Buddhists are losers?

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby TheNoBSBuddhist » Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:44 pm

Untrue.

That is nihilism, not Buddhism.
:namaste:

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.



Image

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap."
‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....
User avatar
TheNoBSBuddhist
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Loch Lomond, via the High AND Low road....

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby walkart » Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:03 pm

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:Untrue.

That is nihilism, not Buddhism.


It is the way it is.

I can not say to my body to not aging, get ill or dead, i can not choose my mental formation i can just contamplate those which already arise.
Soo i have no full control of it. If i have not full control of it - it's not belong to me. It's not me, mine, my self.

Nihilism (from Pali Canon point of view) is the view that there is no given, no offered, no fruit of good or bad action, no this life no the next life etc.
walkart
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby TheNoBSBuddhist » Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:12 pm

walkart wrote:
Denisa wrote:In order to lose something, first, one has to posses it (either material or immaterial). Those who goes after gain, status, censure, and pleasure will someday face loss, disgrace, praise, and pain. Therefore one who posses less lose less, perhaps nothing.


Very good reasoning.

Actually nothing is in our possesion. Our body, feeling, perceptions, mental formation, consciousness - all this is out of our full control, so we dont "have" it, it's not our proprety.


you have partial control. So it is partially yours.
To exempt yourself from full control is to say that you are not responsible for everything you think/say/do.

I disagree with your logic.
There is Not-Self.
But there is also Self.
so to a great extent, the body most certainly is yours.
if it is not fully yours, who else controls what happens to it?
:namaste:

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.



Image

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap."
‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....
User avatar
TheNoBSBuddhist
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Loch Lomond, via the High AND Low road....

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby walkart » Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:29 pm

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:
you have partial control. So it is partially yours.
To exempt yourself from full control is to say that you are not responsible for everything you think/say/do.

I disagree with your logic.
There is Not-Self.
But there is also Self.
so to a great extent, the body most certainly is yours.
if it is not fully yours, who else controls what happens to it?


Buddha said that 5 khandhas are not me, mine, my self.

I dont belief in self, in somethink that exist without conditions. I dont find it in any of 5 khandhas.
walkart
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby David N. Snyder » Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:35 pm

In my opinion, Buddhists are not losers by any definition. A loser in unambitious, lazy, not interested in pursuing wealth, career, employment or anything else. Buddhists are not unambitious, since they strive for enlightenment. See my post on the first page of this thread.
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=19532#p273964

They are also not losers in worldly terms either. Many Buddhists are successful in film, sports, politics, business, careers, etc. Of course the majority are middle class or lower. This is true of any demographic group, including Christians, Muslims, Hindus, etc. The rich are called the One Percent for a reason: they are only 1% of the population. Only 1% of Christians are very wealthy. Only 1% of Muslims are very wealthy; etc. etc.

According to this site: http://www.worldwealthcalculator.org/ you only need to make $33,500 per year to be in the top 5%. You need to make $69,000 per year to be in the top 1%. We probably have many DWers who are in the top 1% or top 5%.

You can be poor and still be a winner. As long as you have some wholesome goals and work diligently toward that, you are a winner. A monk can be a winner. A nun can be a winner. A lay person can be a winner. Even the term sotapanna is often described as "stream-winner".
User avatar
David N. Snyder
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8283
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby TheNoBSBuddhist » Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:54 pm

walkart wrote:
TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:
you have partial control. So it is partially yours.
To exempt yourself from full control is to say that you are not responsible for everything you think/say/do.

I disagree with your logic.
There is Not-Self.
But there is also Self.
so to a great extent, the body most certainly is yours.
if it is not fully yours, who else controls what happens to it?


Buddha said that 5 khandhas are not me, mine, my self.

I dont belief in self, in somethink that exist without conditions. I dont find it in any of 5 khandhas.

You practice as you see fit.
:namaste:

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.



Image

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap."
‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....
User avatar
TheNoBSBuddhist
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Loch Lomond, via the High AND Low road....

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby ihrjordan » Wed Jun 04, 2014 2:56 am

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:Untrue.

That is nihilism, not Buddhism.

It's funny because many times the buddha was deemed a nihilist and it's true...
"Ko imaṃ pathaviṃ vicessati, yamalokañca imaṃ sadevakaṃ.
ko dhammapadaṃ sudesitaṃ, kusalo pupphamiva pacessati"
User avatar
ihrjordan
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 2:42 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby Denisa » Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:45 am

ihrjordan wrote:It's funny because many times the buddha was deemed a nihilist and it's true...

nihilism
noun
■(Philosophy)extreme scepticism maintaining that nothing in the world has a real existence


Don't have the reference, but I remember reading Buddha saying something like: "There's nothing whatsoever worth clinging and with a core."
Denisa
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 1:57 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby SarathW » Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:53 am

Denisa wrote:
ihrjordan wrote:It's funny because many times the buddha was deemed a nihilist and it's true...

nihilism
noun
■(Philosophy)extreme scepticism maintaining that nothing in the world has a real existence


Don't have the reference, but I remember reading Buddha saying something like: "There's nothing whatsoever worth clinging and with a core."


Buddha taught about dependent origination.
He reject the idea the existence and non existence which is a belief due to ignorance.
Dependent Origination is not the middle of existence and non existence either.
SarathW
 
Posts: 2726
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby beeblebrox » Thu Jun 05, 2014 4:03 pm

walkart wrote:Buddha said that 5 khandhas are not me, mine, my self.


Hi all,

This is a bit off topic (or maybe not really)... but here's a thought: whose khandhas was he speaking of that were not him, his, or his self?

When we try to perceive someone through the khandhas, it turns out that it's never accurate. When we try to cling to them (such as trying to call a couple of disrobed monks as "losers"), I think it usually creates trouble.

:anjali:
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Jun 05, 2014 4:19 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
walkart wrote:Buddha said that 5 khandhas are not me, mine, my self.


Hi all,

This is a bit off topic (or maybe not really)... but here's a thought: whose khandhas was he speaking of that were not him, his, or his self?

When we try to perceive someone through the khandhas, it turns out that it's never accurate. When we try to cling to them (such as trying to call a couple of disrobed monks as "losers"), I think it usually creates trouble.
Agreed. This whole "loser" business is nonsense.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

dheamhan a fhios agam

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 20080
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby walkart » Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:33 pm

We are losers of unwholesome kamma ans sufferings.
walkart
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:37 pm

walkart wrote:We are losers of unwholesome kamma ans sufferings.
Only if we do the practice, and that certainly has not a thing to do with worldly considerations.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

dheamhan a fhios agam

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 20080
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby walkart » Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:40 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
walkart wrote:We are losers of unwholesome kamma ans sufferings.
Only if we do the practice, and that certainly has not a thing to do with worldly considerations.

it's true ;)
walkart
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby Denisa » Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:48 pm

beeblebrox wrote:...


There are ultimate truths and then there are conventional truths.

When Buddha said one who disrobed due to a woman is similar to a warrior who ran away after losing the battle, one can say Buddha was talking nonsense since there is no person and it is just khandhas. But Buddha was talking about a conventional truth. When robertk started the thread, he was talking about a conventional truth.

If someone always live in ultimate truth then he/she better stay in that stage without peeking to our mundane conventional world. Because for him what's the point trying to perceive us through the khandhas and clinging to what we say!
Denisa
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 1:57 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby Mkoll » Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:46 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
beeblebrox wrote:
walkart wrote:Buddha said that 5 khandhas are not me, mine, my self.


Hi all,

This is a bit off topic (or maybe not really)... but here's a thought: whose khandhas was he speaking of that were not him, his, or his self?

When we try to perceive someone through the khandhas, it turns out that it's never accurate. When we try to cling to them (such as trying to call a couple of disrobed monks as "losers"), I think it usually creates trouble.
Agreed. This whole "loser" business is nonsense.

:goodpost:
Peace,
James
User avatar
Mkoll
 
Posts: 4137
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California, USA

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby beeblebrox » Thu Jun 05, 2014 8:47 pm

Denisa wrote:There are ultimate truths and then there are conventional truths.

When Buddha said one who disrobed due to a woman is similar to a warrior who ran away after losing the battle, one can say Buddha was talking nonsense since there is no person and it is just khandhas. But Buddha was talking about a conventional truth. When robertk started the thread, he was talking about a conventional truth.

If someone always live in ultimate truth then he/she better stay in that stage without peeking to our mundane conventional world. Because for him what's the point trying to perceive us through the khandhas and clinging to what we say!


Hi Denisa,

I think that what I said was conventional, not ultimate. Form, feeling, perception, mental formation, and consciousness are all words based on conventional concepts.

What was the Buddha trying to accomplish when he said that none of them were him, his, or his self?

What did he mean by it?

Denisa wrote:When Buddha said one who disrobed due to a woman is similar to a warrior who ran away after losing the battle


Could you find out where this quote is from, please? It's already been used twice in the thread.

:anjali:
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby culaavuso » Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:55 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
Denisa wrote:When Buddha said one who disrobed due to a woman is similar to a warrior who ran away after losing the battle


Could you find out where this quote is from, please? It's already been used twice in the thread.


Sounds like AN 5.75

AN 5.75: Yodhājīvūpama Sutta wrote:Then there is the case of the monk who can handle the cloud of dust & the top of the enemy's banner, but on hearing the tumult [of the approaching forces], he falters, faints, doesn't steel himself, can't continue in the holy life. Declaring his weakness in the training, he leaves the training and returns to the lower life. What is the tumult for him? There is the case of the monk who has gone to the wilderness, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty building. A woman approaches him and giggles at him, calls out to him, laughs aloud, & teases him. On being giggled at, called out to, laughed at, & teased by the woman, he falters, faints, doesn't steel himself, can't continue in the holy life. Declaring his weakness in the training, he leaves the training and returns to the lower life. That, for him, is the tumult. This individual, I tell you, is like the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust & the top of the enemy's banner, but on hearing the tumult he falters, faints, doesn't steel himself, can't engage in the battle. Some individuals are like this. This is the third type of warrior-like individual who can be found existing among the monks.

Then there is the case of the monk who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy's banner, & the tumult, but when in hand-to-hand combat he is struck and falls wounded. What is the hand-to-hand combat for him? There is the case of the monk who has gone to the wilderness, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty building. A woman approaches him and sits down right next to him, lies down right next to him, throws herself all over him. When she sits down right next to him, lies down right next to him, and throws herself all over him, he — without renouncing the training, without declaring his weakness — engages in sexual intercourse. This, for him, is hand-to-hand combat. This individual, I tell you, is like the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy's banner, & the tumult, but when in hand-to-hand combat he is struck and falls wounded. Some individuals are like this. This is the fourth type of warrior-like individual who can be found existing among the monks.
culaavuso
 
Posts: 1246
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby beeblebrox » Fri Jun 06, 2014 12:58 am

culaavuso wrote:Sounds like AN 5.75


Thank you, Culaavuso. I think that the context makes it a bit different. It didn't sound like the Buddha was being judgmental.

:anjali:
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Postby alan » Fri Jun 06, 2014 2:41 am

No doubt there are some losers who gravitate towards Buddhism. I've met more than a few. It's easy, giving away your mind. Those who follow rules for the sake of nothing other than a sense of order--those who mindlessly accept what they are told in order to feel part of a group. But most people are like that in general, don't you think?

There are others, though. People who are willing to take on the task. Who have felt a touch of clarity and want to pursue it. Buddha taught for their sake.
alan
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests