Your karma results in your birth, you experience your experiences all of the time again because of your karma. Consciousness is a series of moments arisen sequentially, merely the illusion of an intrinsic viewpoint deludes us. You essentially are switching from person to person - the person who asked this question is different from the one who hadn't yet asked it, the person who reads this answer is different from the one who hasn't, and so on. One moment you're Ivan, the next moment you might still be called Ivan, but you're different. The ways we change, the experiences we have, arise because of our karma. Your karma right now is this body, this point of view. Another might arise. But there is a sort of continuity of perspective because everything is cause and effect, your activities today, last week, etc. in this lifetime lead inexorably to future activities in this lifetime. You're Frykte, how can you have the karma arise to be Paramemetic tomorrow? I suppose you could, but then you'd be Paramemetic, not Frykte. Paramemetic has never been Frykte, so if you're Paramemetic tomorrow, you're not Frykte. No problems here. The point is that "you" are not even the same person moment to moment, let alone lifetime to lifetime, so the whole question is problematic. How can "you" be anyone but "you" when "you" are just a momentarily arisen thing? Dr.Caligari posted:Another thing I am confused about that I have read about (in Tibetan Buddhism), high Lamas will go in search of a reincarnation of certain important people (such as the Dalai Lama). Yet I've read things that state individual 'souls' don't exist, and while our karma might go on to affect a next life, "I" only exist now. Is it that only highly accomplished practitioners are able to transfer consciousness from one life to the next? Or am I doing something like reading two different schools of thought and thinking them to be the same? As for tulkus, like the Dalai Lama, and so on, they are not the same "soul" or "identity." In a Russian documentary, Sunrise/Sunset, he even says this straight up. HH the 14th Dalai Lama is not the same being as HH the 13th DL, and how could he be? Obviously different circumstances, different karmas have fruited. What he is is an emanation, so he shares the mind of Chenrezig, and he shares a kind of lineage. You are correct that at a high level, a bodhisattva can choose a rebirth, from within their karmic chain. An enlightened being can understand perfectly karma, they can see karmic seeds from millions of previous lifetimes, so they can work it intentionally, sort of. For example, HHDL has said straight up he will not be born in a Chinese controlled country. He can do this willfully as a high bodhisattva, because with the wisdom eye he knows all these things. They can also choose not to be reborn, or to be reborn later, and so on. It's not a transfer of consciousness, it's not that HHDL will move his mind, with all his memories and so on, into a new "host child" when he dies. Rather, another child will be born of the karmic seeds of Holiness, HHDL's death will lead to the cause of another birth, which will arise based on the surrounding conditions. Among those conditions are that Holiness is an enlightened being, so the being that is born will have a lot going for it. Yangsi, or young reborn tulkus, tend to be very precocious, because they have that enlightenment near to them. They recognize possessions and so on of their past births because they can immediately recognize karmic connections, the same way teachers and students of many lifetimes immediately might recognize one another, or feel a connection to one another (this is why many people feel spontaneous devotion to certain lamas but not others, and, in a broader sense, it is believed to be why some friends take to one another immediately and deeply and so on). So it's not that the consciousness is continuous, like with our own, it ceases and restarts, but because of the karmic seeds, it fruits deeply and rapidly. quote:Happy Chokhor Duchen! You too! For those not in Tibetan circles, today is a million multiplying day, so karmic seeds planted today will be a million times stronger. A good day to practice! It is also the birthday of His Holiness the 37th Drikung Kyabgon Chetsang Rinpoche. A very auspicious day, as both the birthdays of Rinpoches and Chokhor Duchen "trump" the elemental day type. Chokhor Duchen is the Tibetan holiday celebrating the first turning of the Dharma Wheel, specifically the teaching of the Four Noble Truths by the Buddha at the Deer Park in Sarnath. So this is a very auspicious day!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:21
|
|
|
On the topic of rebirth and so on, one thing I can't stress enough is that Buddhism is a contemplative religion, it's not necessarily all about the intellectual side. You can read so much, but without any practice, it won't make any sense at all. Contemplation, meditation, think about impermanence, think about these things. If you don't practice and meditate and so on, a lot of things won't make sense or won't "click" or you'll intellectually understand it but not really realize it and so on. It's very important not to just read books and so on, but to also practice. Practice compassion, practice meditation, practice calm abiding, consider the Four Noble Truths and meditate on them and think about them. Otherwise it's not likely that you'll "get it."
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:You can read so much, but without any practice, it won't make any sense at all. Contemplation, meditation, think about impermanence, think about these things. If you don't practice and meditate and so on, a lot of things won't make sense or won't "click" or you'll intellectually understand it but not really realize it and so on on. I think this is very important to keep in mind as well. I've mentioned this before in the thread, but the ideas that plague a lot of newcomers became more clear to me after starting an actual practice. I think it was Bhikkhu Bodhi who likened it to being hungry and going to a restaurant and studying the menu diligently, even asking other diners about their meal, asking them to describe the texture and flavor of their food, but never eating.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Frykte posted:Thank you new friend. It is good to know I am not alone on the path. Do you havea twitter account I can follow??? I'm sorry, I don't have a Twitter account. You are more than welcome to PM me anytime though
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
Hi goons, I'm just curious how much of this makes sense to you guys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlGuZKcctXM Is the original language Pali?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 08:29
|
|
|
caberham posted:Hi goons, I'm just curious how much of this makes sense to you guys That isn't pali. I think it is Chinese. Edit: to clarify I mean the original language of what they are saying is not pali either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Thich Nhat Hanh's Miracle of Mindfulness is on the Amazon monthly ebook sale if anyone is interested.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Myrmidongs posted:Thich Nhat Hanh's Miracle of Mindfulness is on the Amazon monthly ebook sale if anyone is interested. Went ahead and picked up a copy for Kindle. Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
I was wondering if anyone knew of or would recommend a "study plan" for reading Suttas. I know that I can just go and read whichever ones I'm interested in, but right now I would really benefit from more structure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
Snak posted:I was wondering if anyone knew of or would recommend a "study plan" for reading Suttas. I know that I can just go and read whichever ones I'm interested in, but right now I would really benefit from more structure. "In the Buddha's Words" is a good way to go about beginning sutta study. Maybe one of the best available actually. For online study, access to insight is hard to beat: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/index.html There are various study guides here that can point you in the right direction. I'm in the midst of this kind of study right now so feel free to hit me up with any questions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
Prickly Pete posted:That isn't pali. I think it is Chinese. It's written Chinese characters and it makes no sense at all. It's the Nīlakaṇṭha Dhāraṇī and supposed to be written in Sanskrit (figures) and got lost in translation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C4%ABlaka%E1%B9%87%E1%B9%ADha_Dh%C4%81ra%E1%B9%87%C4%AB caberham fucked around with this message at 06:23 on Aug 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
I don't think this has been posted yet, but there is a fairly recent book available that does a great job of breaking down key concepts in early Buddhism. For anyone who enjoys Bhikkhu Bodhi, this would be right up your alley. Excursions into the Thought-World of the Pali Discourses The author is Bhikkhu Analayo, a German monk who has made quite a name for himself as a great translator and scholar of early Buddhism. He has been doing a lot of work in the area of comparing the Pali Canon to corresponding suttas in the Chinese Agamas, and it is pretty fascinating for anyone who likes to approach Buddhism from a scholastic or historical angle. If you like the approach of Bhikkhu Bodhi and enjoy having the teachings presented from a more academic or technical perspective, I highly recommend this book. Also, his doctoral thesis (Satipatthana: The Direct Path to Realization) is essential for anyone who is interested in the study of the four foundations of mindfulness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 08:35
|
|
|
Okay, i'm actually going through a real life situation, really concrete, that i wonder how buddhism would deal with. My cats brought fleas to the house. So i ended up killing tons of fleas with insecticide and stuff like that. How am i supposed to deal with that ? I mean, i can't let hundreds of insects bite me and my pets all night ! The itches are horrible ! It's a funny situation because, as a zen practicioner, i try to respect life but i also try to be very practical. There is no way to get rid of the fleas without killing them. If i don't kill them, they will just grow and grow in population and totally plague my house, and i will get bitten a lot, maybe endangering my health and the one of my closed ones. But at the same time, i feel horrible killing thousands of living beings. It's a great situation for practice, because it gets me to see how i react to problems : trying to eradicate them. I also get to work on my body sensations since the bites can really itch. And i also can watch how my mind can really create stuff : there are lots of times, especially at night, when i feel itches erverywhere but there is nothing on me and no bites. Just thinking about itches makes me itch, it is really funny. Anyway, i did not find an acceptable "buddhist" solution to this. I'm just acting out of my instinct on this one : things are threatening me, i just try to get rid of them. It's my natural way of reacting, which, maybe, should be trusted as well. I try to think about this situation with the four noble truths : life is dukkha, you bet it is ! Itching is maybe the best thing there is to feel dukkha. The law of cause and effect, and impermanence : well, i know that things don't last, and will change. But those changes could be difficult. And when you get bitten and it itches, it's quite hard (but not impossible) to consider this like a passing phenomenon that no real self feels (3rd truth). Really quickly, you are back in fight mode and make this "your" problem. It's not always easy to just watch things happen ! And if i follow the path to liberation, the 4th truth, that is if i follow precepts like "no killing", i end up covered in bites and eaten alive, ahah ! Any ideas ? Ugrok fucked around with this message at 14:06 on Aug 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
I have a general question: how or why is Buddhism regarded as a nontheistic religion when there are suttas that explicitly mention various gods? More generally, when a sutta describes something supernatural (a woman's plucked out eye regrows immediately, for example) - is that meant to be taken metaphorically? Literally? Is it sometimes dependent on context?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
Pancakes by Mail posted:I have a general question: how or why is Buddhism regarded as a nontheistic religion when there are suttas that explicitly mention various gods? You don't worship those gods, and they aren't depended on, and it's not necessary to believe they are real, it doesn't matter. Even with things like "wisdom Buddhas" these are understood as conceptually real but not necessarily "really real" (because what is that, anyhow?) quote:More generally, when a sutta describes something supernatural (a woman's plucked out eye regrows immediately, for example) - is that meant to be taken metaphorically? Literally? Is it sometimes dependent on context? However it is meaningful to you. How would anyone but the author know what was meant? Take it how you take it, get from it what you get from it. If someone answers "literally" you might say "no I don't believe eyes regrow immediately, so Buddhism is false," if someone say "no it is metaphorical" then you might say "I don't understand the point of these metaphors, that is just like other religions, and Buddha is a liar, so Buddhism is false." Who knows But it probably doesn't really matter if an eye literally regrew or not if it's not your eye. If it's your eye, it matters, if it's not, then whatever you want to take from it, if it is meaningful and helpful and makes you a better human being, if it enriches you and so on, that's good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Ugrok posted:Any ideas ? There's no way to exist here without harming others to some degree, which is actually a pretty strong incentive to walk that noble eightfold path and get enlightened. Edit: i.e. a way to end all harming of others is to become enlightened, because then you escape samsara for ever. Rhymenoceros fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Aug 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
So I think it was mentioned before but a few new faces have turned up so I figured we'd re-mention that we currently have an AIM chatgroup thing. It uses the ancient AIM protocol but I believe gtalk and AIM are cross compatible? Anyhow, if you want an invite message quantumfate on AIM at quantumf8, or myself at Paramemetic. This chat was originally intended for straight up Dharma discussion but anymore it is a kind of loose e-Sangha community where several of us just talk about our various things in life as well as play CK2 and occasionally harass Cumshot in the Dark about his vices. Anyhow, it's fun and fellowship and we do occasionally get into some fantastic Dharma discussions in a format that is quicker paced than the forums, so if you're interested hit one of us up. If not ignore this post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
Everybody join the CK2 liveblog AIM and maybe we'll accidentally talk about dharma.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
 Sorry about the CK2 commentary.I know we chat about everything, but I do find you guys really helpful when it comes to needed religious support. It's all nice to go to your friends, but it's different when your religious community - albeit extended, is able to offer you some support in that aspect, whether it be because you had a bad day or need to make a big decision in your life.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:07
|
|
Pancakes by Mail posted:More generally, when a sutta describes something supernatural (a woman's plucked out eye regrows immediately, for example) - is that meant to be taken metaphorically? Literally? Is it sometimes dependent on context? I'm going to tread carefully to avoid starting up a giant slapfight again, but I do not believe that Paramemetic's answer was given as skillfully as it could be. The supernatural stuff in Buddhism is, and has always meant to be, taken literally by every Buddhist tradition (though sometimes in slightly different ways). That isn't to say the only way you can possibly get anything out of it is if you dive head-first into the land of magical thinking, but it's important to understand that the tradition backing Buddhism isn't free from the magical or woo elements of other faiths. That said, there is no Dharmapope, there isn't some central authority out there who is going to lead an inquisition against you if you get something out of a sutra by reading it metaphorically or allegorically. If something is positive to you in that way, it's probably positive in general. That said, there are two common traps here that cause friction; one is when people come in so close-minded that they believe Buddhism is some reductive philosophy that has been taken from the husk of an ignorant oriental faith and exists as a series of shallow platitudes and that their modern interpretation of these Sutras is obviously going to be the 'correct' way because science discredits magical thinking in some of thse places. The other is when people fall into the trap of believing that the metaphorical presentation is what Buddhism actually is. The first discredits thousands of years of religious scholarship and reeks of orientalism, and is much less common to see. The second usually stems from a place of (often unintentional) ignorance when presented with some of the common teaching styles which seek to downplay some of the more mystical aspects of the Dharma due to how hard it is for many people to come to terms with and because in the grand scheme of things they're not exactly the most important parts of the Dharma (usually). In either case the biggest problem from these is when people try to present their interpretations as Dharma, as opposed to their personal beliefs. What may seem a harmless interpretation can be totally beneficial to you but can be greatly upsetting to many Buddhists, and not just random strangers on the internet. The spread of Anyone should be free to get whatever they feel they can out of a teaching, but be mindful if you are presenting a personal interpretation as an authoritative one of the suffering that can cause people. To give a direct answer to your question, which Paramemetic kind of danced around; yes they are "meant" to be taken that way, but then to piggyback off his answer there is nothing on this planet saying you have to. Hopefully I've worded that diplomatically enough not to cause this thread to do a Hindenburg impression.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:I'm going to tread carefully to avoid starting up a giant slapfight again, but I do not believe that Paramemetic's answer was given as skillfully as it could be. This is a great post. Popcornicus fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
I do appreciate the responses, very thorough and informative. A follow-up, then: when the Dalai Lama says, “If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims," is he not speaking for all Buddhists? Is the key word "conclusively" and the argument be made that nothing is truly conclusively proven? I appreciate your concern, WAFFLEHOUND, and rest assured that I am not seeking a watered-down, Western-friendly Buddhism with the soul removed from it. I just want to be fully aware of what I am approaching.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
The Dalai Lama is the spiritual leader of a particular sect (albeit quite a large one) of Buddhists and while he may be viewed as a respected figure and spiritual leader by many Buddhists it would be wrong to say he speaks for all of them, yes. As stated, there is no BuddhaPope. I think it comes down to what ends up being spiritually meaningful and valuable to you and your path and that by no means demands that you put a great deal of stock into literal interpretations of miraculous happenings. They might well be literally true, but unless you're deriving something of significant value and meaning from it, then fixating on it and whether various supernatural acts or events actually literally happened isn't really going to do much for you and may be an active hindrance because you'll just end up getting stuck on it. But I'm aware my view on this is not a popular one tbh, and it's why I don't post here much anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 07:58 |
|
Pancakes by Mail posted:A follow-up, then: when the Dalai Lama says, “If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims," is he not speaking for all Buddhists? Is the key word "conclusively" and the argument be made that nothing is truly conclusively proven? He's the leader of the Gelugpa sect of Tibetan Buddhism, not all Buddhists (and not all Tibetan Buddhists). And you're reading a bit too strongly into it. Take it this way; there used to be a belief in Tibet that nothing could travel above the height of one of the holy mountains, I believe Kailash, because the winds would simply destroy it. This might be an interesting problem for a monk to meditate on from an airplane. The Dalai Lama wasn't saying "welp I'm a secular humanist".
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 07:16
|
|