|
Leon Sumbitches posted:
I went through the same thing when I was changing my own personality, telling myself that I was going to a church purely as a phenomenological experience, a chance for me to increase my cultural understanding, and so many other rationalizations. And now I'm looking at Icon catalogues and discussing the eschaton with my local priest. If you want to jump into the pool, you jump into the pool, don't expect to not get wet. Congratulations, Senju. CountFosco fucked around with this message at 22:38 on Jan 3, 2018 |
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
That refuge sounds amazing. I am no authority to give any advice, but like you probably heard early on...just breathe. Before I was interested in Buddhism, and partially what lead me to it, was that I found myself where I was cut off from almost everything for around 4 days. No media, no distractions...just ‘me’. The experience was profound to even to me. On night 3 I witnessed a thunderstorm and it was amazing. I have seen probably thousands of thunderstorms, but I never really saw one. Let go of your apprehension....even if you said ‘this Buddhism is non-sense, I’m just going for the solitude’, you will most certainly experience space and freedom outside of the box almost everyone can’t realize they are living in. There is a movie called ‘Dharma Brothers’ about a prison program where some experienced meditators (I don’t recall if they were even Buddhist) took inmate volunteers to just set together for 10 days in total silence in a prison gym. Almost no one who was a Buddhist signed up, and naturally quite a few dropped out early, but those who stayed were positively changed. Many of them expressed the revelation that after a life of blaming everyone, they finally realized the problem was setting right there with them. It’s a striking, and aggravating, documentary, but I’m getting off track. You have a circumstance much more fortunate , and the preparedness to undertake it. Best of luck and make sure to give a trip report afterward if you so feel like it Dr.Caligari fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Jan 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:35
|
|
|
Paramemetic, I want to thank you for the time you've taken on this post, other posts in this thread, and efforts in general in your life. I appreciate you! I read this post yesterday and felt a sense of a)being understood and b)relaxation. When I can relax around this is when I understand the conflict is internal, rather than actual. I won't respond to your post line-by-line, but rather will return to it. I really find it illuminating about some of the things I'm going through, especially the aspects of fear and attachment. So the attitude then is to go into retreat knowing that I fear the change, fear the surrender, having doubts; recognizing all that is present I'll push on, going in fully. All in. It tickles me that you closed your post with a reference to the four thoughts. For most of 2017 (and to the present day), I have an app on my phone pop up the Four Reminders every morning at 8 AM. So I'll offer those verses as composed by Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche as a gesture of gratitude from one practitioner to another. Joyful to have Such a human birth, Difficult to find, Free and well-favored. But death is real, Comes without warning. This body Will be a corpse. Unalterable Are the laws of karma; Cause and effect Cannot be escaped. Samsara Is an ocean of suffering, Unendurable, Unbearably intense. If people are interested, I'd be happy to write up some of my thoughts on return. It's been encouraged not to journal during the retreat, but will probably be more than happy to share what is recalled on the other side. Thanks everyone for your warmth and encouragement, this meditator needs it! Leon Sumbitches fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jan 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Leon Sumbitches posted:Joyful to have Trungpa Rinpoche's poetic composition there is very good! I think this is much better than the standard convention of translating directly from the Tibetan. Thank you for sharing it. Yeah, don't journal, it is a way for our conceptual minds to kind of take the wheel and it's very easy to follow that down a rabbit hole. How can you observe a thought without following it while preserving it? But in any case if this is a ngondro practice retreat as I believe you said, you will have a lot of time your mind will wander off from the practice and you'll be thinking about something else entirely while doing a prostration, and just like any meditation you can just bring your mind back to the practice, with some renewed vigor at having this victory of meditative awareness where you saw the process of the monkey mind. I'm thrilled I could offer some small token of encouragement and help from my own confused mind, and look forward to hearing back after the retreat. Don't worry about composing that debriefing while you go in, it'll just interrupt your presence. Should be great though, both for you and for the benefit of sentient beings. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
thorsilver posted:As for the empowerments, I can see how that would cause some divisions. For my part, I'd also like to attend in person, but opportunities here in the UK are quite rare in my experience, and as my wife is not working I can't blow through too much money chasing them down elsewhere. I'm taking the view that whether online or off, empowerments would depend on my connection to the teacher and my ability to take in the teachings; I feel like if I were going to get the benefit of the empowerment from that teacher, I'd get it whether I see them on a screen or in the same room. This is my perspective as well re: online empowerments. I attended two empowerments offered by the Gyalwang Karmapa Orgyen Trinley Dorje on his visit to Toronto last year, and the event was so large and he was so far away it was more or less like I took part remotely. I never received the vase empowerment, so I suppose that was incomplete in a strict sense. But, I've also attended the Vajrakilaya and Vajrasattva empowerments offered by HE Garchen Rinpoche and experienced very strong connections with both practices and the lama. I definitely believe that I have received the empowerments, but your own mileage may vary. It really depends on the lama themselves. I know that Garchen Rinpoche (Drikung Kagyu) and Chogyal Namkhai Norbu (Dzogchen) state that empowerments can be imparted online. If they are lamas that you have strong connections with, then you should go with what they are teaching.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Generally speaking, a daily practice is developed by oneself under the guidance of one's Lama. For example, my daily practice (which I'm procrastinating on as I type, so I'll keep this brief to go do that haha) includes two aspects of the common preliminary practices that I'm working through as well as a deity yoga practice that I took a commitment to practice in the mornings, and then in the evenings the very brief practice of my lineage Dharma Protectress. It takes anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour and change to do the morning practice and anywhere from 2 to 20 minutes to do the evening practice, with the adjustments being based on how much time I have. All this is based on the ritual instruction I've been given over the years and then checking in with my Lama whenever something is changing or when I receive new teachings that I would like to incorporate or so on. Thanks for this, I'm still learning about how more structured practice works rather than the chaotic hodge-podge I've created for myself, so it's interesting to hear about your daily routine and how it developed. Clearly I have a long way to go in my learning. I will do my best to enhance my understanding and hopefully in the process find a teacher who can help me develop this kind of practice. I have to admit I have a nagging concern about achieving a strong and consistent daily practice like that. I work about 50 hours a week, and these days I suffer from chronic pain that makes those hours far more of a chore than they'd normally be. Then when I finally get home my wife has been alone all day, and I can sense she's a little upset when I go off to the other room to meditate, and I don't want to cause her any emotional distress. Sometimes I'm so tired and wracked by physical pain that I really have to push myself to sit on that cushion. I'm glad at least that it sounds like the daily practice is pretty flexible in terms of the time commitment, that eases my mind a bit. quote:There are three lines of thinking that go on with these things, and I don't hold strongly an opinion about what is "right," but rather I follow the most conservative format but don't judge those who take different interpretations. I can understand your views on this, since the Tibetan tradition has such a strong focus on the two-way relationship between teacher and student. I agree with Iceattolah here in that I'll take my lead from the teacher -- if they say I can gain an empowerment via livestream or video or what have you, then I'll enter into it with that mindset. Having said that, I don't doubt that there's a difference between physical presence and video in terms of how we interact and react to other people; the dynamics of human conversation are quite different on Skype as compared to real life, for example (a friend of mine did some research on this). So for that reason I can understand the idea that we should approach this with caution when it comes to receiving empowerments. quote:I absolutely understand this. I know of a few Drikung Kagyu practitioners in Oxford but I don't know what their plans are towards developing a center. I think they may have a group that meets fairly regularly, but I'd have to check. I know that some of them are devoted to my own Lama and that I believe he has visited there before and will likely visit again in the future. Unfortunately Oxford is quite far away from me, but if your Lama will be giving teachings there at some stage then I would be interested to try to attend It's not something I could do regularly though, given the cost of British train tickets. Does this group have an online presence where they might post about any upcoming teachings?I'm reasonably close to Kagyu Samye Ling, which is huge, but the downside to that is that teachings from Lamas tend to fill up basically as soon as they're announced. quote:I'm glad to hear it. The FPMT program is widely acclaimed and I think you'll be very happy with it. It's possible that the first few modules will be "review" for you, if so I'd encourage you to stick with it. Gelugpa's philosophical doctrines are vast and going through what is effectively a shedra in those philosophies is certain to enhance anyone's understanding. Thanks again, I'm very pleased to hear this programme is so well-received. It's possible there'll be stuff early on that I've already heard about, but my Buddhist reading has been so all over the place over the years that I'll certainly benefit from a structured review! I've no doubt there's core concepts I may have misinterpreted, or conflated between various Mahayana traditions, etc. Edit: I just wanted to add a general thank you Paramemetic, for taking the time to write these detailed responses They're very helpful and I've learned a lot from them.Dr.Caligari posted:Before I was interested in Buddhism, and partially what lead me to it, was that I found myself where I was cut off from almost everything for around 4 days. No media, no distractions...just ‘me’. The experience was profound to even to me. On night 3 I witnessed a thunderstorm and it was amazing. I have seen probably thousands of thunderstorms, but I never really saw one. Let go of your apprehension....even if you said ‘this Buddhism is non-sense, I’m just going for the solitude’, you will most certainly experience space and freedom outside of the box almost everyone can’t realize they are living in. It's amazing what true solitude can do for your mind. I once spent 24 hours completely alone on the high Arctic island of Svalbard, which is filled with polar bears. I was there for a three-month expedition with a small group, but things worked out so I needed to move some equipment to a different sub-group and had to spend the day alone with my tent and rifle. For the first couple of hours I was scared shitless, clutching the gun and twitching at every breeze. Then I had this astounding moment where my whole body and mind relaxed, and for the first time in my life I truly accepted that I might die, that no one was there to help, and that fundamentally is the case at every moment, polar bears or no. The rest of that 24 hours was like a little frozen oasis of peace and acceptance for me. thorsilver fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Jan 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 04:36
|
|
|
my dharma name is 浄楽, joraku, and that is pretty cool i think
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:my dharma name is 浄楽, joraku, and that is pretty cool i think Who notable do you share a namesake with? Does the name have any meaning in the language itself? Some Tibetan traditions use names based on the lineage, or some will give you a name that is predictive of the things you're supposed to work on. A "Zopa" might be someone who has a teacher named Zopa, or it might be someone who needs to work on patients, or it could mean someone exemplifies patience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
from what i can tell it's the name of a temple, and during the ceremony i was told it meant "finding the path to a calm heart" or something like that, tho the jo is the jo of jodo shinshu and means pure and the raku means calm so i'm not a hundred percent where he got that from. i'm worried to ask cause i don't want to put him on the spot if he actually did massage the meanings of the dharma names you know? but then i'm not very familiar on how dharma names work in jodo shinshu since the only info i can find is on a few websites for individual bca churches and never anything more specific about names. and trying to search joraku online results in card game stuff for romaji and temple information for the kanji huh maybe i should try adding hommyo to both searches... edit: how the gently caress did i forget that 極楽 (gokuraku) is the name for sukhvati. like that's the kanji for the sanskrit term, i think? and jodo is the japanese term. or maybe there's more nuance than that? my japanese is not great and i haven't been able to take classes since starting a retail job so i'm doing my best with regular dictionaries trying to understand the difference between religious terms. so the name combines two kanji referring to the pure land which in my opinion is much cooler than "finding the path to a calm heart" but i'm still in the preliminary stages of cross-linguistic googling Senju Kannon fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:from what i can tell it's the name of a temple, and during the ceremony i was told it meant "finding the path to a calm heart" or something like that, tho the jo is the jo of jodo shinshu and means pure and the raku means calm so i'm not a hundred percent where he got that from. i'm worried to ask cause i don't want to put him on the spot if he actually did massage the meanings of the dharma names you know? but then i'm not very familiar on how dharma names work in jodo shinshu since the only info i can find is on a few websites for individual bca churches and never anything more specific about names. and trying to search joraku online results in card game stuff for romaji and temple information for the kanji I'll use the Chinese characters here since I can't type in Japanese but I think you can extrapolate: 净土, pronounced jodo in Japanese, is the Amitabha heaven specifically. 樂土 "rakudo" is more generally paradise, in a buddhist way though it may be used for other religions idk "Finding the path to" is not really in the name, it's probably more of an explanation of the thought behind the name. 淨 straight up means clean, and it's pretty common in the name of buddhist places. 樂 means happy but in a chill way or comfortable in a happy way. Gokuraku means "extremely happy" and it's indeed the translation for Sukhavati. So congrats your buddhist name is chill out There's a good easy to use Japanese dictionary app called Akebi. It's not super deep on the Buddhism but it does have the basic terms. Wish you all the best 💮
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 05:36
|
|
|
i use rikaikun for ease of reading kanji when i'm on the web and jisho to double check it if i think rikaikun didn't give me what i needed. for my phone i use yomikawa but that's mostly so i can take photos of books and try to learn the meanings of the kanji. it's a very painstaking method of reading so i don't do it very often, but it kinda works. it took me an hour to read a table of contents but read them i did. god i wish there was more info about takagi kenmyo in english that would be nice anyway thanks. also i cant' help but feel like i got owned by that
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 05:49
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:i use rikaikun for ease of reading kanji when i'm on the web and jisho to double check it if i think rikaikun didn't give me what i needed. for my phone i use yomikawa but that's mostly so i can take photos of books and try to learn the meanings of the kanji. it's a very painstaking method of reading so i don't do it very often, but it kinda works. it took me an hour to read a table of contents but read them i did. god i wish there was more info about takagi kenmyo in english that would be nice I once read a whole book in Russian where I had to look up just about every word (and figure out for myself the Chinese transliterations). It's not fun exactly but it's rewarding. What happened to your av?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:10
|
|
|
nothing, as far as i'm aware. do i gotta clean out my cookies or something?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:17
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:nothing, as far as i'm aware. do i gotta clean out my cookies or something? I reloaded and now it's back 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:24
|
|
|
Hey Leon Sumbitches, how'd that go?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2018 16:44
|
|
|
Would it be fair to say Buddhism, especially Mahayana Buddhism, is polytheistic? Born and lived all my life here in the States. As such, "polytheism" is generally treated as an antiquated idea of the distant past that we "evolved" past. I'm aware of some Neopagan groups and ideas that interest me but that's still pretty recent niche all things considered. But then I look to the "East" and it seems like polytheism never died out there. Shinto is a big one of course but Mahayana is bigger still. Bodhisattvas receive veneration and devotion but I'm no expert in Buddhist doctrine so maybe that doesn't count as polytheism? I'd rather ask experts on this. This all came to mind when looking at the Analytic philosophers who are so determined to prove the existence of a Monotheistic God. There are far fewer intellectuals aiming to prove polytheism, although there are at least some. But this is all "Western." NikkolasKing fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Feb 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
What do you mean when you say polytheism? I think bodhisattvas are considered to be very powerful beings but they are not possessed of the qualities of the Abrahamic god or anything. Saints would probably be a better analogy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 01:28
|
|
|
Nessus posted:What do you mean when you say polytheism? I think bodhisattvas are considered to be very powerful beings but they are not possessed of the qualities of the Abrahamic god or anything. Saints would probably be a better analogy. Divine beings, gods, etc.. I'm not really an expert on polytheism and actually the "stereotypical ideas" about polytheism are wrong according to some things I've been reading from this guy named Edward Butler. I guess when I say polytheism I mean something resembling Ancient Egypt or Greece or Rome. Like I said, this is more a larger intellectual curiosity of mine. Polytheism went "away" in the West so I was wondering how prevalent it was in the East. Buddhism is of course huge in East Asia but it might not qualify as part of my overall question.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
Buddhism is polytheistic insofar as it is theistic. The highest realm of rebirth is the realm of gods, and beyond that are the countless buddhas and bodhisattvas, who are considered to be superior to gods.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 02:44
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Would it be fair to say Buddhism, especially Mahayana Buddhism, is polytheistic? If we take "theistic" to mean "worshiping gods," then strictly speaking, it would not be accurate to say that Mahayana Buddhism, or indeed any Buddhism, is theistic at all - either monotheistic or polytheistic. Buddhism is, in fact, atheistic. That is not to say that it does not acknowledge or accept the existence of "gods." There are very powerful beings called gods (and demigods, and weaker beings called hungry ghosts, and demons...) within the Buddhist cosmology. However, Buddhists do not worship those gods, or follow them, or regard them at all in any way except as examples of unfortunate circumstances we can fall into even if we do good works without wisdom and compassion. For example, a god is a being that has karmas allowing it a life of infinite joy and leisure, able to manifest anything that it wants at any time, without any hardship. However, because a god does not have any hardship, they do not practice moral good deeds. Because they are composited things (brought together by circumstances, devoid of inherent existence, just like any other sentient being) they are impermanent. Towards the end of their life, their ability to manifest beautiful enjoyable things diminishes. Their friends abandon them, not wanting to be reminded of mortality. The gods see visions of the lower realms that they are certain to enter into, and so they know tremendous suffering just before their deaths. So, is Buddhism "polytheistic?" Inasmuch as it acknowledges the existence of many beings putatively called "gods," yes. Inasmuch as it worships or follows those gods, or considers those gods capable of benefiting us in anything other than a transactional, worldly way? No, not at all. Gods are not considered objects of refuge, they should not be worshiped, because in fact they are less fortunate than we are. Now, some people would say that Buddha constitutes god in the philosophical sense, or that Buddhists worship the bodhisattvas. "Chenrezig is a deity of compassion that is prayed to through the mantra," for example. This is a superficial perspective that seems true enough. It seems so true that even some followers of the religion may think it is true or practice as if it were true in their expressions of devotion even though they know that it is not true. It isn't true for a few reasons: First, Buddhas do not constitute "beings" as such. A Buddha is not a god. Buddhas can manifest in many forms, but these manifestations only have provisional existence, and do not reflect the actual nature of a Buddha. For example, the historical Buddha Shakyamuni had a physical body of flesh and blood, but these are characteristics of men, not characteristics of Buddhas - other Buddhas do not have such characteristics. Buddha Shakyamuni was a man, but being a man is not characteristic of Buddhas, but rather a secondary composited characteristic. As Buddha nature (and the nature of mind, and so on) are uncomposited, they do not have characteristics in the provisional sense. There's a lot of philosophy that goes into what is meant by this, and I lack the understanding and ability to provide enough nuance. Instead, you could refer to the Uttaratantra Shastra. As for Bodhisattvas, we sometimes ask them to intervene or intercede in our lives, but such is not done out of worship but because those bodhisattvas are composited beings that have made firm vows to benefit beings in certain ways. They are not worshipped as gods, but because they constitute the "sangha," the community of the Buddha's practitioners, they are suitable objects of refuge. We can rely on Bodhisattvas as part of the triple gem, the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, which are three objects of refuge that we can rely on fully. When we rely on a Bodhisattva, it is not because we believe that they are a superior order of being, some kind of "god" that should be "worshiped" in the conventional Western sense, but because they are our seniors on the path toward enlightenment, who have made vows to help us on the way. And, importantly, like Buddhas, they are devoid of inherent existence, as all enlightened beings at the highest level of enlightenment are seen to be like "water mixed with water" - inseparable and undifferentiable. You can pull out a glass of water from the ocean, but when you throw it back in and draw it out again, you don't get the same water. Similarly, Buddhas and Bodhisattvas lack intrinsic identity, but instead are free from the dualistic distinctions of self and other. Again, there is nuance here that my own feeble understanding cannot express. So, what has often happened is that Westerners, coming from a monotheistic culture, identified behaviors that superficially resemble their own worship practices, and out of misunderstanding ascribed those resemblances to being the same sort of thing. Then, because there are more then one objects of devotion or practice, we misapprehended this to be polytheistic practice of deities. We light devotional candles in worship to deities; Tibetan Buddhists (for example) offer lamps and bowls of water in front of statues of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. We saw this and decided, "ah, they worship those deities and those deities do them favors." It's not quite the case, but the distinction is nuanced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
Paramemetic always impresses me with their wonderful explanations. I think another thing to keep in mind is that Buddhism is very syncretic, and because it allows for the existence of gods within its system, there are regions where Buddhism is practiced syncretically alongside traditional polytheist belief systems. Shinto and Buddhism is the example that comes to mind, where there are stories of Buddhas interacting with kami, or kami who are revered as Bodhisattvas etc. Buddhism advises that gods/kami are impermanent, but unlike Abrahamic religions ("You will have no other god beside me") it does not actively punish you for considering them or various supernatural phenomena. Actually it's closer to say that Buddhism's path to enlightenment doesn't really spend much time worrying about gods at all, but because its temperament is closer to indifference toward gods than rejection of gods, you will still see the two belief systems sometimes intermingle. Please correct me if I have made any errors on this; I'm not very well-versed in the topic, so this is just my personal understanding.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 05:34
|
|
|
for a counterexample, in some measure, there’s soto zen, which in practice is about as non theistic as it’s possible to be within the broader context of buddhism / mahayana. any of the writings of dogen will suffice to give a flavor of it, but genjokoan would be a good place to start if you happen to be interested if you’re looking for other polytheistic traditions, the bundle of traditions grouped under the name hinduism would also be a good area of inquiry, though here again, you’ll quickly find a complex melange of thought around what actually is signified by various dieties
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
Annual Prophet posted:for a counterexample, in some measure, there’s soto zen, which in practice is about as non theistic as it’s possible to be within the broader context of buddhism / mahayana. any of the writings of dogen will suffice to give a flavor of it, but genjokoan would be a good place to start if you happen to be interested Yeah I've done minor research (Wikipedia articles, Google searches, talking to practitioners on forums) on a lot of different religions, including Hinduism. One thing I've heard repeatedly is that there is no "Hinduism" really, that was a later name made up to explain thousands of years of diverse traditions. Also heard that Hinduism isn't really polytheistic because all its many deities are just reflections of Brahman. So it's less like there is Zeus and Hera and the rest of them and more like a Supreme God just chooses to appear as Shiva and Shakti and all the rest. I never did serious study into Hinduism though this is just the little bit I read.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
that’s a constructive way to understand the traditions comprised by the label, yes, but again there’s a huge diversity of views, not limited to a qualified form of monism [apologies for the derail] eta: deep, deep apologies 
Red Dad Redemption fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Mar 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
Cephas posted:Paramemetic always impresses me with their wonderful explanations. I think another thing to keep in mind is that Buddhism is very syncretic, and because it allows for the existence of gods within its system, there are regions where Buddhism is practiced syncretically alongside traditional polytheist belief systems. Shinto and Buddhism is the example that comes to mind, where there are stories of Buddhas interacting with kami, or kami who are revered as Bodhisattvas etc. Buddhism advises that gods/kami are impermanent, but unlike Abrahamic religions ("You will have no other god beside me") it does not actively punish you for considering them or various supernatural phenomena. Actually it's closer to say that Buddhism's path to enlightenment doesn't really spend much time worrying about gods at all, but because its temperament is closer to indifference toward gods than rejection of gods, you will still see the two belief systems sometimes intermingle. This seems more or less correct, yes. Buddhism isn't tied to particular beliefs and so on, it migrates around among other religious traditions. So for example in Ladakh the local deities, mountain gods, etc. are not worshiped because they are not suitable objects of refuge, but they are still acknowledged and propitiatory practices are still performed. Just because the deities aren't seen to be divine or something worthy of worship doesn't mean their existence as powerful spirits isn't acknowledged, just like how we might not acknowledge some kind of actual inherent authority possessed by the government as an institution, but still pay taxes. So in these syncretic practices gods are acknowledged and maybe even propitiated, but that's less "Buddhism" and more "local magico-religious traditions." It's worth noting generally that religious practices in many other cultures are less clear cut as belonging to one firm division or another. Some Buddhists practice Ganesh. Why? Because Ganesh gets results for people they know, and if something works, why wouldn't you use it? Achi Choekyi Drolma is specifically an enlightened Dharma protector for the Drikung Kagyu, but some other Karma Kagyu and Drukpa people practice her because she gets good results. There's no need to say "I do this deity" as a point of identification - you propitiate Ganesh because he gets you results. If he doesn't get you results, you don't propitiate him anymore.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
As far as I know "Hinduism" is kind of a generic name for a number of related religious practices in India that don't fall under a more specific label like Jainism or Buddhism. Some of them have the understanding that all gods are just manifestations of one divinity, others do treat the gods as separate entities, others again only worship one or a few gods out of the many. That said I'm not a Hindu and I haven't studied it too much, so there may well be a bit more of a common core than I know of. Whether Buddhism has gods really depends on what branch you're looking at and how you choose to use the terminology. Broadly speaking, Theravada acknowledges that gods exist but argues that a person trying for liberation should not concern hirself with them. Mahayana has the Bodhisattvas or the pure land Buddhas which are functionally treated as gods (prayer, sacrifice, place in the cosmology etc) but technically aren't. Some forms of Vajrayana do seem to use gods in their pursuit of liberation, though I don't know too much about that. And then there are relatively recent forms of Buddhism (Zen maybe? Definitely secular Buddhism) that don't really talk about any godlike beings at all or explicitly deny their existence. Adding on to what paramemetic said, trying to do Buddhism on top of the native religion is also really common in non Tibetan contexts. In China people tend to just compartmentalize, going to a daoist temple this week and a buddhist one the next without thinking too hard about how these things connect. In Europe on the other hand there's a relatively popular movement trying to harmonize Buddhism with the Christian tradition, which seems somewhat fundamentally incompatible but they do manage to make it work. So in the future maybe we'll have monotheistic Buddhism on top of all the other variations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
pidan posted:As far as I know "Hinduism" is kind of a generic name for a number of related religious practices in India that don't fall under a more specific label like Jainism or Buddhism. Some of them have the understanding that all gods are just manifestations of one divinity, others do treat the gods as separate entities, others again only worship one or a few gods out of the many. This is basically right. Hinduism isn't 'centralized' and there's no authority that ensures orthodoxy, so most practices are just passed down through tradition. There are plenty of regional gods that aren't canonical but are kind of justified post-hoc as 'avatars' of canonical/Vedic deities. svenkatesh fucked around with this message at 06:09 on Mar 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
pidan posted:As far as I know "Hinduism" is kind of a generic name for a number of related religious practices in India that don't fall under a more specific label like Jainism or Buddhism. Some of them have the understanding that all gods are just manifestations of one divinity, others do treat the gods as separate entities, others again only worship one or a few gods out of the many. Yeah Hinduism, if you look at it based on Western ideas, is ultimately a bunch of different religions. There are some core beliefs (that everything has a soul for example) that persist and some common deities but there just isn't one set of common beliefs that every Hindu must adhere to. A common one is that all gods are ultimately aspects or avatars of a particular god so it really doesn't matter what you worship; in the end you're worshiping The One anyway. Depending on who you ask that could be various gods or even no god at all. Some Hindus follow only one god; some many, others none. This is part of why dharmic religions get along better than Abrahamic ones and why it's possible to be a Buddhist, a Taoist, and a Hindu with no real problems. It's possible to make Buddhism and Christianity work together for Christians that actually understand Buddhism but that can be a hard hurdle to go over. I've had to explain to a lot of people that I don't worship the Buddha and he isn't a messiah. I don't worship anything nor do I follow any gods. I also don't deny that gods exist. If they do then my puny mortal mind wouldn't be able to even try to comprehend them so I don't worry about that. Of course that also depends on the sect of Christianity; I grew up around a lot of evangelicals and they believe that every religion other than their particular flavor of Christianity was created by the devil. They tend to believe that Buddhists all actually worship Buddha who was just the devil in disguise trying to mislead people. As they believe that the Earth is and always has been a battleground between God and the devil any religion other than the right flavor of Christianity is effectively devil worship. As Buddhism trends toward the agnostic this is viewed as tempting people away from God and His teachings by pulling practitioners into that state of questioning. There are sects of Christianity that are more permissive of such things so long as you go to church, pray to God, and believe in Jesus. Of course I've also run into people that became quite furious when they found out that I'm not a Christian but have studied the teachings of Jesus. There is wisdom there. Unfortunately a lot of Christians have this attitude of "if you read his teachings or the Bible you would inevitably come to the same conclusions I did and would believe exactly what I do. Since you don't you are following the devil and I want nothing to do with you." Getting past that would not be easy in that case and evangelical Christianity is sadly pretty widespread. It's very hard to explain to that type that Buddhism neither requires you to worship nor not worship; whatever gets you in the right direction is fine. You can screw up along the way as long as you're making progress. Compare that to many flavors of Christianity; you must be 100% correct or you go to Hell forever. ToxicSlurpee fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Mar 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2018 02:56
|
|
|
I went to an introduction class a few weeks ago at a local zen Center. Since then I’ve been sitting just about every day, as well as going to a weekly sitting at a local university (The time and location make it possible with my schedule to go to vice the zen center, even though the latter has quite a few sittings through the week) The university group doesn’t have quite as many bells and whistles as the zen center but nonetheless I’ve found sitting with others to be an interesting and unique experience when compared to doing it at home by myself. The chaplain who runs it gives a great little talk at the beginning that I’ve found to be quite helpful with my own practice so far. I haven’t stopped yet, so, uh, I guess, hello Buddhist and fellow Buddhist-curious goons?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
gassho nofeed is your group soto or rinzai (or obaku)?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
Annual Prophet posted:gassho nofeed Gassho AP - I guess this is something people type out too then?! The group is Rinzai, the Osho having learned under Joshu Sasaki Roshi. We sit facing each other, walk and chant in between sitting, have formal tea after the third sit and burn incense throughout. After the practice there is a period of work and cleaning. I haven't any experience with koan, there are no robed figures jumping up and down yelling at me nor has anyone I've seen been struck by a stick unwillingly; all things that one may apparently expect when reading some descriptions of the Rinzai tradition on the web as I just did! The emphasis and direction I've had so far has been on just sitting (And just walking, and just chanting, and just sipping, and just working and just cleaning...) How does this contrast with the Soto practice? I imagine quite a bit the same if one of the greatest differences is "Well, they sit like THAT and we sit like THIS." It's odd in a way, I probably intellectually know more about Soto so far? My introduction to Buddhism in general has been this thread, and zen in particular by the writings of Brad Warner and transcriptions of talks by Nishijima. I pretty much just googled "zen [cityname]" and didn't pay too much attention to the results when it came to tradition at all. There seems to be a decently sized Soto group following the lineage of Shunryu Suzuki Roshi in my city as too, although their schedule is somewhat less active. Maybe I should give them a try and contrast with my experience above? At this point so early in my practice I can't help but feel it's good enough to just sit and not worry about it too much. I do come from a military background personally and the thought of being a part of a tradition that historically was practiced by a soldier-class is somewhat appealing, I must admit. I would certainly like to read some more on the subject of differing schools, would you be able to recommend anything? fake edit: I'm still very new to all this and probably have displayed quite the amount of ignorance on the topic at hand above, apologies!
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
Nofeed posted:Gassho AP - I guess this is something people type out too then?! haha yeah we do type that out ultimately you have to do what feels comfortable to, and works for, you, but I’d certainly suggest trying out the SFZC / Suzuki affiliate. speaking of which, if you do wind up practicing in the soto tradition, and probably also if you stick with rinzai, I would heartily recommend the SFZC and Sanshin podcasts. i like many of the Zen Center teachers, especially Paul Haller, and Shohaku Okumura is a luminary of american soto zen, with extremely illuminating commentary on dogen’s works. i don’t agree with brad on everything, but my practice background aligns very very closely with his, so if you’ve read his work, you’ll have a sense of how soto practice has been for me (minus the lengthy stay in japan): focused, as you’d expect, on shikantaza, as all of soto practice is, but with few formalities. it’s a mahayana tradition, so there’s absolutely a doctrinal background, but practice is central and the tradition is regarded as a special transmission outside the scriptures. on the other hand, dogen’s writings articulate the perspective of practice in the context of the concrete and ever changing circumstances of life in a way i haven’t quite found in any other writer of any buddhist or non buddhist tradition, and that is deeply resonant with my experience koan practice exists in both soto and rinzai, but there tends to be a greater focus in rinzai on koan/ kensho, in contrast to the soto notion that “zen is zazen”. the simplicity, but also amazing depth, of the latter has been a more appealing and useful model for me personally, and that is why, from my perspective, soto is home. but again, you may have a very different experience, and as you’ve already observed the differences can sometimes wind up being more in degree than in kind, depending on the zen center to give you a sense of the soto outlook (though you already likely have quite a bit from reading brad’s books), without having to plow through the entire shobogenzo, let me recommend How to Cook Your Life, an amazing little book that you can read, footnotes and all, in an afternoon. best wishes in your choice, and feel free to reach out anytime if you have questions
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2018 04:03
|
|
|
Annual Prophet posted:haha yeah we do type that out Thanks very much for the response! I think I’ll try sitting with the Soto crew too this weekend and seeing where things go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
Hey Buddhism thread, a couple of questions, if I may. I've loosely considered myself to be Buddhist for the past few years — I try my best to follow the Buddhadharma and the precepts, and sit as often as possible, but haven't yet taken refuge or joined any particular tradition. I have tended to align most closely with Zen, especially with Soto and the Engaged Buddhism of Thich Nhat Hanh, whose work I have read in depth since discovering him 3 or 4 years ago. So, firstly, I have been mulling over the implications of the second precept recently — the vow not to take what is not freely given — and how it relates to my hobbies and undertakings in life. One of my biggest hobbies as of late is photography, and specifically with documentary and street photography, which usually involves taking candid photos of people and places around the city. It occured to me the other day, though, when discussing it with my girlfriend that the act of taking a person's picture without their expressed consent could be considered an act of theft. Thinking this over, it increasingly seemed to me that if that were true, those acts would run counter to the second precept. What do you all think, does the act of taking a person's photograph without explicit consent in public constitute theft from a Buddhist perspective, and does it run afoul of the second precept? The second question I had is entirely unrelated, but I've just recently moved to Chicago from Austin, Texas, and am looking into practice centers in this city. In Austin I went semi-regularly to the Austin Zen Center which is a lovely establishment, but it doesn't seem that there are any SFZC-affiliated temples here. Does anyone happen to know of a good Zen practice center in Chicago that I should check out?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
Keret posted:So, firstly, I have been mulling over the implications of the second precept recently — the vow not to take what is not freely given — and how it relates to my hobbies and undertakings in life. One of my biggest hobbies as of late is photography, and specifically with documentary and street photography, which usually involves taking candid photos of people and places around the city. It occured to me the other day, though, when discussing it with my girlfriend that the act of taking a person's picture without their expressed consent could be considered an act of theft. Thinking this over, it increasingly seemed to me that if that were true, those acts would run counter to the second precept. What do you all think, does the act of taking a person's photograph without explicit consent in public constitute theft from a Buddhist perspective, and does it run afoul of the second precept? I don't know much, but I shouldn't think so. Mainly, we only "take a picture" in English. This is an English phrase, in other languages you don't "take" pictures. When we take a picture, we're not actually taking anything. When you take someone's photo, they don't lose anything. You are making a photo, producing a photo, preserving an image, but you are not taking anything from someone. Now, if you were to take someone's photo and then sell it for a profit, knowing that they themselves intended to sell a photo of the thing for profit, then maybe that might be within the spirit of the precept. But in the case of simply taking a picture, you're not taking anything from anyone. Nobody is losing anything. You're producing something. I do not see how this could be considered a violation of the second precept, which deals with not stealing. Similarly, if you were to violate their rights by taking their photo without their consent, and then to deliberately expose those photos or share them with the world or sell them or so on, that could be considered a violation, but moreso because it harms others and breaks the law than because it is a violation of the precept. Buddha posted:"Furthermore, abandoning taking what is not given (stealing), the disciple of the noble ones abstains from taking what is not given. In doing so, he gives freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings. In giving freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings, he gains a share in limitless freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, and freedom from oppression. This is the second gift, the second great gift — original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning — that is not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and is unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & brahmans... Looking at the Buddha's words, I do not see how taking a photo is taking what is not given. A photo is not taken.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
Keret posted:So, firstly, I have been mulling over the implications of the second precept recently — the vow not to take what is not freely given — and how it relates to my hobbies and undertakings in life. One of my biggest hobbies as of late is photography, and specifically with documentary and street photography, which usually involves taking candid photos of people and places around the city. It occured to me the other day, though, when discussing it with my girlfriend that the act of taking a person's picture without their expressed consent could be considered an act of theft. Thinking this over, it increasingly seemed to me that if that were true, those acts would run counter to the second precept. What do you all think, does the act of taking a person's photograph without explicit consent in public constitute theft from a Buddhist perspective, and does it run afoul of the second precept? You might err on the side of not harming by trying not to get faces in your photos, given all this development of face-tracking software...
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Keret posted:The second question I had is entirely unrelated, but I've just recently moved to Chicago from Austin, Texas, and am looking into practice centers in this city. In Austin I went semi-regularly to the Austin Zen Center which is a lovely establishment, but it doesn't seem that there are any SFZC-affiliated temples here. Does anyone happen to know of a good Zen practice center in Chicago that I should check out? I don’t live in Chicago, so take this with something of a grain of salt, but Dan Leighton (Ancient Dragon Zen Gate) has a good rep, worked in Japan with Shohaku Okumura and hails from SFZC. Certainly worth checking out, and he also has a podcast.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
Thank you for the replies, friends; they provided a good deal of clarity and have helped me in my meditation on the subject.Paramemetic posted:I don't know much, but I shouldn't think so. This is a good point, and I hadn't considered it enough. I suppose it is a quirk of language that colors our ideas of what it means to do something. That said, although there is no direct “taking” in a physical or economic sense, as you've excellently laid out, I wonder still about the less tangible elements involved in picture making, and of the exchange or interaction that is taking place in that moment. I suppose that this shifts the topic from that of physical gain/loss and the second precept, to that of privacy and bodily autonomy, and more broadly of ahimsa. As a follower of buddhadharma, I feel very invested in causing as little harm as possible, within the limitations of my existence as a human being in this time period. I know that I am not in control of the responses that others have to my actions, but nonetheless it is my responsibility, I feel, to dispense with actions and intentions that could reasonably cause harm, be it physical or psychological, to others. So, in this case I am presented with some difficulty in how to apply ahimsa in photography with regards to privacy and the body. I try always to maintain Right Intention in the making of photographs (and all things), but that intention can fall short if the actions which are arising from it cause harm to those I am photographing. The question that remains, then, is: does spontaneous photography of others in which they are clearly featured (without explicit approval) constitute an invasion of privacy and a violation of bodily autonomy, making it unskillful? My own meditation on this points somewhat to yes, or at least I can't shake the feeling that I am invading in some way another person's privacy during such times. In any case it feels a bit selfish, which seems like an unskillful seed to be watering just to have nice photographs. On the other hand, as Nessus mentioned, incidentally including others seems to not be a problem, though maybe I am arbitrarily drawing a line here (I guess all lines are arbitarily drawn, but that's another topic). It's not really feasible to ask everyone in the street for permission to make photos of them, but perhaps by making pictures that are sufficiently anonymizing, I can side step that problem. Annual Prophet posted:I don’t live in Chicago, so take this with something of a grain of salt, but Dan Leighton (Ancient Dragon Zen Gate) has a good rep, worked in Japan with Shohaku Okumura and hails from SFZC. Certainly worth checking out, and he also has a podcast. Thanks for the recommendation. I had heard of this place before, but did not know anything about Dan Leighton. It's good to know that he is legitimate, I will check out his podcast and some of his teachings and perhaps give that center a try.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
I’m not a buddhist nor do I know much about it, but what I do know is that there is meditation involved and the OP says as much. This is something that I decided to give a try because I feel like I’m stressed all the time and heard it helps. Is it okay if I ask questions about “guided meditation” here?Paramemetic posted:I don't know much, but I shouldn't think so. Keret posted:Thank you for the replies, friends; they provided a good deal of clarity and have helped me in my meditation on the subject. Just as an example, in German you’d ask someone “kannst du bitte ein Foto von uns machen?“ to ask “could you please take a picture of us?” and “lass uns ein Foto machen“ to say “let’s take a picture.” The verb is machen, to make. Even in English there are differences among word choices. The easiest example I can think of is that in America you “take exams” but in the UK you “sit exams.” Language is really cool and one of those things I nerd out about. I swear I always read articles about how people growing up bilingual literally understand the world differently than people who only know one language but I never remember where those articles are when I want to look them up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2018 09:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I’m not a buddhist nor do I know much about it, but what I do know is that there is meditation involved and the OP says as much. This is something that I decided to give a try because I feel like I’m stressed all the time and heard it helps. Is it okay if I ask questions about “guided meditation” here? I started with an app called Headspace, which was a paid service and got me into the habit. For about a year. Concurrently, I read a book called "Mindfulness in Plain English," which was really great and I recommend it. From there I naturally became more interested in Buddhism. In a sense, I think you're definitely in the right place, but I'm not sure how the thread will feel overall. But I definitely recommend reading the book I mentioned. If you aren't interested in Headspace, which I'm only mentioning because I personally used it initially, a nice free alternative introduction to mindfulness meditation is here: https://www.audiodharma.org/series/1/talk/1762/
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2018 15:11
|
|
