Why I am not a Buddhist
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
pray/not pray, believe/not believe, Mahayana/Theravada, etc. at the end of the day, if one's practice helps them upholding the silas of not killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, and indulgence, or if it helps one progressing further on the 8NP, then that's good practice. One word of advice I'd like to offer to that young fellow in the blog is to have some patience and a more thorough observation beyond the superficial rituals and forms of practice. If the praying/ritual part does make one become a filial son, a faithful husband, a responsible father, or a loyal friend, then isn't it a bit hasty (maybe even unfortunate) for those youths and educated to abandon Buddhism, be it Theravada or Mahayana?
-
- Posts: 939
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
I think that's good you haven't encountered this in Theravada... but even then I hope that you'll still continue your practice. It's really the only thing that matters in the end.Digity wrote: It just seems like it's more prevalent in Mahayana Buddhism. The first few Buddhist center I went to were Mahayana and I remember one of them talking about how we needed to pray more, because enlightenment was too hard...or something like that. I remember just thinking it was a silly comment and starting to sound too "religiousy". The Theravada teachings are way more in line with the Buddha's original teachings. I guess everyone needs to choose the path that suits them the most.
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
If this "I" is conditioned by "a buddhist", it is.ground wrote:"I" is not "a buddhist", never has been and never will be.pilgrim wrote:This very much describes why youths and the educated are leaving Buddhism in many parts of Asia, and partly why Theravada is increasingly appreciated.
http://warforscience.wordpress.com/2010 ... -buddhist/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Like to hear your comments..
If this "I" is conditioned by "The Dhamma", there is no "I".
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
Anyway we all practice the same meditation, we work with same fenomena, and we have all liberation like knowledge.santa100 wrote:pray/not pray, believe/not believe, Mahayana/Theravada, etc.
Form change, nature still.
About division of teachings
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
-
- Posts: 939
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
I think you're both right.DAWN wrote:If this "I" is conditioned by "a buddhist", it is.ground wrote:"I" is not "a buddhist", never has been and never will be.pilgrim wrote:This very much describes why youths and the educated are leaving Buddhism in many parts of Asia, and partly why Theravada is increasingly appreciated.
http://warforscience.wordpress.com/2010 ... -buddhist/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Like to hear your comments..
If this "I" is conditioned by "The Dhamma", there is no "I".
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
All fenomena depends on what we mean by "I".beeblebrox wrote:
I think you're both right.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
-
- Posts: 939
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
I think that might be a topic for another thread... let's not derail this one.DAWN wrote: All fenomena depends on what we mean by "I".
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
Actualy it is.beeblebrox wrote:I think that might be a topic for another thread... let's not derail this thread.DAWN wrote: All fenomena depends on what we mean by "I".
Question :"Why I am not Buddhist?"
Response: "Because, that is called "an Buddhist", was not the condition of your "I". This why, "you" are not "Buddhist"."
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
-
- Posts: 939
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
"I" has nothing to do with it, period... or else we would be focusing on the wrong thing. It's illusory. Believing in that kind of perception will only contribute to the dukkha... whether it's coming from either side, including yours.
You said that there's no "I" in the Dhamma. Well, why don't you try to view things in that way now? You seem to be fixated on it... even to the point where you believe that it's part of the topic. The word "I" has nothing to do with the person's issue who wrote that blog.
I think that the real issue here is that he encountered something which he didn't like, and then some people in here were concerned enough about it to discuss that. "I" had no part in this... never has been, and it never will be. It's just a word that a guy used.
You said that there's no "I" in the Dhamma. Well, why don't you try to view things in that way now? You seem to be fixated on it... even to the point where you believe that it's part of the topic. The word "I" has nothing to do with the person's issue who wrote that blog.
I think that the real issue here is that he encountered something which he didn't like, and then some people in here were concerned enough about it to discuss that. "I" had no part in this... never has been, and it never will be. It's just a word that a guy used.
Last edited by beeblebrox on Sun Nov 04, 2012 9:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
You are right. My "I" depends on Dhamma, this why i see it even when there isn't.beeblebrox wrote:
You said that there's no "I" in the Dhamma. Well, why don't you actually start to try view things in that way now? You seem to be fixated on it... even to the point where you believe that it's part of the topic. The word "I" has nothing to do with the person's issue who wrote that blog.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17232
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
Some people call themselves Buddhist.DAWN wrote: If this "I" is conditioned by "a buddhist", it is.
If this "I" is conditioned by "The Dhamma", there is no "I".
Some people call themselves a follower of The Dhamma.
"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"
As far as I am concerned, they are the same. Others may see it differently or just want to avoid the big "R" label, which is fine; for me they are the same.
The young man in the blog link in the OP is arguing against Buddhism as it is practiced, not as how the doctrine is brought out in the Suttas. For example, there are numerous references against amulets, superstition, divinity, palm reading, etc.
Of course Buddhism does have some mythological elements brought in from Brahmanism, but they are not essential teachings of dukkha and the way out of dukkha.
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
Complitely agree.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
Hi, Digity,Digity wrote:Fair enough. It just seems like it's more prevalent in Mahayana Buddhism. The first few Buddhist center I went to were Mahayana and I remember one of them talking about how we needed to pray more, because enlightenment was too hard...or something like that. I remember just thinking it was a silly comment and starting to sound too "religiousy". The Theravada teachings are way more in line with the Buddha's original teachings. I guess everyone needs to choose the path that suits them the most. I can't really say much else.James the Giant wrote:I have lots of Theravada friends from Thailand and Malaysia, and they pretty much believe the same things in the same way as that guy rebelled against. It's not just the Mahayana.Digity wrote:I'm not a fan of Mahayana Buddism.
James is absolutely right about Theravada in traditionally Buddhist countries in SE Asia (and probably just as much in China and Japan, too). I think your perception of the difference in religiosity of the two schools reflects the way they have developed in the West - Theravada without so much of the 'cultural baggage' that Mahayana, especially Vajrayana, carried with it.
The difference may be because Theravada has been transmitted to us largely by Westerners while Mahayana has come more often via Asian teachers - especially the Tibetan diaspora - but that's just a guess.
Kim
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
I also posted the link to a local Buddhist discussion group and some of the responses I received was some thing like, "He is ignorant . He wasn't really a Buddhist in the first place. He didn't make an effort to investigate further". I am struck by the fact that many Buddhists want to spread their religion but would place the blame on the person if he fails to believe. Somethimes comments would go further to say his wisdom is weak, he did not have good karma , etc. They fail to see that the guy picked up all these wrong beliefs and practices from other Buddhists, so who is at fault here?
In Malaysia, becoz Theravada is relatively new and being developed on the back of traditional Chinese Mahayana, thankfully, we also have less of the cultural folk religious elements.
In Malaysia, becoz Theravada is relatively new and being developed on the back of traditional Chinese Mahayana, thankfully, we also have less of the cultural folk religious elements.
Re: Why I am not a Buddhist
It is just the felt self's self-protection strategypilgrim wrote:... "He is ignorant . He wasn't really a Buddhist in the first place. He didn't make an effort to investigate further". I am struck by the fact that many Buddhists want to spread their religion but would place the blame on the person if he fails to believe. ...