In Shin Buddhist terms, the practice misses the point in two ways. It defines the central problem to be the need for kuyo rather than the practice of abortion, which in Buddhism is seen as the taking of a life. And it draws a karmic connection between the spirits of dead children and real life problems...
- Elizabeth Harrison 'I can only move my feet towards mizuko kuyo'
This is interesting: Mizuko kuyo, the Japanese Buddhist ceremony for aborted and miscarried fetuses.
Mizuko kuyō - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I wonder if they mean an induced or therapeutic versus a spontaneous abortion. The term "abortion" traditionally has a broader meaning than just deliberate termination of a pregancy.
One would think Buddhists with their traditional reverance for all forms of sentinence and life would consider deliberate abortion in a negative light.
The fetus has a soul, and is living, the taking of its life is the same as taking of any life.
I think you would find that the majority of buddhists would beleave that letting nature take its caurse would be the best action.
couldn't you say that insofar as we are aware of ourselves as being separate to nature, then we are indeed outside it. Isn't this the meaning of The Fall? Where in 'nature' will you find an artificial material like plastic, a computer, a building?
All things have buddha nature this includes a table a plastic chair etc.
All things are connected there is no 'outside' nature as such from what i can gather in my head.
plastic is natural. We just happen to mix some things that don't always find themselves mixed.
It is a 'natrual' thing for humans to want to sperate un-natrual from natraul etc
In my opinion absoloutly everything is the same thing, a total interconnectedness
Science calls it intanglement i think. There is a buddhist saying that is, 'no one is truly enlightend untill all are enlightend.'
Come on. Up until the exact time that humans created this particular compounds, they did not exist. If you went digging through ancient landscapes looking for them, you wouldn't find any. So what does 'natural' mean then? If it means 'everything that exists' then it means exactly nothing at all, and we might as well abandon the word.
---------- Post added 04-18-2010 at 08:58 PM ----------
1.existing in or formed by nature (opposed to artificial): a natural bridge.
2.based on the state of things in nature; constituted by nature: Growth is a natural process.
3.of or pertaining to nature or the universe: natural beauty.
4.of, pertaining to, or occupied with the study of natural science: conducting natural experiments.
5.in a state of nature; uncultivated, as land.
6.growing spontaneously, without being planted or tended by human hand, as vegetation
1. made by human skill; produced by humans (opposed to natural): artificial flowers.
2. imitation; simulated; sham: artificial vanilla flavoring.
3. lacking naturalness or spontaneity; forced; contrived; feigned: an artificial smile.
It is indeed true that Mahayana Buddhism places the enlightenment of all beings ahead of enlightenment for oneself.
You might hold to that definition but I don't. It is nothing different than looking at a bird nest and calling that unnatural. Is it unnatural for a bird to collect twigs, leaves, and grass to build a nest? I have a feeling you will say no. But let's take it a little further. Is it unnatural for a human to take a bunch of sticks, mud and grass to build itself a "nest"? Maybe here you will say no. But you have already claimed that a building is unnatural. So when exactly does a human cross over to the unnatural side? The only thing the human did was refined the building materials. There is absolutely nothing unnatural about that, in fact that is the nature of a human being. It is our nature to refine the things we use as tools. Nothing is excluded therefore everything a human does is natural by nature. It does not matter if it is a human heating a bunch of oil until it separates or rubbing two sticks together to produce heat.
Some do, but not all do. There are some who only strive for self realization and have no intentions of helping to point the way for others.
We don't get to choose our own definitions. Artificial means 'an artifice, something that is made'. I suppose, at a stretch, a bird's nest might be considered an artifice, but I rather doubt it. 'Everything a human does is natural by nature' apart from being tautological is obviously not true. I don't even see the point of the argument.
in which case they are not Mahayana practitioners