What do you know about Buddhism?

[Zen_Woof]

Yes you are right on this, But how can a person eats all those ducks,Chickens,Goats and still make spiritual progress ? I don't think so. Yes there are other factors too but avoidance of Meat remains the Basic principles to strive for higher spiritual progress.

Ask the Dalai Lama about this. Of course, he never claims to be anything more than a simple monk, which of course begs the question, what is spiritual progress anyway?

Metta,
ZW

 

[Shy21]

I have a question....I don't kow if its been asked or not, but where do people go when they die according to Buddhists?

 

[Zen_Woof]

I have a question....I don't kow if its been asked or not, but where do people go when they die according to Buddhists?

Hello.

I'll try to put this in a nutshell, but please note that it is only my take on the teachings and I could be getting it wrong.

Nutshell version: Buddhists don't believe a permanent soul exists, rather that we are a collection of aggregates. Those aggregates are dispersed after death and then recompiled in another being according to the person's karma. There is a common parable of that of a candle flame. The flame passes onto a new candle but the flame itself is not permanent and unchanging. It is both existent and nonexistent at the same time. Does that make any sense whatsoever?

For a lengthier explanation, I suggest trying something such as buddhanet. I don't know if I can post links here as this is sometimes perceived as proselytizing, but here is one: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/reincarnation.htm (Mods: Please feel free to delete it if you receive any complaints.)

Metta,
ZW

p.s. Happy birthday!

 

[Proud Hindu]

You are one that will NEVER get a positive response from me. I thought I made that perfectly clear in my p.m.

Lol, I'm actually quite flattered. But is that just an excuse cuz you know nothing about Buddhism? Okay, forget me, why don't you tell BuddhistGuy what you know about Buddhism?

 

[Monica child of God 1]

Hi

I just wanted to say that I don't think replacing Christ with X is offensive. We do it all the time.

IC are the first and last letters of "Jesus" in Greek XC are the first and last letters of "Christ."

In IC XC,
Monica

PS: I know a wee bit about Buddhism. I had a good friend, an older woman, when I was in high school who was Buddist. She was a great person

 

[QuantaCura]

When there is enough grains,fruits and vegetables why kill a animal to eat ?? Meat eating for survival is ok, but not for enjoyment. A person needs to eat to survive, there are plenty of vegetation to eat(for survival) why kill animals then ?

Yes Plants are also living, but because you need to eat, it is not a sinful act to eat it.

Couldn't one flip the argument around and say there are plenty of animals to eat, why kill plants? A person needs to eat to survive and if there are plenty of animals around, why kill plants?

Likewise, killing an animal to eat actually spares life, becuase it can no longer go around eating plants or other animals

So therefore the only way to get closer to God is to eat meat; that's the only way to make spiritual progress

 

[Monica child of God 1]

I am a Christian. I do not eat meat or animal products. The factory farming industry is cruel to animals. It also pollutes the environment and pumps us full of antibiotics and chemicals. Factory farms pollute the poorest parts of society harming those that we Christians are supposed to care for the most ("the least of these...").

Cruelty to animals is not God's way. When we eat animals and dairy we take part in cruelty and torture.

"A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal..." Proverbs 12:10

Monica

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste Buddhistguy,


welcome to the forum

i have some slight knowledge of the Buddhadharma. my particular school is the Nyingma school in the Vajrayana Vehicle as found in Tibet, though i also practice some Taoist Spiritual Alchemy teachings as well. they speak to me in a different manner, it seems.

metta,

~v

 

[vajradhara]

I know enough to say that Buddhism is not a religion but just a self-improvement club for atheists. No offence intended to anyone.

actually, you are correct, though not in the way that you suspect

Buddha Dharma isn't a religion... it is a Dharma and Dharmas and religions are different things.

metta,

~v

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste Sefroth,

thank you for the post.

Not Required to be Vegetarian ?? I don't think so, People are giving excuses so that they can continue Eating meat.

kit is actually correct. the Buddha Dharma does not mandate that one be a vegetarian. there are some very specific and strict rules regarding the consumption of flesh and, as a practicle matter, a modern Buddhist has very little chance to be a meat eater due to the strictures placed on consumption of flesh.

it's all spelled out in the Vinya.

naturally, the Vinya is applicable for monks and nuns but, where possible, lay people should uphold and adopt monastic practices to help speed their journey along the path.

metta,

~v

As long as a person, Buys,sells, transport and consumption means they are indirectly killing an animal. When you eat meat you are actually supporting the Killing. From what i know A Buddist is a person who follows Buddha's Teachings of Non-Violence, which includes all living beings. A Person cannot eat meat and hope to make spiritual progress in Life, that is impossible.

that is most of the reasons why most Buddhists are vegetarian. however, remember the cultural millieu in which the Buddha Shakyamuni arose, there were cases there where meat was available which was not killed for the purpose of consumption, not grown to be eaten and all the other restrictions which are to be observed. if the meat met these conditions, it could be consumed.

generally speaking, this isn't much of an issue in the southern reaches of Asia, but when we move into the high plateaus, growing vegetables is problematic, at best.

metta,

~v

 

[vajradhara]

My point is: If you don't like meat... don't eat it... but it's NOT morally wrong to eat meat... any more wrong than it is to eat other living creatures (plants), any way. We need to eat to survive, just like everyone else, it's a fact of nature.

Namaste Gregorian,

er... perhaps you skipped the bit about "sentient" beings? so... find some sentient plants and we can talk

in the Buddha Dharma the precept is to avoid killing sentient beings, plants, rocks and so forth, are not included in this. of course, that does not mean that eco-sensitive views are absent, they simply aren't on the level of precepts.

i have noted that you've asked some good questions... hopefully, someone will have addressed them to your satisfaction. if not, please ask them again and i will proffer an opinion on them.

metta,

~v

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste Gregorian,

well... i see that these weren't answered, so i'll give them a go, if you don't mind

Well, it depends on your definition of religion...

good point. it is difficult to discuss something if we don't know what it is we are discussing. so, what is the definition of religion?

Main Entry: re·li·gion

Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at [size=-1]RELY[/size]

1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : [size=-1]CONSCIENTIOUSNESS[/size]
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith


so, with this definition in mind, both Christianity and Buddha Dharma are religions.

I believe a religion has to answer questions like: 'how did we get here, what happens after we die, is there a higher power/who?'

that seems more like a philosophical position rather than a religious one.

nevertheless, Buddha Dharma takes your question in a different direction than you may initially suspect.

"how did we get here" is, i take it, a reference to all material in the universe, yes? if so, the Buddhist answer is called Interdependent Co-Arising.

"what happens after we die" is a reference to the afterlife of a being, yes? if so, the Buddhist answer is that it would depend on your karma. sentient beings undergo the process of rebirth wherein the mundane aspects of personality and consciousness cease to arise and and, in so doing, condition the next arising aspect of consciousness and so on and so on...

I've never seen Buddhism answer these questions (although, again, I admit to not knowing much about it at all).

fair enough. if you have an interest in looking at some of these things for yourself, www.buddhanet.net is a good site to get started.

Instead, I see Buddhism as a very distinct and honorable set of morals, and guidlines as to how to live life.

it is that, and much more, of course, from our view

From what I've read Buddha isn't anything more than a normal human... albeit one who achieved enlightenment, and therefore someone to learn from and strive to be similar to. Again, these are just from what I've observed, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

we actually have a teaching on this very thing. after Awakening, Buddha Shakyamuni was asked if he was a God? he said "no". he was asked if he was "divine", he said "no". when asked if he was a "human", he said "no". in exasperation, they asked what, exactly, he was. he replied with one word, Awake.

So, would it be possible for someone to follow another religion (say christianity as my example), yet also respect the man named Sidharta Gautama, and learn from his teachings?

sure, from our view, one could be an adherent of any of the worlds religions and put into practice the teachings of Bodhichitta and so forth, without having to take formal refuge and be a Buddhist

You say Buddha recognized that there are divine beings, yet he didn't specify the nature of heaven (or wherever a diety resides), so could not both christianity(or any other 'theism') and Buddhism both be accurate? Or is Buddhism a 'theism' in some way I'm not understanding?

he commented on the nature of heaven for all the heavenly beings. please try to bear in mind the cultural millieu in which this took place. as such, the concept of Heaven and God and all of that was well understood. the Indian views of deity are quite sophisticated.

in the Buddhist view of things, there are 6 (relative) states of rebirth that a sentient being can undergo. three of them are negative and three of them are positive, with the human rebirth being the absolutely best one. in any case, Buddhism is not atheistic in a strict sense since we do not say that deities do not exist. we are atheistic in the sense that we do not believe that there is a Deity from which all things come.

of course, this is simply a reflection of my own understanding of the Dharma, such that it is.

metta,

~v

 

[The Gregorian]

When there is enough grains,fruits and vegetables why kill a animal to eat ?? Meat eating for survival is ok, but not for enjoyment. A person needs to eat to survive, there are plenty of vegetation to eat(for survival) why kill animals then ?

Yes Plants are also living, but because you need to eat, it is not a sinful act to eat it.

Why kill dozens of plants when the death of only one animal is necessary? I'm not seriously trying to say vegetarianism is wrong, everyone's entitled to their opinion, but not eating meat so as not to destroy life doesn't make sense when so much more destruction is caused killing plants.

I am a Christian. I do not eat meat or animal products. The factory farming industry is cruel to animals. It also pollutes the environment and pumps us full of antibiotics and chemicals. Factory farms pollute the poorest parts of society harming those that we Christians are supposed to care for the most ("the least of these...").

Cruelty to animals is not God's way. When we eat animals and dairy we take part in cruelty and torture.

"A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal..." Proverbs 12:10

I'm christian too... trust me, I lived in a small town with a LOT of farms and orchards, and the cows are treated MUCH better than the apple trees (look on the side of an apple box, a HUGE percentage will say something about 'yakima' or 'selah' that's where I'm from). True, Cows are keps in a confined space... 40+ acres at a time, and yes they are killed... but apples are packed in to where their roots tangle together. Every year they're horribly mutilated and dismembered until their sexual peak when they're ripped out of the ground, piled up and burned alive. Cows recieve a MUCH more merciful death. As for the pollution... You've never lived across the street from an orchard (as I have), have you? They're ALWAYS spraying pesticides and herbicides and fungisides, etc. etc.

 

[The Gregorian]

Namaste Gregorian,

er... perhaps you skipped the bit about "sentient" beings? so... find some sentient plants and we can talk

in the Buddha Dharma the precept is to avoid killing sentient beings, plants, rocks and so forth, are not included in this. of course, that does not mean that eco-sensitive views are absent, they simply aren't on the level of precepts.

i have noted that you've asked some good questions... hopefully, someone will have addressed them to your satisfaction. if not, please ask them again and i will proffer an opinion on them.

What is 'sentient?' Venus fly traps, among many others can be very easily seen 'feeling' their food etc. Put a house plant by a window so half of it is in the shadow of a wall and your plant will slowly lean toward the warmth. Stab a tree and chemicals change throughout the tree in the same manner that people's chemicals change when we feel pain. So trees don't communicate... cows aren't exactly 'inteligent' themselves. (btw, I'm being silly about this argument, I know there IS a difference between animals and plants, I just try to give vegetarians the same view they point out to us... I have nothing against eating plants... I do so daily.)

As for your definition of religion... You're right. Buddhism IS a very definite belief structure. Under some definitions it can be called a religions. But when people say Buddhism is athiestic, they're not insulting you... Though it's a belief structure, it isn't a theism. It doesn't suggest that NO higher power exists, so it really isn't an athiesm, it just isn't a theism. (I'm certain you've heard these arguments many times, but I'm just learning, and this is how I retain information best. If I say anything offensive, I AM sorry, and please point it out to me. While I have my own views on God, I do believe that Buddhism has very important lessons that I would like to learn.)

You also gave a link to buddhanet (lol, good name, btw.) and I actually came across that site yesterday, I've been reading some.

Feel like explaining any more about the whole 'Interdependent Co-Arising.' thing? I assume by the name everything just 'came to be' or whatnot?

btw, what does 'Namaste' mean?

 

[Monica child of God 1]

cows are treated MUCH better than the apple trees ...True, Cows are keps in a confined space... Cows recieve a MUCH more merciful death. As for the pollution... You've never lived across the street from an orchard (as I have), have you? They're ALWAYS spraying pesticides and herbicides and fungisides, etc. etc.

Organic, pesticide free fruits and veggies are best for the environment and I try to buy them as much as my buget will allow. But a cow eats 25-30 lbs. of grain daily. That grain is grown with pesticides and fungicides that pollute the environment. But the meat produced by that cow feeds far fewer people than if we just ate the grain and plant matter ourselves. It is inefficient to eat meat and it causes more pollution than eating conventionally grown plant products and by passing animal products. Cows also release methane gas into the atmosphere which harms the ozone layer and contributes to global warming.

With regard to cruelty: This is what 120,000 cattle look like from space

There is no shade, shelter, or grass on the ground. All if not most of their God given behaviors have been suppressed by confinement. There is no joy in life for these animals. And if you have ever spent time around a cow, you know that they are sociable, loving creatures. They will come up and lick your hand just like dogs. No dog owner would treat his beloved pet this way. Why should cows be different?

Cattle are ruminants, meaning that they would primarily graze on grass. Cattle in feedlots, however, are fed grain, and are often implanted with a series of steroid hormone implants inserted under the skin behind their ears. It makes them grow faster and has the effect of poisoning the water, as well as every burger eater.

Cattle have four stomachs designed to process the cellulose fibers in grasses. Grain mixed with garbage like chicken feathers and bone meal really isn’t what these beasts are supposed to be eating. The food combined with regular doses of antibiotics cause the cattle to put on so much weight that their internal organs fall out and have to be stuffed back in by the ranch hands. And because it would be too expensive to call a vet out to treat these problems cow hands manage the task with crude implements.

Says one rancher, “I spent countless hours stuffing 25lb of cow back inside the animal and then sewing the wound, the whole force of a 600lb heifer straining against me.”

There is also growing evidence that feeding cows grain increases the growth of e.coli which is hazardous to humans.

All of the hormones, antibiotics, and other garbage in the meat isn’t very good for people. It turns out that the hormones in the meat cause estrogen levels to rise in people who eat it. Even though the EU won’t allow it, the USDA insists that the rise in hormone levels is safe. Especially for children.

Many doctors maintain that things like elevated levels of oestradiol, a powerful sex hormone, in your beef can cause all sorts of problems, such as the increased levels of cancers in the prostate, breast, and ovaries. Incidence of these diseases have been rising since the 1950s as beef consumption, heart disease, and obesity have all skyrocketed.

And this is only the cattle industry. I could tell (and show pictures of) horror stories about chickens laying in waste, being burned by toxic amounts of ammonia in the urine all around them. I am telling you this is just the tip of the iceberg.

No apple ever has to endure such abuse.

Our Scriptures forbid cruelty and indifference to animals. We were placed here to care for creation and God’s creatures. The animals in factory farms are our animals. And if we “hunger and thirst after righteousness” we should tend to their needs.

"A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal..." Proverbs 12:10

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste Gregorian,

thanks for the post.

"namaste" is an ancient Nepali greeing made with the palms pressed together and held infront of the chest. it roughly means "i bow to the divine in you. when you are in that place in you and i am in that place in me, there is but one of us."

What is 'sentient?'

great question. what does the property of "sentient" connote?

according to the dictonary, sentient is:

Main Entry: sen·tient
Pronunciation: 'sen(t)-sh(E-)&nt, 'sen-tE-&nt
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin sentient-, sentiens, present participle of sentire to perceive, feel
1 : responsive to or conscious of sense impressions
2 : [size=-1]AWARE[/size]
3 : finely sensitive in perception or feeling
- sen·tient·ly adverb

so, in this regards, we could say that plants are sentient in that they respond to chemical stimulii. in the narrow use sense of Buddhism, sentience is a property of consciousness, which is, itself, dependent upon a brain, of some sort, to manifest. ipso facto, sentience in the Buddha Dharma is limited to beings with brains.

Venus fly traps, among many others can be very easily seen 'feeling' their food etc. Put a house plant by a window so half of it is in the shadow of a wall and your plant will slowly lean toward the warmth. Stab a tree and chemicals change throughout the tree in the same manner that people's chemicals change when we feel pain. So trees don't communicate... cows aren't exactly 'inteligent' themselves. (btw, I'm being silly about this argument, I know there IS a difference between animals and plants, I just try to give vegetarians the same view they point out to us... I have nothing against eating plants... I do so daily.)

my reasons for being vegetarian have nothing to do with this, however, and all to do with my religious experience. however, my religion does not mandate that i be a vegetarian.

As for your definition of religion... You're right. Buddhism IS a very definite belief structure. Under some definitions it can be called a religions. But when people say Buddhism is athiestic, they're not insulting you...

i do not take it as such. however, it really depends on what the being asserting the atheistic view feels qualifies as being "atheistic". should that being hold that only a Creator God is being referenced, then Buddhism could not be anything but if, however, it is simply the acknowledgement of deity, then Buddhism is not.

Feel like explaining any more about the whole 'Interdependent Co-Arising.' thing? I assume by the name everything just 'came to be' or whatnot?

btw, what does 'Namaste' mean?

i can touch on it a bit... i've prepared something for another site which goes into this in a fair amount of detail.

some of your questions may be addressed here:

http://www.christianforums.com/t996060-ask-the-buddhist.html

metta,

~v

 

[LienShen]

Namaste vajradhara,

Thank you for your insightful posts. I have just found this thread, and I am glad that someone has enough compassion to teach what Buddhism is so that it is more clear. Your patience and clarity is an example to us all.

Buddhism is a religion. In general, all followers of Buddhism have fundemental beliefs taught to us by Buddha. There are four Noble Truths;

1. Life means suffering.

Due to human nature not being perfect, nor the world we live in being perfect, we live with suffering. Given the circumstances, we inevitably will have to endure physical suffering. In our lives, we will experience pain, sickness, injury, tiredness, old age, and eventually death. There is also the mental suffering like sadness, fear, frustration, disappointment, and depression. While there are many degrees of suffering in our lives, there are often positive experiences in life. Joy, ease, comfort and happiness all exist, but there is not a life or journey without suffering. Our lives are in constant state of flux, and because of our imperfect nature and the imperfect nature of the world it creates impermanence. All things will pass, both the positive and the suffering during the time where the cycle begins again.

2. The origin of suffering is attachment.

The underlying cause of suffering are our ties to the material, or transient world. Transient things do not only include the physical objects that surround us, but also ideas, and all things which we percieve (as oppose to that which is real). Often this is mistranslated as detachment, but it is most closely aligned with the word non-attachment. Suffering arises when we have desires, passion, ardor, pursue of wealth and prestige, striving for fame and popularity. This is more defined in a basic way of a craving or clinging to that which is impermanent. The loss of that which is transient is inevitable, thus suffering will surely follow when one is attached to the object of the attachement be it an idea, a perception, material or physical wealth. The idea of "self" is also an object of attachment because it is merely a delusion. There is no abiding "self", as it is just an imagined entity in a the greater chaos of the universe.

3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.

You can begin to stop suffering buy accepting that craving and conceptual attachement are the causes of suffering itself. When we refuse the ignorance of attachement and craving, it becomes clear that we are free of that which ties us down. The third noble truth expresses the idea that suffering can be ended by attaining dispassion or non-attachement. The word Nirodha is used to describe that which extinguishes all forms of clinging and attachment. Suffering can be overcome through human activity, simply by removing these causes of suffering. That which we call Nirvana, is what ultimately results when we attain freedom from all worries, troubles, complexes, fabrications and ideas. Nirvana is often not comprehensible for those who have not attained it. And certainly it is a state that most people will not attain.

4. The path to the cessation of suffering.

By following the Eightfold Path, which I will describe in the next paragraph, we begin the gradual movement towards self-improvement. It is the middle path between the two extremes of excessive self-indulgence or hedonism if you will, and excessive self-mortification or asceticism; Most people throughout their lives will wander the wheel of becoming, and are subject to karmic conditioning in their cycle of rebirth. It is important to understand that the path to the end of suffering can extend over many lifetimes, when there is no final object to be achieved. All the things that cause us suffering; craving, ignorance, delusions, and its effects will eventually disappear as you travel and make progress on the middle path to becoming.

The Noble Eightfold Path is a ethical and mental guideline to end suffering. It is also referred to as Buddha's first discourse.

These are;

• Right view is an understanding of the Four Noble Truths.
• Right aspiration, or intention, is having caring thoughts and intent for all living things.
• Right speech is to speak kindly, truthfully, and without bad language.
• Right action is to follow the Moral Precepts. Either Five or Ten depending on the school of Buddhism
• Right livelihood is work that will harm nothing living.
• Right endeavour, or effort, is to practise meditation and work at stopping bad thoughts.
• Right mindfulness is to give full and relaxed attention to what one is doing, and to do it to the best of one's ability.
• Right concentration leads to enlightenment

Also know as the "middle way", it is the path that leads to the end of suffering.

Just as in every religion, you will find that there are people on all lengths of their journey. There are many understandings, and much more to the Buddhist faith, but these are the basics that all Buddhists hold true.

It is true that most Buddhists are Vegetarian, but it is because Right Livelihood for most includes adopting the precept of non-violence. Also, science has proven that the vegetarian diet can be a well balanced and healthy diet for humans. I am a vegetarian and have no ill effects. There are some vegetarians who do not know how to balance their diet, and often are showcased as people who need to eat meat. This is not the case for all people.

Loving Kindness,

Undeniably.

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste Undeniably,


thank you for the kind words and thoughts, they are appreciated

as an aside... do you speak Pali or Sanskrit? if so, do you find the English transliterations to be more accessible or do they tend to obscure the Dharma, in your view?

from my own view, i've had some difficulty with the English transliterations especially with regards to Dukkha and Tanha and what those terms actually connote. have you found the same?

metta,

~v

 

[LienShen]

Namaste vajradhara,

I speak neither Pali or Sanskrit, but I do find the English transliterations to be lacking in many places. I have read much about all different kinds of Buddhism, through books and attended seminars and discussion groups relating to the understanding of Buddha's teachings. That has lead me to the more correct and accurate translations of the Dharma. I think as a non-native speaker, it is important to see things from all sides to better understand as a whole. I suppose too, that it is the way of many things.

English texts often mistranslate but are unintentional in their misleading. For instance, I have found that the translation of the concept of "no leaning mind" is mostly translated as having no preferance at all. When it is meaning that when given the choice of two equal options, a buddhist will not choose that which pleases him most but would have no choice at all. I have heard it stated that a Buddhist would not use logic in choosing, and would never think about his choice.

It is very difficult to understand Buddhism without learning the keywords and phrases and their true meaning from a good source. There are plenty of english written books on the subject, but none that is the perfect resource for all things. I also find the internet extremely useful, in that I can ask questions of native speakers to clarify my answers. As Buddha taught us, it is important to question in answer to find the truth.

When I am talking or writing to an english speaking audience, I do attempt to clearly define what I mean and I encourage people to ask question for that which they don't understand. Even with my ease of language, I am still often accused of "sounding like Yoda" and things like this. But as long as they end up understanding the meaning behind the words and not just learning the words themselves, it is of benefit.

Loving Kindness,

Undeniably.