What do you know about Buddhism?

[MAXX]

My apologies, my intent was not to offend. If we can do it with Christmas, why not with Christianity?

It is also very interesting that you brush my entire belief system aside with a self-praising comment about how much you know, but you take a very small, offense-less mistake of mine and blow it up huge.

"Those who are right rarely need to get angry if they are sure of themselves. People only get impatient and angry in a debate if they are unsure of their own conviction."

Dear Buddhist Guy Eldy is like this always , Don't take him seriously .

Buddhism is a wonderful religion. I was a Christian and after studying all major religions , it was Only Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism) and Buddhism which attracted me.

 

[Ram]

A Person cannot eat meat and hope to make spiritual progress in Life, that is impossible.

I am a pure vegetarian even avoiding vegetables like onion etc, but I still disagree with this highly generalized statement. Any black-white statements about spiritual progress is the teachings of cults. Of course, meat eating is to be avoided if and when possible, but several other factors are more important than that in spiritual growth.

 

[Bill Insgate]

Kit,

Thanks for your post regarding the eating of Meat, I do eat meat but i do not kill it myself and never would, but I do consider myself to be growing more and more spiritually as I grow older

Bill

 

[satay]

Not Required to be Vegetarian ?? I don't think so,

Namaste sef,
Kit is correct. Buddhists are not "required" to be vegetarians but I think many are.

satay

 

[Proud Hindu]

Much too much to accept it as a valid religious alternative to Jesus Christ.

Oh, and it is lame for you to abbreviate Christianity the way you do. Go ahead and do what you want with the ianity part but to turn the Name of Christ into an X is out of line.

Eldy, tell me, what do you know about Buddhism, other than the fact that it is not christianity? Absolutely nothing, I'm willing to bet.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I know enough to say that Buddhism is not a religion but just a self-improvement club for atheists.

Even better.

 

[Orontes]

I was attracted to Theravada because it seemed to me to be the school most directly linked to Sidharta Gautama (the Buddha). I really do believe the other schools developed in large part to accomodate the more Northern Cultures where they have become rooted. I certainly see all schools though as being Buddhist.


Many Western Theravadins are practicing meditation as householders. In our wealthy modern age it is not just monks who can afford the time to devote to meditation. Many Western Theravadins don't have ready access to monks either. The traditional structure of the Sangha (community) is streching to accomodate a Culture without a large Buddhist Tradition.

Hello,

From your experience do you find Western Buddhists are more attracted to Theravadin thought? If so, would that be for the same reasons you cited? Aside from Zen, which seems the most successful variant of the Yogacara School in the West, are there other Buddhist Schools you see flourishing in the West?

 

[Zen_Woof]

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

I love this!

Buddhists are not required to be vegetarian, but many are.

Metta,
ZW

 

[z3ro]

Buddist don't believe in an external God, i know that. what i'm trying to say is Vegetarianism means closer to Reality.

Um, reality says we're omnivorous, and that we eat both meat and plants to survive.

 

[Eldy]

Eldy, tell me, what do you know about Buddhism, other than the fact that it is not christianity? Absolutely nothing, I'm willing to bet.

And I am willing to up your ante and take your cash. On the flip side, I am betting you have no idea about me so your statement would therefore be meaningless. Pay up.

 

[The Gregorian]

Numerous Christians have told me my religion is not a religion. I can tell you Buddhism is my religion. Buddhism has all the hallmarks of a Religion. In fact you would have a more religious experience visiting one of our temples than visiting a Protestant church. We remove our shoes, we venerate the Buddha-images and alter, we venerate our monks. We have an ethical system and our religion answers our life questions. We have a community of Monks. I can't imagine how much more religious a religion gets than that.

Well, it depends on your definition of religion... 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?' I've never seen Buddhism answer these questions (although, again, I admit to not knowing much about it at all). Instead, I see Buddhism as a very distinct and honorable set of morals, and guidlines as to how to live life. 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.

He is not a God. Buddhism is non-Theistic, it is NOT Atheistic. The question of a creator God as monotheism doesn't come up in Buddhism. In that aspect some would say it is agnostic. The Buddha recognized that there are divine beings. Divine beings are subject to the same nature as all compounded things. They arise, "become", degrade, and disintigrate.

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? 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?

 

[The Gregorian]

For a more sarcastic post:

The idea of vegetarianism so as 'not to hurt living things' is silly. It's a fact plants are JUST as alive as any animal, and it's been proven that plants (at least the ones that were tested) do sense things such as pain... they scar just like any other living creatures, and when damaged, chemicals change throughout the organism exactly like any other creature.

Point #1: Yes... killing a cow does hurt the cow... but they suffer a quick death, and one cow can be used to provide a meal for MANY people... on the other hand a potatoe is plucked from the earth and boiled alive in a pot with multiple other potatoes before they are smashed together... One person may devour half a dozen small potatoes in a single sitting (I know I can with good gravy... mmmm....). It is much more honorable to provide a swift death to ONE creature to feed MANY people, than to boil half a dozen creatures (plants) for just one person.

Point #2: People say you shouldn't eat cows because they're not treated right... trapped in a tiny little pasture, then killed... But I'm from a town with many fields, and many apple orchards. Cows often have MILES to roam around... their entire life is lived in a protected environment where they don't have to do a day's work, surrounded by many friends... they're well fed, well taken care of, and very well treated then they're given a swift, and generally painless death.

Apple trees, on the other hand are packed in so tight you can barely see through three rows. They're roots are smashed and twisted together, given only enough room to barely survive. While a cow gets an instant death, the tree gets parts hacked off and ripped off every year to prune the tree... before it's unborn babies are ripe, they're ripped off the mother tree and consumed while the baby(apple) is still alive. This constant torcher goes on for only a few years before sexual maturity passes it's peak, then the poor creatures are ripped out of the ground and dumped into a large pile, then burnt while they're still alive.

Cows are treated MUCH better than apple trees (note: I lived directly across the street from a large apple orchard for a few years, I've seen the piles of coarpses... it sickened me.)

Last point: people need protein and fat. True, you can stack partial proteins together, and if you try very hard, a solely vegetarian diet CAN sustain you, but biologically, humans were designed (or have evolved, depending on your belief) to eat meat. Protein aside, omega fats found in seafood is ESSENTIAL for a human's brain development and health... how are you supposed to get 'fish fat' out of plants?

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.

 

[Proud Hindu]

And I am willing to up your ante and take your cash. On the flip side, I am betting you have no idea about me so your statement would therefore be meaningless. Pay up.

Why don't you stop talking trash and tell me what you know about Buddhism?

 

[sefroth77]

I am a pure vegetarian even avoiding vegetables like onion etc, but I still disagree with this highly generalized statement. Any black-white statements about spiritual progress is the teachings of cults. Of course, meat eating is to be avoided if and when possible, but several other factors are more important than that in spiritual growth.

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.

 

[sefroth77]

Kit,

Thanks for your post regarding the eating of Meat, I do eat meat but i do not kill it myself and never would, but I do consider myself to be growing more and more spiritually as I grow older

Bill

Just think man, even if you don't kill it directly, you are still supporting the killing indirectly, so that makes you a killer too. If the eating stops the killing also stops.

One of the primary training rules in Buddhism is that we will not take the life of another living being. Therefore we may be limited in access to meat

The above post was posted by Kit, buddist must never take the life of another living being, but then what is the so called "Limited in access to meat " ???? Thats is also amount to killing indirectly isn't it.

 

[sefroth77]

For a more sarcastic post:

The idea of vegetarianism so as 'not to hurt living things' is silly. It's a fact plants are JUST as alive as any animal, and it's been proven that plants (at least the ones that were tested) do sense things such as pain... they scar just like any other living creatures, and when damaged, chemicals change throughout the organism exactly like any other creature.

Point #1: Yes... killing a cow does hurt the cow... but they suffer a quick death, and one cow can be used to provide a meal for MANY people... on the other hand a potatoe is plucked from the earth and boiled alive in a pot with multiple other potatoes before they are smashed together... One person may devour half a dozen small potatoes in a single sitting (I know I can with good gravy... mmmm....). It is much more honorable to provide a swift death to ONE creature to feed MANY people, than to boil half a dozen creatures (plants) for just one person.

Point #2: People say you shouldn't eat cows because they're not treated right... trapped in a tiny little pasture, then killed... But I'm from a town with many fields, and many apple orchards. Cows often have MILES to roam around... their entire life is lived in a protected environment where they don't have to do a day's work, surrounded by many friends... they're well fed, well taken care of, and very well treated then they're given a swift, and generally painless death.

Apple trees, on the other hand are packed in so tight you can barely see through three rows. They're roots are smashed and twisted together, given only enough room to barely survive. While a cow gets an instant death, the tree gets parts hacked off and ripped off every year to prune the tree... before it's unborn babies are ripe, they're ripped off the mother tree and consumed while the baby(apple) is still alive. This constant torcher goes on for only a few years before sexual maturity passes it's peak, then the poor creatures are ripped out of the ground and dumped into a large pile, then burnt while they're still alive.

Cows are treated MUCH better than apple trees (note: I lived directly across the street from a large apple orchard for a few years, I've seen the piles of coarpses... it sickened me.)

Last point: people need protein and fat. True, you can stack partial proteins together, and if you try very hard, a solely vegetarian diet CAN sustain you, but biologically, humans were designed (or have evolved, depending on your belief) to eat meat. Protein aside, omega fats found in seafood is ESSENTIAL for a human's brain development and health... how are you supposed to get 'fish fat' out of plants?

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.

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.

 

[Eldy]

Why don't you stop talking trash and tell me what you know about Buddhism?

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

 

[Eldy]

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.

Well, according to one on this board we can go a full year without eating so would it then be okay to have a burger for your yearly meal?

 

[Ram]

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.

Have you heard the story of the fowler in Mahabaratha/Bhagavatam?

Can you show me one scriptuiral evidence to prove that a meat eater cannot make spiritual progress. Meat eating is an action of the physical body. Spiritual progress is a process of the soul. You should not tie them up perfectly.

Even salvation is possible for somebody who eats meat, because the factors that govern them are not just based on what you eat. Avoiding meat and then living a life of deciet is not going to help you.

Seff, anyone who is very seriously devoted to God(in anyway), or somebody who is devoted to his creation( even an atheist) will make a spiritual progress. Avoiding meat is only a helpful tool in this process. Anybody who is less selfish will make spiritual progress. It is more likely that a person will give up meat or even any food automatically in his final incarnatons towards salvation.

Hinduism does not forbid meat for anybody other than Brahmins inclined to do penance. Since Vaishnavas have a very high ideal in life with almost all daily activities directed towards God, many things have been forbidden. But you should not apply them to people following different spiritual disciplines or religions.

 

[bmoynihan]

Um, reality says we're omnivorous, and that we eat both meat and plants to survive.

What is this "reality" that you mention? Don't say that its because we have sharp front teeth because so do Gorillas, who are vegetarian!!

Also on the topic of vegetarianism and Buddhism I would say that its beneficial to be vegetarian to reduce the suffering to sentient beings. I think the Buddha didn't rule it out for monks because monks only live by what people give them. If somebody brought them meat that was left over from their own meal then it would be rude not to accept it, and could limit the amount of food that monks in remote places in the world get. The only exception is if somebody kills the animal specifically for meat for the monks, then they cannot accept it, which makes perfect sense to me.

I think in a western world where there are many alternatives to meat that anybody with a loving heart wouldn't choose to eat meat. If they pick it up off the shelf and buy it then in my eyes they are funding the meat market which will cause suffering.

I don't buy the silly argument that vegetables suffer pain, they have no nervous system, no brain etc, its just an excuse!



I would say that in generally I don’t see Buddhism as a religion. I see it as a guide to enlightenment. The thing that attracted me to it was that there is no black and white in Buddhism. Everybody is different so every situation is different. The Buddha gives clues and guides but at the end of the day its up to us what we do as we will be the one who either reaps the rewards or the consequences (Karma!). There is nobody or nothing judging us, only ourselves.