Buddhism (Moderated Discussion)

[Nick]

Hi Beth,

This is a nice thread. I have to stop by these religion forums more often, I guess. All I wanted to say was that for about five years I attended the Zen Center of Los Angeles (back in the 90's) and went through Jukai.

Now I still receive a monthly newsletter, but I don't get down there at all anymore. The zen center was as close to buddhism as I came. Zen seems to have a nice philosophy to it with less ritual than say, Tibetan buddhism. There are people who attended the zen center that seem caught up in ritual however. Also, there is no sacred text that I know of in buddhism, and I liked that. The zazen (meditation) was a nice experience for me. However I drifted away from it as my path does not seem to be one attached to any particular religious type belief system, although I can see how for others it may be helpful.


Very best,

[travelinbob]

What I like about the Buddhist philosophy is the idea that unhappiness and misery are a result of unfulfilled desires. So in order to attain peace and happiness it is important to stop desiring these things and they will not cause unhappiness. Unlike christianity, that fights temptation of things that lead away from spirituality, buddhism tries to make these temptations irrelevant by seeking spirituality first. Thus morality is a natural result of spirituality and not the other way around.

If you fight temptation, like christians do, these temptations become your unavoidable enemy. But if you make them irrelevant, they are not an obstacle to spiritual growth. In order to make them irrelevant you must sidestepped them and go straight for spiritual enedevours like meditation and service to others. The happiness these endevours bring balances and fullfils the soul. Very peacefull.[]

[Beth]

Nick,

I know what you mean about attachment to any formal religion, I too cannot bring myself to "attach." I have never been much into formal ritual either, but SO many people are.  I know I have rituals that I go through every day, but I guess I prefer to do them in private...I prefer to remain an "independent practitioner"!![]

Travelin':

Wouldn't it be nice if WE COULD ALL understand this?  Then we would all benenfit from the "service to others--by others" and at the same time we would all be "serving our spiritual path."

Good stuff...and good thoughts to leave this thread with!  Thanks!

Peace,
Beth

[Radha]

The one thing I have always thought of is that, Siddartha never said he was a "supernatural being".  His humanity is all the more real to those who follow Zen.  
There is, I feel, a truth in the post that said zen where he practiced was becoming ritualized.  I'm sure they'd give out belts like in Karate if they could.  (In some places.)
My preferance, however, for theoretical concepts will always be the QBL.  The old Rabbis gave deep vision to the inner work that has never been matched, in my opinion.  For practice I will always prefer Zen, especially as delineated in the Surangama Sutra concepts.
When I re-Read "Siddartha" by Herman Hesse, and see how skillfully he weaves the concepts of the sound current into the "stream" he depicts Siddartha as sitting down beside at the end.
That same stream, whether called Shabd Brahm, or "Vav" in Hebraic, is the eternal within us all.  It just IS.
Our zen group, by the way, isn't ritualized so you are always welcome to visit, ha ha.  I'm building my own retreat hut these days, so you are welcome to do your sitting there and help build the "stream" into mine and Siddartha's home.

[travelinbob]

Watch the movie: "Little Buddha". It is pretty good about giving an overall quick view at budhism.

[Nick]

Great movie travelinbob, I have it on dvd and have watched it a number of times. Another good one, along these lines is Kundun. Here is a review:

"Kundun is a rare movie that offers a clear and non-sentimental look at one of the oppressed people in this world. It begins with the search for the 14th Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of Tibet, culminating when a young boy is able to identify the objects that belonged to the 13th Dalai Lama. That boy, Kundun, the re-incarnated Buddha of Compassion, is taken to a monastery in Lhasa and is instructed in the ways of the Buddhist religion.

As he grows older, Communist China, probably in an attempt to handle its burgeoning population, invades Tibet and eventually forces the Dalai Lama to flee to India. The movie really picks up when the Chinese invade, but ends rather abruptly when the Dalai Lama reaches India. But this is where his real quest, to win the liberation of Tibet, really begins.

This isn't a movie for everyone, but it is one that basically sticks to the facts and doesn't really resort to emotional appeal. Even the scenes where we see glimpses of the Chinese putting a gun into the hands of children and making them kill their own parents is handled abruptly and briefly. However, it does have an intellectual appeal, and it is a great history lesson, particularly if you're familiar with what happened with the Dalai Lama after his exile. The music and the cinematography are the icing on the cake as far as this movie is concerned. I highly recommend it."


Very best,

[travelinbob]

Another great movie relating to buhddism is called "Circle of Iron". It was written by Bruce Lee before he died. Its with David CArradine playing multiple characters, and some guy named Cooper as the Seeker. A bit martial artsy but not overly violent. Many great lines and very thought provoking.

I've seen it many times. Hard to find because it is from the mid 70s.

I Highly recomended.

[greatoutdoors]

What is the Buddhist theory of creation? I understand their idea of reincarnation, but haven't run across anything discussing how it all began. Does anyone have anything on that?

[Radha]

As I have mentioned on other posts, the main problem with Westerners assessing Buddha hood is probably their lack of experience in it.
For example, they (and some easterners) refer to Siddartha as though his name was Buddha.  I wasn't and isn't.  Buddha relates more to a specific state of Being.  Siddartha achieved it and then all he said was I did it, and so can you.  He didn't found a religion.  People after him did.  He didn't say he was an exception...he said he was an example.
Reincarnation is not a theory.  However, until you can experience it for your own self, it does remain, for you, just an idea.  One of the great lessons one values after becoming conscious of having lived before is that the DhammaPada is correct.  Also that what you do sets in place a cause...and sooner or later you will be effect of your cause.  All energy in this universe returns to it's source.
Siddartha did address creation, but it is only "legible" to those who have a certain degree of Buddha consciousness realized.  Then they see in his writing where he refers to the principles by which it occurred. If you practice Zen awhile, then read the western Christian writings of Evagrius Ponticus, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen...and the writings of the Eastern Church called the Phylokalia, you'll see they were speaking the same language.  It shows that at one point the west had a chance to study...and didn't.  It's a shame really.

[RandomName]

"Siddhartha Guatama had become Buddha or "he who is enlightened"

I think this is an example of what Radha was talking about. This statement is not a quote, as one would assume it to be. Thats the first mistake. Secondly, HAD BECOME, can apply to a state of being or mind, not a transformation of the physical self,soul,thought patterns,ect.

I personally find everything in Buddhism to make perfect sense, except for the mythical(YES I SAID "MYTH")story about Siddharthas birth. For example, his mother was said to have had a nearby tree lower its branch to support her birth. Also, Siddhartha" he who has acheived his goals", was said to be able to walk and talk, which we all know is extremely farfetched. Notice I say Myth, meaning poossibly true, and farfetched, meaning POSSIBLE. I try to have respect for most religions because sometimes calling particular parts of a religion BS is offensive.
As I said in my post about Islam, I mean no offense to anyone, and all statements are what I understand to be true.

I am trying to sort out some MAJOR beleif issues at this point in my life, so cut me some slack if I get under your skin by mistake. Im trying to have respect for all religions, because i am trying currently to TRULY determine which one I beleive the most, if any.

[Radha]

Yeah, I agree with you.  I'm trying now to get a guy who teaches sanskrit to start teaching me Pali.  Then I can read the earliest writings and maybe escape some more of the myths.  When I read some of the early writing as translated by people with several years training in Vipassana I can see so much more clearly what Siddartha was saying.  I guess that's what I was referring to in the earlier post when I said I disliked the "religion" aspect built around Siddartha's ideas.
Radha

[Usiimers]

It seems to me that most religions lose a lot of their spirit when they become "institutions".  Especially when government and politics become so involved.  There is always that beauty and spiritual depth for those that care to dig.  
Siddhartha is one of my favorite books by the way.  All is Atman...

[greatoutdoors]

I'm still curious as to whether Buddhism has a theory of creation. Does anyone on this forum know? If no reply (I first asked about this in September!) I'll try and find out somewhere and post it here. I occasionally attend a Tibetan Buddhist service in Texas, but I keep forgetting to ask when I'm there. I guess I just hate to admit my ignorance![]

[Gandalf]

A question about Buddhism (which I know next to nothing about!):

Is it the case that there is no 'god' figure in buddhism, like that of the judeo-christian and islamic tradition?

I read that 'buddha' is a state of enlightenment which Siddhartha Guatama discovered and tought for everyone.

So what has happened to him? Its just that I noticed that in Buddhist temples I have seen people praying to statues of Buddha, is he meant to be aware of them in some way and can answer their prayers?  I have read that he is in 'Nirvana' a state of 'bliss and nothingness' in which case he isnt going to be in a fit state to hear anyone!

If someone can 'enlighten' me (pardon the pun) on this one i would appreciate it, oh yeah, the creation theory as well please (if there is one).

Also are there other spirits or 'gods' that one can pray to? Its just that some of my chinese friends seem to refer to 'the gods' or the spirits etc which confuses me as they are buddhists!

Thanks,
Douglas

[Shinobi]

...

[bomohwkl]

When you try to look at what Buddha had said, he never say anything about the existence of God or the theory of creation.

Objectivity was what Buddha seek. Buddha even mentioned to his followers not to worship him.He insisted not to accept his teaching because you respect him. You have to verified by yourself by your self-observation of your own mind and manifestation around you.

It is important to differentiate what Buddha himself had said and what other people had said after Buddha had passed away.

[Gandalf]

Thanks Shinobi & bomohwkl.

I like the idea that he left things like creation and nature/existence of god unsaid, as it leaves the whole area up for debate and personal exploration rather than putting some theory/story down in written dogmatic form as some kind of 'truth'.

Thanks for describing all the realms, so this is why my chinese friends refer to 'the gods', this confused me in the past. I actually dont have a problem with the notion of 'gods' as such, it is just a word, but the monotheistic traditions get really hung up on this word, stating adamantly that there is only one 'true' god all others are false. Angels are not 'gods' etc

Personally I would apply the term 'god' to any being vastly greater in power than myself. I woudnt worship them as such...respect them yes.

I think the issue is that the monotheistic traditions are convinced that the creator of the universe wants us to recognise and worship him and no other, which is a view that I dont actually accept. I think this view is based on the traditional all-too-human power heirarchy system which was common-place at the time these religions were formulated, where you have the king who demands all his subjects are loyal to himself and no others and he is responsible for their wellfare. This power structure has been a common set-up of human societies and I think this concept has been applied to the divine realm as well.

I already subscribe to the idea that many gods or powerful spirits exist in the world and beyond it so I dont have a problem with the buddhic system you describe.

Maybe im wrong but Im sure I have seen Buddha statues in temples being prayed to directly by people.
Does this mean that at least some buddhists revere Buddha directly?

Regards,
Douglas

[Shinobi]

...

[greatoutdoors]

My thanks as well to Shinobi & bomohwkl. Also, Shinobi, thanks for reminding me that "Dharma Center" was the name I was trying to remember -- there is a Dharma Center for the Vajrayana tradition reasonably close to me. Over time I hope to become better informed as to their beliefs.

[Jonas K strand]

hi, i am also0 interestet in buddhism and enjoyed reading the questions and answers. i have read almost nothing about buddhism as a religion but i know things about vipassanameditation from courses and some books. so buddhism is not buddhism to me. the one thing i know is this meditationtechnique of vipassana. (www.dhamma.org)

i once talked with someone who had experience in zen and we just laughed as kids understanding each other perfectly well. so my question is, how can two so very different meditationtechniques come from the same scripts? vipassana is observation of the minds influence on the body and vice versa, and zen is, i guess, so much more mental, at least more not physical. why is this? does anyone know of a good site about zenmeditation?

/jonas

[Shinobi]

...

[blue pearl]

great outdoors Hi,
There is a sutra that although doesnt refer to the creaton of the big bang theory as such but it describes the creation of galxies and universes and also of other beings that were androgenous, but something went wrong for them........I think they ate something !! there is also a very good sanskrit suttra that goes into alot f detail too!!! I shall get back with some links for you!!!
Metta Blue pearl

[samsara]

In regards to ego does using the letter "I" in speech or wordsa automatically mean that it is the ego talking?

                                           Samsara

[Shinobi]

...

[blue pearl]

Yes ,Shinobi ,I agree!!![]
When you practise being mindful in your every day life you become aware that the *I* is not a solid reality just an illusion, but when communicating with another person we say *I* as that is the duality of samsara!! That is why we are here!!  The ego is  made up of the the 5 skhandas or aggregates which is the sensory organs consciousness, always grasping at the world and conceptualising , which is to wrap a thought and label onto something therefore now making it *exist* . It is working with this that we can start to become aware of how the mind works and tricks us into thinking we are a seperate identity. Through meditation and Buddhist practices we can slowly peel back the layers to reveal our inherent Buddha nature, I think once you start there can be no going back . You start off chasing mindfulness and then it ends up on your tail not letting up.  So be mindful in every thing you do[]
Metta Blue pearl