I am a Buddhist and if anyone wants to question my beliefs then they are welcome to do so...

@igm,

what is enlightenment?

@void123,

Awakening to things as they are. By "things" I refer to one's immediate experience of sensations, feelings, thoughts, etc. etc.. These are us. They do not happen to us; they are us. But of course we are now going to embark on competitivee discussions of ideas about things, on the problems of the essential (ontological) nature of material things instead of our immediate awareness of how they appear in/as our lives.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

how do they appear?
how are they really?

2 Replies

@igm,

I am a Christian but I also welcome Buddhism as another religion I would want to practice. What attracts me to this religion is its emphasis of achieving enlightenment and eliminating ignorance as a process to attain nirvana. There are non-Christians who say that they love Christ but are corrupt, swear, steal and take advantage of others. Christians often look down at non-Christians for being pagans and ungodly. Our country is the only Christian nation in Asia but I noticed that we're so corrupt, undisciplined and far behind from those non-Christian countries (Japan, Singapore) who are more prosperous and disciplined.
Christians focus on love and mercy but non-Christians emphasize discipline (Confucianism), peace and enlightenment (Buddhism) this is what attracts me to Buddhism. If my family weren't that strict in keeping religions I would had been converted to Buddhism.

0 Replies

@void123,

i'm gonna assume you don't know

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

That may be the best 'last word' post I've seen.

That's a compliment!

After further review, I've noticed that great 'last word' post is now in the middle. Wasn't as effective as I expected. This never ends.

0 Replies

@void123,

void123 wrote:

how do they appear?
how are they really?

Are you using the discriminating mind? If you are you'll never reach the answer to those questions and if you do they will be false paths.

They rely on the bright Buddha nature the mind that does not move and how they really are is pure, uncreated and do not arise nor cease.

1 Reply

Quote:

Darkmelancholia said: I also welcome Buddhism as another religion I would want to practice.

But is Buddhism a religion?
Wasn't Buddha just an ordinary human who didn't claim to have a divine connection to any gods?

0 Replies

Well I just looked up the dictionary definition of "Religion" and it's-
"The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power.."

so according to that, Buddhism isn't a religion.
Buddha was simply giving us his own thoughts, but Jesus gave us God's, there's the difference!
Jesus said- "For I have not spoken on my own authority; but the Father who sent me gave me a command, what I should say and what I should speak" (John 12:49)

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Krumple wrote:

...They rely on the bright Buddha nature the mind that does not move and how they really are is pure, uncreated and do not arise nor cease.

That's Mahayanist mysticism. It doesn't reflect anything in the Pali Canon that I've found so far. This sort of metaphysical speculation is one reason I won't have anything to do with Mahayana.

2 Replies

@FBM,

As I understand it, the Mahayana version of mystical buddhism is similar to the other versions with addition of the altruistic Bodhisattva ideal. Buddhism is more than a strict (fundamentalist) reflection of the original insights of the Buddha. It has grown over the centuries along various lines of evolution. I think the historical Buddha (Siddhartha Guatama) would be pleased with most of the ways his teachings have evolved

0 Replies

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Krumple wrote:

...They rely on the bright Buddha nature the mind that does not move and how they really are is pure, uncreated and do not arise nor cease.

That's Mahayanist mysticism. It doesn't reflect anything in the Pali Canon that I've found so far. This sort of metaphysical speculation is one reason I won't have anything to do with Mahayana.

The Mahayana was the final teaching. It is completely inline with the Buddha's fundamental insight. The problem is that some people are under the impression that everything the Buddha said was meant for them. This is not the case. All Dharma talks have a specific subjective as it's target and if you are not that subject, no only will you not understand the Dharma talk but even if you think you understand it, it will have very little impact on your awakening. The Mahayana is not an inferior vehicle, it is the completion of the Buddha's Dharma.

For example the founding of the Pureland School was necessary because some beings only want to put in very little to no effort in their pursuit of Buddhahood. If all they have to do is recite a Buddha's name then that is all the effort they want to put towards awakening. The Buddha's are well aware of the minds of sentient beings and many sentient beings are lazy, they want quick results with little to no effort. Taking advantage of this weak mindset a method to attract these weak minds would allow these beings a path of slow awakening and that delivers them to the Pureland so they will carry out the Bodhisattva path gradually to full enlightenment.

3 Replies

@Krumple,

Excellent post, very well stated.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Krumple, do you accept the claim by Mahayana apologists that the Mahayana sutras were kept for 500 years in the "land of the nagas" before being released back into humanity by demi-gods and/or spirits?

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Krumple wrote:

The Mahayana was the final teaching. It is completely inline with the Buddha's fundamental insight. The problem is that some people are under the impression that everything the Buddha said was meant for them. This is not the case. All Dharma talks have a specific subjective as it's target and if you are not that subject, no only will you not understand the Dharma talk but even if you think you understand it, it will have very little impact on your awakening. The Mahayana is not an inferior vehicle, it is the completion of the Buddha's Dharma.

For example the founding of the Pureland School was necessary because some beings only want to put in very little to no effort in their pursuit of Buddhahood. If all they have to do is recite a Buddha's name then that is all the effort they want to put towards awakening. The Buddha's are well aware of the minds of sentient beings and many sentient beings are lazy, they want quick results with little to no effort. Taking advantage of this weak mindset a method to attract these weak minds would allow these beings a path of slow awakening and that delivers them to the Pureland so they will carry out the Bodhisattva path gradually to full enlightenment.

i appreciate that Buddhist fundamentalist doctrine is more peaceful than its religious competitors, but it is at least as dogmatically proscriptive -- please, let me know when your enlightenment raises you above making snarky remarks about your less enlightened fellow travelers.

1 Reply

@Razzleg,

Razzleg wrote:

i appreciate that Buddhist fundamentalist doctrine is more peaceful than its religious competitors, but it is at least as dogmatically proscriptive -- please, let me know when your enlightenment raises you above making snarky remarks about your less enlightened fellow travelers.

There was nothing snarky.

The difference between theravadin and mahayana traditions is that the first is meant for key mentalities and the later for a much broader less specific mindset. To put it into an analogy to help explain what I mean it would be like a fisherman using either a fishing pole or a fishing net. The first tool the pole only can catch one fish at a time, this is the theravadin tradition. The teachings were meant to catch one at a time with specific teachings meant specfically for the individual. The later method using the net is meant to catch non specific individuals all at once. This is why there "seems" to be drastic differences in their make up. As some might say mahayana is heavily dogmatic while theravadin sticks strictly to the core teachings.

Here is the thing. If you have heard the teachings of the four noble truths and have not awaken? When will you? If you have not awakened to the four noble truths then have you awakened to the teachings of the twelve links of dependent origination? If they did not awaken you when will you? Maybe you think you need to perfect the ten perfections first? Maybe you think you have not meditated enough yet? How long is it going to take you, ten years? Twenty years? Never? Because you think there is nothing that happens? You just understand the Dharma and put it into practice the best you can until you die and game over? You tried your best? If none of the core teachings have caused you to awaken then what will? It isn't a gradual process.

This is why Mahayana is necessary. It IS within the Buddha's fundamental insight. It is NOT dogma. Sure some schools have heavily lumped a lot of rituals in with it but the core teachings are still available.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Interesting, and as far as I know, valid points. But I personally feel that enlightenment is not such an extraordinary thing as religious literature hyperbolically suggests. It seems to me that it is consistent with a view of the content of ordinary mind that is embraced just as it presents itself, not something that is esoterically added to experience. Meditation enables us to maintain a posture of total acceptance of and non-interference with what is happening right now--without cleverness.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

The above statement can be very misleading. It seems to say that enlightenment is no different from suffering. In a way that is so, but it is a mental or spiritual posture in which one accepts at a profound level whatever is the case at any on-going moment, even what we normally consider misery and pain. When these are accepted and seen for what they truly are they cease to be suffering, in the Buddhist sense of dukkha. Indeed, when we wish to live totally without moments of missery and pain, that is when suffering begins. Dukkha is the frustration of dissatisfaction with life. Enlightenment is, among other thngs, contenment with Reality on its terms.
Perhaps it sounds paradoxical but Dukkha reflects a kind of idealism and enlightenment a kind of profound realism.

0 Replies

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Krumple, do you accept the claim by Mahayana apologists that the Mahayana sutras were kept for 500 years in the "land of the nagas" before being released back into humanity by demi-gods and/or spirits?

I am a Buddhist and if anyone wants to question my beliefs then they are welcome to do so...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know