I have been familiar with Buddhism since the early 2000's. I was a member of e-sangha for a while but found their fundamentalist approach to Buddhism too exclusivist to me. The way I see it, Buddhism is like a pool. You can dip your toe in the water as much as you like, or you can wade in to the pool as deeply as you like. You get out of it what you put into it. I try to practice Buddhism as a way of life, not some religion that owns an exclusive copyright on truth. (By the way, that is how some moderators at e-sangha presented Buddhism.)
What I like about Theravada Buddhism is that it isn't so encumbered with rituals, deities, esoteric doctrines and such as the other types of Buddhism are. It's very direct and to the point.
I'm hoping to learn more about Theravada Buddhism from this forum so I can lighten my burden in life. When I mention "burden" I mean my attachments.
Hello from Colorado
-
DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17230
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Hello from Colorado
Welcome to Dhamma Wheel!
Regarding e-sangha, please see: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2478" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Hello from Colorado
Greetings,
Welcome to Dhamma Wheel.
Metta,
Retro.
Welcome to Dhamma Wheel.
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
-
Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Hello from Colorado
hi & Welcome to DW
you will find people like that everywhere, or that's how they come across.
you will find people like that everywhere, or that's how they come across.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill