Jump to content
Male HQ

A New Kind of Buddhism


Steve5380

Recommended Posts

I had an inspiration to put together a credible belief after reading this article @fab posted describing the Buddhist Nirvana:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(Buddhism)

 

This new belief is in line with traditional Buddhism, finding peace through detachment and renunciation of cravings, etc.  It is all in the concept of Nirvana, the soteriological cessation of dukkha, the extinction of self, the timeless peace.

 

This belief accepts the concepts of Buddism with one single modification: we attain nirvana after our current life, that is,  we die INTO nirvana. This makes all the rebirths and successive lives superfluous.  Also, it reduces karma to the natural principle of cause-and-effect throughout our life. This is an incredible simplification, and it takes away the mysterious, the miraculous of a speculative rebirth, reincarnation. And this simplification makes sense: if we find ourselves with all the attachments, sufferings, ignorance following the ONE birth we know, why should we not get rid of all these in ONE death?

 

This belief does not take away the benefits of practicing Buddhism, which eliminates suffering and brings peace during the natural life. And it adds a very important detachment:

 

The detachment from JUSTICE. What is rebirth and karma but a way to satisfy our need for justice through a superior mechanism?  It is a common saying that "there is no justice on earth". What if we can accept that there is no justice, period!?  Nature is blind to justice, it does not care for the victims of its natural disasters, which we are resigned to call "acts of God". Once we reach nirvana we should be disconnected from all the justice and injustice that happened during our life. It is all erased, like the color of our eyes in life.

 

I am happy to formulate this new belief which like atheism does not need to define any supernatural nor Gods.  As such, it could have real social value by giving atheists the right to claim a belief and allow them to save face and accept some agnosticism.  Buddhism makes the smart directive to avoiding speculations about our origin and the end of the world, which it considers to be superfluous. 

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't expect any prompt comment on this topic.

A gay website is not the best environment for a philosophical discussion.

There are more interesting threads about cocks, asses, tops, bottoms, gay relationships.

Meanwhile, the thought about Buddhism keeps me personally entertained, and so

any criticism or counter argument will be welcomed  :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ironrod said:

The thing abt Buddhism, it's not abt talking. Its abt action and practice, nothing will come out of talks. If u treat it as a philosophy, it will stay as just ..... a theory. Nothing will happen.

 

You are right that the benefits of Buddhism come not from talking of philosophizing but from hands-on  practice.  

 

In addition to the concrete benefits that materialize during our lifetime,  like reduction of suffering by progressive freedoms from attachments,  Buddhism promises more transcendental benefits in future lives.  These future benefits are not backed by solid evidence but are a matter of faith.  Any faith that is not blind needs to be supported by information that usually comes from hearsay and is accepted by reason.  In the case of existential matters, our faith accepts and then adopts a philosophy.  In any case, the action may lead to the philosophy,  and/or the philosophy to the action.  Both are essential.

 

In this thread I deal with the Buddhist philosophy rather than the action, of which I don't know much because I am not a practicing Buddhist.  This philosophy, like any other,  is perfectly accessible to anyone who is interested in it and has the means to find information about it.  Thanks to the literature and in particular the Internet,  I can find all I need to know about Buddhism without having ever set foot in a Buddhist temple except as a visiting tourist.

 

Is Buddhism your basic philosophy?  Are you interested in its theory?  If so, do you have anything to say about my proposal?   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

You are right that the benefits of Buddhism come not from talking of philosophizing but from hands-on  practice.  

 

In addition to the concrete benefits that materialize during our lifetime,  like reduction of suffering by progressive freedoms from attachments,  Buddhism promises more transcendental benefits in future lives.  These future benefits are not backed by solid evidence but are a matter of faith.  Any faith that is not blind needs to be supported by information that usually comes from hearsay and is accepted by reason.  In the case of existential matters, our faith accepts and then adopts a philosophy.  In any case, the action may lead to the philosophy,  and/or the philosophy to the action.  Both are essential.

 

2

 

I am not sure who is your Teacher but u are definitely misguided. To understand Buddhism, U must understand the "4 noble truth", what did it say? "There is SUFFERING". What do want to do abt this "SUFFERING"? What steps to take to achieve it? Why even talk abt AFTERLIFE when your this life is suffering itself?

 

Maybe u say, nah life is both suffering and joy. Then ask yourself, are this suffering and joy acceptable to me? If yes, just continue what u are doing now. Don't need to do anything abt it. If you say, nope I refuse to suffer anymore then u proceed to take steps to remove yourself from this endless cycle.

 

Don't try to jump before you learn to walk. There is no faith required but you need conviction instead, just like a sportsman training for Olympic gold medal, talking abt it will bring u nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Ironrod said:

 

I am not sure who is your Teacher but u are definitely misguided. To understand Buddhism, U must understand the "4 noble truth", what did it say? "There is SUFFERING". What do want to do abt this "SUFFERING"? What steps to take to achieve it? Why even talk abt AFTERLIFE when your this life is suffering itself?

 

Maybe u say, nah life is both suffering and joy. Then ask yourself, are this suffering and joy acceptable to me? If yes, just continue what u are doing now. Don't need to do anything abt it. If you say, nope I refuse to suffer anymore then u proceed to take steps to remove yourself from this endless cycle.

 

Don't try to jump before you learn to walk. There is no faith required but you need conviction instead, just like a sportsman training for Olympic gold medal, talking abt it will bring u nothing.

 

My Teacher were very good Catholic priests before I became agnostic, and since then I am self taught.  I understand Buddhist's four noble truths.  The first two are acceptable, like motherhood.  But the last two can be questionable.  Unless we are clairvoyants how can we know what our sufferings will be after death?  All we can do is to speculate or believe. 

 

While we are free to speculate anything we want,  belief should come with support from reason.  And reason asks a first question:  why we need to keep suffering after death?  It seems perfectly acceptable that our physical suffering ends when we die.  No more nervous system that transmits pain to our consciousness.  Why not accept that spiritual sufferings ends too?

 

Doesn't conviction require faith?  Shouldn't we let reason move us from speculation to faith, and finally to conviction?  To jump straight to conviction means mental blindness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about "Mindfulness" or  ‎Eckhart Tolle   "New Earth"  type practice? Very much simpler, fewer beliefs through faith, less system to follow than mainstream. Quickly de-emphasizes or aims to remove the Ego, which is loudly present in most preachers and teachings, so lets you get closer to imminent Nirvana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/25/2019 at 8:24 AM, Guest Ergo said:

How about "Mindfulness" or  ‎Eckhart Tolle   "New Earth"  type practice? Very much simpler, fewer beliefs through faith, less system to follow than mainstream. Quickly de-emphasizes or aims to remove the Ego, which is loudly present in most preachers and teachings, so lets you get closer to imminent Nirvana.

 

I think that the preaching of Eckhart Tolle is positive,  if one has the patience to watch, listen to, read what this guy with funny accent has to say. It has a component of psychology, or even more,  "mental and emotional hygiene",  a phrase I learned here at BW.   He plays with words and one cannot analyze much what he says, but he correctly conveys his message. 

 

I find something similar with this non-denominational megachurch preacher Joel Osteen,  who with the excuse of Christianity preaches self-help.  And what he says is also positive (as long as one has the firm resolution to not send him any money).

 

Their preachings have good content of psychology, mental hygiene, self-help,  but fall short of being a philosophy.  They don't concern themselves with existential issues, with the before and beyond death. (Osteen mentions Jesus Christ here and there, probably to justify having a "church" and being tax-free). Tolle takes material from oriental spirituality,  which I find superior to the fairy tales of occidental religions.

 

I agree with you that these practices are simpler and perfectly adequate, without insulting our reason.  For anything beyond this,  philosophical speculation is a great intellectual activity.

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
On 7/24/2019 at 11:56 PM, Ironrod said:

The thing abt Buddhism, it's not abt talking. Its abt action and practice, nothing will come out of talks. If u treat it as a philosophy, it will stay as just ..... a theory. Nothing will happen.

 

Like some 吃肉和尚 who goes around preaching Buddhism all over the place, and then slut shaming others elsewhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Johnson

During the buddha's time, there was only 1 type of buddhism. Abt a hundred yrs or more after his death and entry to nirvana, the ancient indian monks gradually had new interpretations, and opinions. So gradually more types of buddhism began to establish themselves. And over the centuries, these different types spread to diff parts of asia and the world. They may be influenced by the various local cultures in order to adapt and survive in the midst of ever changing societal needs. Personally, i feel whatever the type, they shld venerate the buddha as the founder, the 4 noble truths, 8 fold paths, 3 universal characteristics, promote loving kindness. These days, obviously some groups or some new groups may be misleading, with lots of "attractive claims & rituals". So be cautious. Always verify the source for validity and reliability. May all beings be well and happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

 

Like some 吃肉who goes around preaching Buddhism all over the place, and then slut shaming others elsewhere. 

 

I hope u r not referring to me. :P. For me, wisdom precedes compassion.

 

Aparently u don't seem to know that Most non Chinese Mahayana monks are not vegetarians.

 

1 hour ago, Guest Johnson said:

During the buddha's time, there was only 1 type of buddhism. Abt a hundred yrs or more after his death and entry to nirvana, the ancient indian monks gradually had new interpretations, and opinions. So gradually more types of buddhism began to establish themselves. And over the centuries, these different types spread to diff parts of asia and the world. They may be influenced by the various local cultures in order to adapt and survive in the midst of ever changing societal needs. Personally, i feel whatever the type, they shld venerate the buddha as the founder, the 4 noble truths, 8 fold paths, 3 universal characteristics, promote loving kindness. These days, obviously some groups or some new groups may be misleading, with lots of "attractive claims & rituals". So be cautious. Always verify the source for validity and reliability. May all beings be well and happy.

 

Actually there are only 2 main ways, I.e. the arahat or the Bodhisattva vehicles. The best part is they don't conflict each other.

鍾意就好,理佢男定女

 

never argue with the guests. let them bark all they want.

 

结缘不结

不解缘

 

After I have said what I wanna say, I don't care what you say.

 

看穿不说穿

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I find that when there is deep diving into religion/theosophy, it becomes more convoluted. Definitely, the practice of Buddhism today is as such. Things like merit-making, grand prostrations, icons, amulets, charms, holy artefacts. All of these deviate from the true message of Buddhism - It is a bit sad to see something that is intangible, become so rooted in the material, in an effort to grasp and make certain of something that is at its very core, spiritual and formless. Irony.

 

For me, true enlightenment is simple. It is seeing one in others, and others in yourself. It is the blurring of identity, through accepting and discarding, not denial and overpowering. Once you are able to truly shed who you think you are, and all that defines you, is when you are enlightened, though only from a mortal sense. Through my studies and what is shown to me, there are many layers to Enlightenment. It comes in waves, washing over you as you shed yourself, but gain more of its essence. The pattern is cyclical, the lessons are repeating, the opportunities aplenty, but whether most of us are ready to be Enlightened and to regain that alignment is the question of ages. 

 

But even once one has achieved Nirvana, that is not the end. After the Buddha gained enlightenment, it was only the beginning for him. Indeed, it is in action, the daily breaths, interactions, musings, joys that he encouraged, nurtured and shared until his eventual Parinirvana. Those that have gain Enlightenment, and then chose to remain in the earthly realms become the equivalent of angels, Bodhisaatvas, most famous being Avalokiteshvara, later becoming Guan Yin or Kwannon.

 

The toil doesnt end just because you have a peek into Enlightenment. In fact, that is where it starts. Just that you walk the path with full acceptance and love. With power comes responsibility, and with Enlightenment comes the deep understanding that you are aligning yourself to a greater purpose, that encompasses Humanity, living things, and even the Universe itself. That is why, in deep esoteric Buddhism, there are even mentions of Buddhas that are not from Earth, or from other time dimensions and parallel universe. Not imaginings, but pointers that the real essence of what we happen to call Buddhism is trans-dimensional and meta-physical. That it is Transcendental, in every literal sense of the word. And what it truly is has no name, nor does it need one.

 

In essence, the laws of Buddhisms only guide humanity towards the Beauty of Life. In the end, Buddhism, Nirvana, Dukkha, Samsara are only words that we Humans have assigned to deep intrinsic Truths of all Reality. They are not definitive, only pointers to what Is, but that is the flaw of the human race, to get hung up on names, stories, events that in the end, we forget what they were pointing and hinting at in the first place.

 

How many wars have been waged due to a semantic, or difference in understanding? How much suffering has occurred, how many factions have been created in the quest to be triumphant in this spiritual contest of righteousness and singularity? 

If you are truly Enlightened, and aligned you will know with zero doubt that right now, our greatest challenge as a species is to actually look beyond the programming of religion and doctrine. To unpack its old outdated and out of context tropes, and find the similarity in the message. This is why some teachings like Eckhart Tolle ring very true for those who are awakened, or on the brink of awakening, because it offers Truth, Clarity and nothing else, and everything else is carried on from your own intuition and deep spiritual alignment in approaching your own Darkness, and your eventual path towards Light.

I won't say that what we call Buddhism is the way to Enlightenment but that it is only the tip of the iceberg - it hints at something much older than Man, Religion, Time. Something truly eternal that will go on even when Man, the Earth, etc is nothing more than a distant memory - so the point of highlighting a New or Old Buddhism in view of this is actually quite pointless..
 

Edited by tomcat

🌑🌒🌓🌔🌕🌖🌗🌘🌑

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tomcat said:

Hmm, I find that when there is deep diving into religion/theosophy, it becomes more convoluted. Definitely, the practice of Buddhism today is as such. Things like merit-making, grand prostrations, icons, amulets, charms, holy artefacts. All of these deviate from the true message of Buddhism - It is a bit sad to see something that is intangible, become so rooted in the material, in an effort to grasp and make certain of something that is at its very core, spiritual and formless. Irony.

 

 

You are right, but Buddhism may not have come even close to the distortion from the original message that happened to Christianity.  Christ said "love each other",  and what happened is an Apostle Paul that wrote horrible things about some alleged gay people he met in Rome plus his opinion that homosexual acts deserve death.  And today's churches, starting with the Catholic and continuing with the plague of televangelism, have been bashing LGBTQs with sinfulness like their bottom lines depend on it.  Fortunately, serious churches (not televangelist cults) seem to be walking back on this.

 

6 hours ago, tomcat said:


I won't say that what we call Buddhism is the way to Enlightenment but that it is only the tip of the iceberg - it hints at something much older than Man, Religion, Time. Something truly eternal that will go on even when Man, the Earth, etc is nothing more than a distant memory - so the point of highlighting a New or Old Buddhism in view of this is actually quite pointless..
 

 

Thank you,  I do many pointless things.  I wish I could delve into the Eternal Transcendental as easy as you can do.  But I am a simple person with a severe case of agnosticism.  Before venturing into the extremes of time and space,  and ignorant of the HOW of rebirth and karma, I am still dealing with WHY by a little question:    why we need to keep suffering after death?.  Why should there be a need for repeated lives with their sufferings?  Why cannot it all end with our known one time death,  and at this time we reach nirvana, if this needs to be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
10 hours ago, fab said:

I hope u r not referring to me. :P. For me, wisdom precedes compassion.

 

Aparently u don't seem to know that Most non Chinese Mahayana monks are not vegetarians.

 

Don't even understand what is meaning of 吃肉尚 = no wisdom. 

No compassion + no wisdom = no anything = hot air hypocrite .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

 

Don't even understand what is meaning of 吃肉 = no wisdom. 

 

 

吃肉  ?   What I get is "Eating meat and still".   When I eat meat, I am usually sitting still.  So I can say:   I am 吃肉 和 尚.  (wow, I'm learning Mandarin! )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

吃肉  ?   What I get is "Eating meat and still".   When I eat meat, I am usually sitting still.  So I can say:   I am 吃肉 和 尚.  (wow, I'm learning Mandarin! )

 

https://www.google.com/search?client=tablet-android-samsung&ei=fOs7XbOYH4XpvgTBz6TwCQ&q=和尚+英文&oq=和 尚&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.1.1.0i12l8.24293.25745..27758...4.0..0.99.645.9......0....1.........30i10._7KA8Ul0QxQ

鍾意就好,理佢男定女

 

never argue with the guests. let them bark all they want.

 

结缘不结

不解缘

 

After I have said what I wanna say, I don't care what you say.

 

看穿不说穿

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
6 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

吃肉  ?   What I get is "Eating meat and still".   When I eat meat, I am usually sitting still.  So I can say:   I am 吃肉 和 尚.  (wow, I'm learning Mandarin! )

 

Yes, you can definitely say that ....... It befits you.. LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in San Francisco, I happened to visit a mainstream Episcopal church of which I am a member elsewhere. Incredibly, they had Vipassana meditation classes in a room with a Buddha!

 

Everybody preach less. My turn though! Get with it; shut up and practice! Pause now, stop language and mental straining inside your head,  and feel this moment. It is the only truth. Truer than any preachings  you will find in any religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Nightingale said:

 

吃 eat

肉 meat

尚 monk

The 4 characters mean a meat-eating monk.  The writer referred to hypocritical monks who don robes, going around preaching religion and acting holy.

 

If one transposes the characters, can it also mean "eat monk meat"?   

This must not be very common,  since monk meat must be rather tough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Guest Ergo said:

in San Francisco, I happened to visit a mainstream Episcopal church of which I am a member elsewhere. Incredibly, they had Vipassana meditation classes in a room with a Buddha!

 

Everybody preach less. My turn though! Get with it; shut up and practice! Pause now, stop language and mental straining inside your head,  and feel this moment. It is the only truth. Truer than any preachings  you will find in any religion.

 

Another thumbs up for Episcopalians!  This is besides their acceptance of homosexuality, same-sex marriage, women and LGBTQs in the ministry. 

 

Any type of meditation in small amounts should be very positive.  And not as controversial as preaching  :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

 

Yes, you can definitely say that ....... It befits you.. LOL.

 

No.  I simply eat meat sometimes, not much. 

But since there are no pictures of you we cannot be sure that you don a robe.  But from what you write,  hypocrisy is there!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nightingale said:

 

In that case, just shift the position of the characters:

吃 eat + 和尚 monk + 肉 meat = 吃和尚肉 or 吃和尚的肉 (的 being equivalent to  's)

 

Thank you.  I will practice this to make myself understood the next time I visit a Buddhist temple and get hungry.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record,  many Buddhists monks are meat eaters, so do not label them as hypocrites. 

鍾意就好,理佢男定女

 

never argue with the guests. let them bark all they want.

 

结缘不结

不解缘

 

After I have said what I wanna say, I don't care what you say.

 

看穿不说穿

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Coolbriz said:

Oh no, I see a potential Buddhist here astraying into the demonic path (I.e. desire for tripitaka meat) 

 

Tripitaka meat...

 

This brings curiosity about what material was used to write the Tripitaka.  Was it papyrus, like they used for the Bible, or birch bark, or parchment?

Parchment would be the closest to meat, but 2000 years later it would be quite dry and tasteless.  Worse than the charki they made by drying meat to preserve it before modern freezers become available.  Would there be any spiritual blessings from eating Tripitaka meat?  Can they enter through the eyes, the ears, the mouth... ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Tripitaka meat...

 

This brings curiosity about what material was used to write the Tripitaka.  Was it papyrus, like they used for the Bible, or birch bark, or parchment?

Parchment would be the closest to meat, but 2000 years later it would be quite dry and tasteless.  Worse than the charki they made by drying meat to preserve it before modern freezers become available.  Would there be any spiritual blessings from eating Tripitaka meat?  Can they enter through the eyes, the ears, the mouth... ?

 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_Sanzang

Quote

Tang Sanzang is constantly terrorised by monsters and demons because of a legend which says that one can attain immortality by consuming his flesh because he is a reincarnation of a holy being.

 

鍾意就好,理佢男定女

 

never argue with the guests. let them bark all they want.

 

结缘不结

不解缘

 

After I have said what I wanna say, I don't care what you say.

 

看穿不说穿

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fab said:

 

I enjoyed reading about Tang Sanzang, a fantastic story that brought me back to my childhood.   And it brought to mind another story of consuming the flesh of a holy being.  As a Catholic child I learned of the sacrament of the Eucharist,  and every Sunday I ate the body and drank the blood of god Jesus Christ.  Then as an adult I learned that in the Eucharist we eat and drink REAL flesh and blood (of course miraculously it does not look like that, haha).  All this makes me think with nostalgia:  "it would be so nice if all this were true".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/27/2019 at 3:46 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

You are right, but Buddhism may not have come even close to the distortion from the original message that happened to Christianity.  Christ said "love each other",  and what happened is an Apostle Paul that wrote horrible things about some alleged gay people he met in Rome plus his opinion that homosexual acts deserve death.  And today's churches, starting with the Catholic and continuing with the plague of televangelism, have been bashing LGBTQs with sinfulness like their bottom lines depend on it.  Fortunately, serious churches (not televangelist cults) seem to be walking back on this.

 

Thank you,  I do many pointless things.  I wish I could delve into the Eternal Transcendental as easy as you can do.  But I am a simple person with a severe case of agnosticism.  Before venturing into the extremes of time and space,  and ignorant of the HOW of rebirth and karma, I am still dealing with WHY by a little question:    why we need to keep suffering after death?.  Why should there be a need for repeated lives with their sufferings?  Why cannot it all end with our known one time death,  and at this time we reach nirvana, if this needs to be?


The only thing worthy of taking away from Christianity, is the precept of Christ Consciousness. I would say it is a pretty new way of saying Buddha-like! haha.

I find several problematic things with reincarnation actually. Things that do not add up, and stick out glaringly like a sore thumb. When you look at reincarnation, don't you just have a little voice within reminding you not too take it too seriously, because deep down, you can feel in your soul that it is the machination of Man. A way for humans to kind of make sense of something divine, that it becomes a clumsy concept of transactional subtraction/ addition. It is just so contrived.

Why not stop worrying about what comes after your death? And focus on the now, the aliveness of this moment. When death comes, it will come. And whether there is nothing beyond that, or if you are reborn as a housefly, those are beyond your earthly concerns.

 

So the best way is often simplest. Dont worry about what has passed, nor what is to come. Just commit to now, and whatever it brings, and whatever path it leads you to, is the one you should be on. The only thing standing in our way often times is the cynicism, self-ridicule and the lack of faith.

 

Once you learn to silence this, and maybe channel them differently, there is no obstruction from you to acknowledge your sufferings, accept, work through them. When you are free from then, often the path then leads you to help others. This is the thing about suffering, it doesn't necessarily mean it's painful, it's just a path we have to walk to get somewhere else. We are so hung up on the pain that we forget its divine purpose.

 

Without suffering, the buddha would have never awoken. So in this view, is Suffering good or bad? 

🌑🌒🌓🌔🌕🌖🌗🌘🌑

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tomcat said:


The only thing worthy of taking away from Christianity, is the precept of Christ Consciousness. I would say it is a pretty new way of saying Buddha-like! haha.

I find several problematic things with reincarnation actually. Things that do not add up, and stick out glaringly like a sore thumb. When you look at reincarnation, don't you just have a little voice within reminding you not too take it too seriously, because deep down, you can feel in your soul that it is the machination of Man. A way for humans to kind of make sense of something divine, that it becomes a clumsy concept of transactional subtraction/ addition. It is just so contrived.

Why not stop worrying about what comes after your death? And focus on the now, the aliveness of this moment. When death comes, it will come. And whether there is nothing beyond that, or if you are reborn as a housefly, those are beyond your earthly concerns.

 

So the best way is often simplest. Dont worry about what has passed, nor what is to come. Just commit to now, and whatever it brings, and whatever path it leads you to, is the one you should be on. The only thing standing in our way often times is the cynicism, self-ridicule and the lack of faith.

 

Once you learn to silence this, and maybe channel them differently, there is no obstruction from you to acknowledge your sufferings, accept, work through them. When you are free from then, often the path then leads you to help others. This is the thing about suffering, it doesn't necessarily mean it's painful, it's just a path we have to walk to get somewhere else. We are so hung up on the pain that we forget its divine purpose.

 

Without suffering, the buddha would have never awoken. So in this view, is Suffering good or bad? 

 

I agree.  What I find valuable in Christianity is the philosophy in Christ's teachings, which may not have been entirely his own, but this is immaterial.  All the rest is power grabbing by the Christian organizations.  

 

Buddhism is different.  Its principles are easy to speculate when searching for existential explanations that put everything in its place.  Its main grace is in resolving the pursuit of justice.  We all ultimately get what we deserve, which does not seem to happen in normal life.  Somehow, organized Buddhism has taken rebirth and karma from the easy thoughts of speculation into a heavy belief.  And here came the four pillars of this,  the ten rules of that,  the seven principles of such,  etc. etc. all nicely enumerated.  (these compete with the ten commandments of Judaism,  a ridiculous enumeration of heterogeneous things that tries to combine religious compulsion with natural morality).  And the conversion into heavy belief came with an attraction, a premium to the followers which is the promise of nirvana and its eternal peace. 

 

Buddhism is more honest than other beliefs in that it is pragmatic,  it only goes as far as is necessary to attain its goals.  Other religions try to cover everything with their fantastic stories, like Judaism with the book of Genesis and Christianity with the addition of the Apocalypses for the end of times.  There is nothing we Christians should not know.  Ask a priest, pastor anything, and he will have a religious answer.  There is nothing like "this knowledge is superfluous", like the Buddha allegedly said.  At most they will say  "This is a Mystery hidden in the mind of God". 

 

You are right that enlightenment comes from suffering.  What lead me to this "new Buddhism" is the realization of how equally insignificant we all are and therefore our acts are insignificant. Instead of seeing good and bad people, one sees fellow pals trying to get the best out of this imperfect life that burdens us. The killing of six million people in gas chambers was insignificant,  like we kill millions of bacteria with one dose of antibiotics.  Hitler was like all of us,  a troubled individual with some insane shit he unloaded on the poor Jews. In the end, what punishment makes sense to give to this person who was a nothing ?

 

After bringing in the typical "Hitler" argument,  it is easy to see that all the good and evil we normal people do are not worth an elaborate supernatural principle that makes sure that each of the billions of humans gets their books of deeds balanced out.  What we deal here is not more than play money.  If at the end of our lives all our physical issues,  all our emotional issues are resolved by bringing them to and end, leaving us resting in peace, this should not disturb the Universe.  And what IS this that is left resting in peace?  LOL!  this is rich material for further speculation.  :thumb:

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LeanMature said:

I was told one can still eat meat as long as one did not order it to be killed for consumption. Avoid killing does not mean avoid eating meat.

 

In today's world we can be totally dissociated from this issue.  One can eat all the meat in the world as long as one has the money to buy it, without any moral issue.

We rarely think that meat comes from living animals  :o  

We rarely order an animal to be killed to eat it.   This is left for those who go to fine restaurants and choose the live lobster they want to eat.  Yuck!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

In today's world we can be totally dissociated from this issue.  One can eat all the meat in the world as long as one has the money to buy it, without any moral issue.

We rarely think that meat comes from living animals  :o  

We rarely order an animal to be killed to eat it.   This is left for those who go to fine restaurants and choose the live lobster they want to eat.  Yuck!

 

 

The right word is moderate.  Eat too much meat is bad for your health too, moral issue aside.

Don't read and response to guests' post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buddhism is concerned with sufferings while sentient beings are alive but not with the afterlife. 

 

In general theravada buddhists and Tibet buddhists  are not vegetarians.  Only Chinese mahayana buddhists  are mostly vegetarians. 

鍾意就好,理佢男定女

 

never argue with the guests. let them bark all they want.

 

结缘不结

不解缘

 

After I have said what I wanna say, I don't care what you say.

 

看穿不说穿

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Bang

E=mc2

 

Don't these help explain the basis of karma, spirits, saints, incarnation, reincarnation, assumption, genesis, rapture, Shiva, prayer, change-resistance-suffering, Ego, afterlife, Bible,  & & etc.  ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Guest Ergo said:

Big Bang

E=mc2

 

Don't these help explain the basis of karma, spirits, saints, incarnation, reincarnation, assumption, genesis, rapture, Shiva, prayer, change-resistance-suffering, Ego, afterlife, Bible,  & & etc.  ?

 

Are you comparing nature and physics, which are real,  with all the other stuff which is imagination, speculation, belief?

Or do you know of an "explanation"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Real? Aren't the borderlines fuzzy? Manmade? Human imagination and invention? Compare 21st century with 11th century. The implications of the two theories mentioned are profound.

 

 

On 7/31/2019 at 8:01 PM, Steve5380 said:

 

Are you comparing nature and physics, which are real,  with all the other stuff which is imagination, speculation, belief?

Or do you know of an "explanation"?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Guest Ergo said:

 

Real? Aren't the borderlines fuzzy? Manmade? Human imagination and invention? Compare 21st century with 11th century. The implications of the two theories mentioned are profound.

 

 

I don't find a problem in considering E=mc2 real.  Real experimental electromagnetism +  a theory that "c" does not change relative to a frame in motion + some math (exact science). And it has been proven in real experiments.  Same with Big Bang,  real astronomical observations without obvious contradictions. Isn't physics nature-made instead of man-made?

 

But the supernatural seems to be man-made. Nothing in it that can be proven.  Even pure thought cannot make a belief real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to say that with E=mc2 conservation of matter and energy, etc. maybe spirits' energies MUST still be in this current universe.

 

Apocalypse, rapture,  creation related to Big Bang.

 

Even mathematics and physics are  human inventions that doesn't fully describe "reality"  eg PI, imaginary numbers, plane vs spherical geometry, quantum theories.  Maybe religions are the "math"  that approximate what we call the metaphysical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conservation of "spiritual energy"  is a nice idea that tells us that "we" don't disappear on death but may be recycled in other living creatures.  But... it is nothing more than speculation.  Take the case of our beloved computer, running such an intelligent program as Windows. If the computer is destroyed, what happens to its soul, the Windows operating system?  Will it reincarnate in another computer?  "We" are the operating system of our body.   A conservation of "we" is not much different from the conservation of the Windows in our computer.  But not all is lost, there is a repository of Windows (the source code in Microsoft's possession) and there is a repository of "we"s in our genes. 

 

When John wrote the Apocalypse,  he surely had no idea of what the universe is,  much less its origins. 

 

Mathematics and physics are true realities to us, which we can perceive with our senses.  The "imaginary" in imaginary numbers is just a name that does not take away the fact that these numbers are the result of a clever mathematical abstract definition that opens up rich and powerful resources to apply to real cases.   There is nothing metaphysical or supernatural in science.

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2019 at 12:11 AM, fab said:

Buddhism is concerned with sufferings while sentient beings are alive but not with the afterlife. 

 

 

Isn't it true that in all living creatures, our suffering ends at the end of life?

What is the purpose of supernatural karma and rebirth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Isn't it true that in all living creatures, our suffering ends at the end of life?

What is the purpose of supernatural karma and rebirth?

 

suffering ends at the end of samsara.

 

karma is cause and effect. The cause in previous life will/may ripe in this life. The cause in this life will /may ripe in next life.

 

The purpose of karma is to for us to understand the cause of sufferings.  

 

The purpose of rebirth or rather, samsara is for us to know that we have a choice to end our sufferings.

 

鍾意就好,理佢男定女

 

never argue with the guests. let them bark all they want.

 

结缘不结

不解缘

 

After I have said what I wanna say, I don't care what you say.

 

看穿不说穿

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, fab said:

 

suffering ends at the end of samsara.

 

karma is cause and effect. The cause in previous life will/may ripe in this life. The cause in this life will /may ripe in next life.

 

The purpose of karma is to for us to understand the cause of sufferings.  

 

The purpose of rebirth or rather, samsara is for us to know that we have a choice to end our sufferings.

 

 

Your answers reveal a lot of good will, which I like.   But they are very personal, a reflection of your ideology.  I could have answered that suffering ends with the entrance to heaven after death.  And then we have two ideologies, which neither of us can prove or justify.  I believe that we can agree about suffering ending at death.  At least the physical and mental suffering. And the spiritual one?  For this we have to be sure that our spirit transcends death.  And then know if it still suffers then or not.  There is no instrument that can measure suffering after death!

 

The cause in previous life....   which previous life?   All we know of previous is that our parents were alive, and they passed life to us with their genes.  Even Buddha would not give opinions about our previous lives and how they all started.  And we don't know the effect today's causes will reflect in future lives,  because...  no one, nothing can know the future except...

... except the clairvoyants who make a profession from telling the future with help of crystal balls, laser lights, sound systems that make weird sounds, and tables that shake.  We just have to content ourselves with the principle of cause and effect in the natural world.

 

The purpose of karma is for us to understand the cause of suffering.....  Why we need to understand it if it can simply disappear?

 

Why does it have to be so complicated?  We don't need a rebirth to end physical suffering,  why we need it to end spiritual suffering?  

 

I sincerely expect that when I die  I won't have any suffering left to endure.  What would be its purpose?  Where does this masochism comes from that wants to keep us suffering after death?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Russ said:

There was somebody,  name John Hick?, who tried to unify the basis of all religion, but had difficulty with bridging Buddhism. Has there been any further progress?  

 

I think  that John Hick's differentiation of Buddhism was in Buddha's  unanswered questions, his position that we don't need to know the answers.  This contrasts with all the other religions who go out of their way to answer everything.  (to their loss of credibility :lol:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Fuwar

There are two main competing theories about how the universe will end - the Big Crunch/Big bang and then the Big Rip/singularity. Eastern religion such as Hinduism interprets that the world is a cycle of birth, death and rebirth. Buddhism is born from the same cultural background.

 

I think it is arguable which religious model ( just lIke cosmology) offers more hope. One where you can try again or one where you reach an immutable, indestructible and eternal form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, fab said:

 

suffering ends at the end of samsara.

 

karma is cause and effect. The cause in previous life will/may ripe in this life. The cause in this life will /may ripe in next life.

 

The purpose of karma is to for us to understand the cause of sufferings.  

 

The purpose of rebirth or rather, samsara is for us to know that we have a choice to end our sufferings.

 

 

@fab I would like to correct you again.

 

1) Suffering only ends when one attains nirvana (attain enlightenment)

 

2) Although Karma can span 3 lifes, it's not neccesary when and what conditions can cause it to ripen.

 

3) Karma is also not a supernatural effect (like laws of gravity, cycle of life) Karma is just a natural force that keeps the samsara wheel turning. To think Karma has a purpose, is as good as saying the purpose of water is to flow around? Purpose of fire is to burn stuff? Purpose of air is to create wind?

 

4) Lastly, rebirth has no purpose too. It's not a choice, most of us never had a choice. Rebirth is a process which Budhha explain through the " dependent originationPratītyasamutpāda. You must understand this statement " if this exists, that exists; if this ceases to exist, that also ceases to exist".

 

To think most have choice, is very delusional. Most beings have no choice, they are driven by their "instinct" which we human call the "heart". We take this false heart as real and we treat this false feelings as real motivation. 

 

“见我身者发菩提心,闻我名者断恶修善,闻我法者得大智能,知我心者即身成佛“ - 不动明王

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Guest Fuwar said:

 

I think it is arguable which religious model ( just lIke cosmology) offers more hope. One where you can try again or one where you reach an immutable, indestructible and eternal form.

 

 

It may not need much arguing to recognize here the superiority of Buddhism over Abrahamic religions like Christianity.  With rebirth, we get a second chance,  a third chance... as many as we need to attain nirvana. It just takes a little more suffering in "remedial" lives if we are slow learners.

 

My native Catholicism taught me that our soul lives forever,  either enjoying eternal heaven or suffering eternal hell. The difference?  A "mortal" sin.  The definition of sins keeps changing, but in my days if I would refuse to attend Mass every Sunday,  this would be a mortal sin, and I would burn in hell for all eternity.  Imagine!  What a nice teaching to give young children!  Of course I never believed that.  It is not difficult to find that this Catholic doctrine is immoral,  completely time-incongruent.  An infinite praise or punishment decided on a conduct that only lasts a short instant in time.  And of course no second chance!

 

The Buddhist doctrine gives us the possibility of multiple chances to make up for any deficiencies we have the first time around.  But here is my big question:  why the deficiencies in our short life have to be "made up"?   A need for justice?  How can a superior force of nature demand "justice" in such imperfect creatures as we are?  That force of nature should be the culpable for making us so imperfect.  I see much more sense in us being allowed to die in peace with our balance of good and bad cancelled together with the physical body,  since it does not have any transcendental importance.

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, all the hairsplitting, the terminology, the sermons, the volumes of scriptures! Try instead to get out of yourself and feel the moment of what is real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • G_M locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...