limit the influence of secular buddhism

Tell us how you think the forum can be improved. We will listen.

should the influence of secular buddhism be limited on this forum?

yes - explain how
22
67%
no - explain why
11
33%
 
Total votes: 33

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by mikenz66 »

salayatananirodha wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 3:29 am he's the only one on my foes list, but when he comments often i end up reading some of his stuff.
Since the cessation of those posts seems to be unlikely I suggest applying sense restraint to them... :tongue:
And how does someone guard the sense doors?
When a mendicant sees a sight with the eyes, they don’t get caught up in the features and details.
If the faculty of sight were left unrestrained, bad unskillful qualities of desire and aversion would become overwhelming. For this reason, they practice restraint, protecting the faculty of sight, and achieving its restraint.
https://suttacentral.net/sn35.120/en/sujato
:heart:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,

Well said - in conformity with both the Dhamma and the Terms Of Service.

:anjali:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"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."
TRobinson465
Posts: 1783
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by TRobinson465 »

retrofuturist wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 3:40 am Greetings,
TRobinson465 wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 3:33 am What i asked was how did you get the idea that denying rebirth completely was one of the teachings the Buddha reserved for monastics
This was not said. You are fake news, which is ironic given that you compared me to Fox News.

Similarly, your inability to comprehend what I actually said, renders the remainder of your indignant papanca moot and irrelevant.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Well what you actually said was this
To me this current hoopla has nothing whatsoever to do with Secular Buddhism or even "denying rebirth" - it is these two sets of teachings being misrepresented and pitted against each other - the Dhamma taught "to those gone forth" and the Dhamma taught to "white-clothed laypeople".

There is no need for us to take sides between those two, and I respect both, because the Buddha taught both, as the situation required, per the ability and capability of his audience. Therefore to see certain people suggesting (albeit unwittingly) that we degrade the Dhamma taught to those gone forth and call it Secular Buddhism in order to ostracize it, so that we can defend the Dhamma taught to "white-clothed laypeople" is quite frankly baffling to me. Yet here we are.
although it seems that your inability or perhaps unwillingness to connect whats been said from the entire thread to Secular Buddhism and instead just dismissing it as "going forth" dhamma is probably why this problem has never been solved.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 4:37 am Greetings Mike,

Well said - in conformity with both the Dhamma and the Terms Of Service.

:anjali:

Metta,
Paul. :)
For me It's a simply a necessary last resort after witnessing many years of incessant trolling. It would waste far too much valuable time to actually read all of those posts.

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
TRobinson465 wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 4:40 am although it seems that your inability or perhaps unwillingness to connect whats been said from the entire thread to Secular Buddhism and instead just dismissing it as "going forth" dhamma is probably why this problem has never been solved.
As I've said above, the member who is the basis of Salayatananirodha's complaint is not a Secular Buddhist. That is a straw man which has been used as the rationalisation for creating a whole thread aimed at vilifying someone who reads the Suttas differently to the kind of Western mainstream presentations of Theravada done by the likes of Bhikkhu Bodhi, Thanisarro Bhikkhu et.al.

We have different views on what "the problem" is. Frankly, I think intolerance of different perspectives is the root problem, and in saying that, I'm not saying that intolerance lies only on one side of the fence. Yet, it's only one side trying to "other" the other, and exclude it from the Theravada fold.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"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."
TRobinson465
Posts: 1783
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by TRobinson465 »

retrofuturist wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 4:46 am Greetings,
TRobinson465 wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 4:40 am although it seems that your inability or perhaps unwillingness to connect whats been said from the entire thread to Secular Buddhism and instead just dismissing it as "going forth" dhamma is probably why this problem has never been solved.
As I've said above, the member who is the basis of Salayatananirodha's complaint is not a Secular Buddhist. That is a straw man which has been used as the rationalisation for creating a whole thread aimed at vilifying someone who reads the Suttas differently to the kind of Western mainstream presentations of it done by the likes of Bhikkhu Bodhi, Thanisarro Bhikkhu et.al.

We have different views on what "the problem" is. Frankly, I think intolerance of different perspectives is the root problem, and in saying that, I'm not saying that intolerance lies only on one side of the fence. Yet, it's only one side trying to "other" the other, and exclude it from the Theravada fold.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Yes, the last thing we want on DW is whole thread dedicated to vilifying someone/something that reads a few texts differently than the mainstream :thinking:

I hardly consider secular buddhism an insult, let alone a strawman. Most people call Buddhists who deny literal rebirth secular buddhists just because its easier than going into some convoluted explanation of thier views. The same reason ppl say Buddhism is a "religion" or say that Buddhism teaches "reincarnation" (as opposed to rebirth) or when people (obviously not in this forum but maybe other ppl in everyday life) talk about the "soul" instead of the "consciousness stream" or whatever. Its not because they dont understand Buddhism or are practitioners of the lower "white-clad laypeople" Dhamma, its because its the easiest way for them to convey thier point and they just want to get on with thier lives rather than sit there and be badgered by Buddhist grammar Nazis on how to convey thier points in a politically correct fashion.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17188
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by DNS »

As has been noted in this thread previously, we have been discussing this behind the scenes in the moderator sub-forum. It was a very close vote, only by one vote, but the "Yea's" have it over the "Nay's" that a change in the terms of service was indeed needed. I won't say how each admin or mod voted, but I don't mind saying that I voted "Yea."

We don't believe another sub-forum is needed, as there probably is not that much interest in secular Buddhism here. However, we are adding the following to the Terms of Service:
3.j. Excessive posting against core Theravada principles, including kamma, rebirth, the awakening of the Buddha will not be allowed except in great rebirth thread and other topics where it may be on-topic, but not in other areas of the forum.
For those of you who may support the "Nay" position, note that this is not censorship, it just moves those posts to the appropriate place away from the main areas of the forum.
TRobinson465
Posts: 1783
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by TRobinson465 »

DNS wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 5:09 am 3.j. Excessive posting against core Theravada principles, including kamma, rebirth, the awakening of the Buddha will not be allowed except in great rebirth thread and other topics where it may be on-topic, but not in other areas of the forum.

I think this was a well thought out rule. including "excessive" in there was a nice touch because it gives leniency to people who just post one offs and aren't in your face hounding people about it, which i think was the main thing that got people annoyed.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by robertk »

TRobinson465 wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 5:26 am
DNS wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 5:09 am 3.j. Excessive posting against core Theravada principles, including kamma, rebirth, the awakening of the Buddha will not be allowed except in great rebirth thread and other topics where it may be on-topic, but not in other areas of the forum.

I think this was a well thought out rule. including "excessive" in there was a nice touch because it gives leniency to people who just post one offs and aren't in your face hounding people about it, which i think was the main thing that got people annoyed.
yes, I thought that was very well thought out as well.
I was also a yea and I would like to thank everyone on this thread for their input - especially salayatananirodha who made the initial suggestion with a detailed opening post and further follow up.
As the Suggestions forum says " Tell us how you think the forum can be improved. We will listen."
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by salayatananirodha »

Sounds good
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

Since we seem to be saying what we like about it, I'll say I don't like about it.

It introduces a subjectivity on what is "core", which could potentially be abused in the future by moderators who take their own personal priorities and interpretations as "core" and use this as the basis to punish those who disagree with them. Anyone who was a member here circa 2015 knows very well that this can happen. We're just fortunate for now that the current batch of moderators are unlikely to abuse it in such a way, but you never know who will be your next overlord, taking it upon themselves to decide for you and other members what is "core".

As they say, be careful what you wish for... One day your authentic understanding of the Dhamma might fall on the wrong side of someone else's arbitrary designation of what is "core". Good luck.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"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."
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by BrokenBones »

Hi Paul

I don't see it quite as grim as that. We're not dealing with different interpretations of jhana or Vism. influenced thinking which may or may not have a grounding in the suttas or if the commentaries are the words of the Buddha etc... such things are obviously up for debate within the appropriate forum and in the appropriate thread... we're talking about the constant derailing of multiple threads with a View that is in direct opposition to the View taught by the Buddha as part of the 8 fold noble path (you can't get more intrinsic than that). It shouldn't be hard to understand that this is intolerable.

The Buddha wasn't really into free thought within the Sangha... it was his way or the highway. Now, obviously, as laypeople we are not held to such high standards but as a Theravadin forum it should have certain expectations of its members.

If certain members want to question this vital aspect of the Buddha's teaching then let them start a thread dedicated solely to this and confine their 'enlightened wisdom' to posting in it about how stupid the rest of us are.

I think the revised TOS is appropriate and avoids the ridiculous banning that you talk about. I'm all for free speech but the speech should be appropriate (not bullying, abusive or passive aggressive), at the right time (not on every other thread) and on this particular forum... words that are consistent with the fundamental teachings of the Buddha i.e. 8 fold path.

As an example... the lite v hard jhana debate... plenty to discuss and argue about there... but both sides agree on Jhana's place within the path... neither side (I assume) would disavow jhana and would indeed view it as integral to the Buddha's teaching... Dhamma 101.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
BrokenBones wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 7:13 am I don't see it quite as grim as that.
I see from your member ID that you've been a member here since 2018. As such, you've never had to concern yourself with the purges here in 2014/15, nor presumably prior to that at E-Sangha in 2007/08 where Dharma policing and the insta-banning of anyone who understood the Dharma differently to the chief administrator, was institutionalized as part of the forum culture.

Do not take for granted the freedoms that you have to discuss the Dhamma here at DWT. It's understandable that you may not recognise or understand the hard-fought battles that took place (nor the friendships lost) which gave you that freedom, but it would be wrong to think such freedoms occur organically and naturally just because you have "Buddhists" in charge.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and as this topic itself has shown, there's no shortage of Buddhists who would dearly love to censor, admonish and cut down other Dhamma practitioners and cast them into the wilderness for the thought-crime of understanding matters differently. As for me, I believe it's best if people can openly and respectfully share their opinions with one another and then individuals can make up their own mind on what is correct, relevant and true... but then, I guess I think differently. :smile:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"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."
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by Aloka »

retrofuturist wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 6:01 am Greetings,

Since we seem to be saying what we like about it, I'll say I don't like about it.

It introduces a subjectivity on what is "core", which could potentially be abused in the future by moderators who take their own personal priorities and interpretations as "core" and use this as the basis to punish those who disagree with them. Anyone who was a member here circa 2015 knows very well that this can happen. We're just fortunate for now that the current batch of moderators are unlikely to abuse it in such a way, but you never know who will be your next overlord, taking it upon themselves to decide for you and other members what is "core".

As they say, be careful what you wish for... One day your authentic understanding of the Dhamma might fall on the wrong side of someone else's arbitrary designation of what is "core". Good luck.

Metta,
Paul. :)
:goodpost:
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: limit the influence of secular buddhism

Post by Aloka »

retrofuturist wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 8:08 am Greetings,
BrokenBones wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 7:13 am I don't see it quite as grim as that.
I see from your member ID that you've been a member here since 2018. As such, you've never had to concern yourself with the purges here in 2014/15, nor presumably prior to that at E-Sangha in 2007/08 where Dharma policing and the insta-banning of anyone who understood the Dharma differently to the chief administrator, was institutionalized as part of the forum culture.

Do not take for granted the freedoms that you have to discuss the Dhamma here at DWT. It's understandable that you may not recognise or understand the hard-fought battles that took place (nor the friendships lost) which gave you that freedom, but it would be wrong to think such freedoms occur organically and naturally just because you have "Buddhists" in charge.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and as this topic itself has shown, there's no shortage of Buddhists who would dearly love to censor, admonish and cut down other Dhamma practitioners and cast them into the wilderness for the thought-crime of understanding matters differently. As for me, I believe it's best if people can openly and respectfully share their opinions with one another and then individuals can make up their own mind on what is correct, relevant and true... but then, I guess I think differently. :smile:

Metta,
Paul. :)

:goodpost: :clap:
Locked