Stilling the mind

[nac]

Except Buddhism?

Where did I say that? Buddhist traditions have their differences too. They can't all be right.

[Vajrahridaya]

Is speaking one's mind equivalent to lunatic raving in this community unless one accepts the official consensus?

 

 

Such a funny clip! OMG!

[Raymond Wolter]

Individual interpretations may have their failings, but the Buddhadharma has no failings at all. It is good in the beginning, middle and the end. The Buddhadharma was defined as the Sanatana (Eternal) Dharma (Path to Truth).

 

 

So you recommend Buddhism as the answer to all spiritual needs? I mean entire world following Buddhism is the only perfect solution to problems of every kind?

 

Also, is Buddhism suitable for all irrespective of culture, temperament etc.? Now every religion feels the same. So, how would you impose your view on others? What nac and you are saying is that other religions are incomplete or don't make total sense, so convert to Buddhism?

 

I like Buddhism a lot but is this the right thing to do for any religion?

[nac]

the Buddhadharma has no failings at all

Neither does the Tao or Brahma or Jesus. Not to Buddhists though. These are all pious legends. Buddhism is all about studying the failings practitioners develop at various stages of spiritual cultivation. In that sense, I suppose failings are less a part of traditions than spiritual communities and individual practitioners. A practitioner with less failings will reform and improve whatever tradition he belongs to.

[Raymond Wolter]

Where did I say that? Buddhist traditions have their differences too. They can't all be right.

 

Vajrahirdaya seems to think differently. I was a member of e-sangha forum and there too every Buddhist thought Buddhism was perfect. Theravadas thought Hindusim, Jainism, Christianity as flawed but Buddhism and especially Thearavada was perfect and better than the rest. Vajrayana forum thought the same about Vajrayana. So, what you alluded to was that Buddhism is better or superior than Toaism? Buddhists also frequently think Taoists don't get what Emptiness is all about. So how are they different?

 

Not sure I understood what you were trying to say with the high-fiving thing when all religions do the same. I don't understand the need to convert everyone into Buddhism. I used to see the same attitude in other Buddhist forums as well. But why do Buddhists try to use all kinds of arguments, ways and means to consciously or sub consciously try to convert every one into Buddhists? Simply be and let be is better? Just my 2 cents.

[nac]

So you recommend Buddhism as the answer to all spiritual needs? I mean entire world following Buddhism is the only perfect solution to problems of every kind?

This is even incorrect according to Buddhist doctrine. The Buddha himself said that Buddhism isn't for everyone. The Buddhist view does, however, purify every sentient being in the six realms.

 

What nac and you are saying is that other religions are incomplete or don't make total sense, so convert to Buddhism?

Please note that is a fucking lie.

 

I like Buddhism a lot but is this the right thing to do for any religion?

What is, imposing our views? I don't really understand conspiracies.

[Vajrahridaya]

So you recommend Buddhism as the answer to all spiritual needs? I mean entire world following Buddhism is the only perfect solution to problems of every kind?

 

Also, is Buddhism suitable for all irrespective of culture, temperament etc.? Now every religion feels the same. So, how would you impose your view on others? What nac and you are saying is that other religions are incomplete or don't make total sense, so convert to Buddhism?

 

I like Buddhism a lot but is this the right thing to do for any religion?

 

It is not an idea to raise arms for. It is not something to be imposed onto others in the sense of repressing others. Just through clearly being and speaking, the dharma is integrated into other traditions and it has been. Hinduism has taken up so much from the Dharma and now calls it it's own. So have so many other traditions like Bon for instance. The Buddha once said that his Bodhisattvas would take birth in other traditions in order to make them more clear as well...

 

But, not all beings are ready for the Dharma and they need to cling to the idea of a cosmic Self or a universal creator to surrender to in order to evolve. Good paths lead to good re-birth and beings will evolve accordingly, life after life and their capacity will deepen to the point of being able to finally understand the depth of Buddhadharma.

 

The Buddhadharma is not something to kill for like Islam or Christianity does for instance.

[Vajrahridaya]

But why do Buddhists try to use all kinds of arguments, ways and means to consciously or sub consciously try to convert every one into Buddhists? Simply be and let be is better? Just my 2 cents.

 

Just let beings proliferate suffering? Constructive argument has been used by Buddhists to convert people since the Buddha.

 

I was converted through constructive argument and contemplation of the conclusions over a number of years of discussion. I then had inner meditative experiences which supported my opponents conclusions and thus I couldn't deny the truth of what he and others were saying anymore.

 

I was converted by people on E-Sangha. Then finally by meeting a Dzogchen master to put the Cherry on top.

[nac]

Vajrahirdaya seems to think differently. I was a member of e-sangha forum and there too every Buddhist thought Buddhism was perfect.

That's because he's being a pious Buddhist.

 

So, what you alluded to was that Buddhism is better or superior than Toaism?

In what way?

 

Buddhists also frequently think Taoists don't get what Emptiness is all about. So how are they different?

Oh no, it's an ancient Taoist tradition to make fun of Buddhists and simply state they don't understand the Tao. However, his is not a weakness of the Taoism per se. How many Buddhist texts depreciate the Tao and how many venerable patriarchs are noted for their opposition to Taoism?

 

 

Buddhists aren't exactly noted for going out of their way to mock Taoism. In fact, many Buddhists who belong to East Asian traditions are also Taoists like myself.

 

Not sure I understood what you were trying to say with the high-fiving thing when all religions do the same.

Not really, Indian religions bear more resemblance Greek philosophical traditions than Abrahamic religions or East Asian philosophical traditions.

 

I don't understand the need to convert everyone into Buddhism.

This need exists in your imagination and, I'm sorry to say, the heads of many other western Buddhists. Asian Buddhists are passive missionaries at most.

 

I used to see the same attitude in other Buddhist forums as well. But why do Buddhists try to use all kinds of arguments, ways and means to consciously or sub consciously try to convert every one into Buddhists? Simply be and let be is better? Just my 2 cents.

Why did Greek philosophical schools contend with and debate each other? Because they had honestly held beliefs which they believed can be transmitted using logic and argumentation. Indian philosophical traditions are the same. I've never seen Buddhists simply stating that Taoists don't understand the universal Buddha-nature. The stance isn't the same. I'm simply advising Taoists to overcome this common failing among Taoist communities. I'd advise Buddhists to do the same.

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

Individual interpretations may have their failings, but the Buddhadharma has no failings at all. It is good in the beginning, middle and the end. The Buddhadharma was defined as the Sanatana (Eternal) Dharma (Path to Truth).

Really? REALLY? YOU 'Choose' freely, of your own pathetic volition to accept a 'religion' whose spellings of words and pronunciations defy practical reason and common-sense??? You accept the mad imaginings of guy that meditates for years, cared for by the kindness of strangers.. then, in utter disregard for the care and Life he his blessed with, proclaims it all to be a 'Suffering Illusion', itself a nonsensical muttering that morphed into some sort of religious 'truth' when the equally insane caretakers decided to pretend the crazy-guy was 'crazy'.. to explain Buddha's eccentric babblings they said: "He was struck by Lightning", but.. Hell, no.. their nearly unintelligible language skills were heard to say: "He's Enlightened".. and the rest is 'twisted history'..

 

No, really, "Truth IS a pathless Land", as J. Krishnamurti explaind.. any path excludes that which is 'not' the path.. even the 'path' that claims ALL.. 'truth' encompasses ALL paths, and ALL that which is not a path, rendering Truth 'pathless'.. forgive the intended humor in the paragraph above, but pay attention to the meaning..

 

Be well..

[Raymond Wolter]

This is even incorrect according to Buddhist doctrine. The Buddha himself said that Buddhism isn't for everyone. The Buddhist view does, however, purify every sentient being in the six realms.

 

 

Please note that is a fucking lie.

 

 

What is, imposing our views? I don't really understand conspiracies.

 

 

No need to get abusive with smilies and all. Don't appreciate that, at all.

 

Vajrahridaya has explained his stand on why it is necessary to convert. Like I does, some do it consciously and some unconsciously. Actually a christian thinks he is saving someone from satan and tries to convert. And a Buddhist for the sake of saving others from suffering. How are they different? I don't think sensible conversions based on ideology are that bad but Buddhists won't admit that they are as good or bad as any other religion. Vajrahridaya gets an applause from me for being frank and making no bull stories and smilies and trying to pretend.

[Raymond Wolter]

I'd advise Buddhists to do the same.

But you didn't and that was the whole point.

[Raymond Wolter]

So look at the divisive nature of these supposedly beneficial arguments:

 

1. Taoists vs Buddhists

2. Passive Missionary vs Active Missionary

3. Less Open Minded vs More Open Minded

4. Asian Buddhists vs Western Buddhists.

 

Do such arguments really help a community? Every forum degrades into screaming when such issues creep in.

 

By the way, comparative religions section in e-sangha was closed long ago I guess? By the way generally Taoists have a higher regard for Buddhism than any Buddhist I have seen. Tao is universal and they cannot find issues with a universal concept behind their philosophy. Buddhists on the other hand need to attack the universalists, for whatever reason. Vajrahridaya thinks out of compassion for suffering human beings, and you have another reason?

Edited June 18, 2010 by Raymond Wolter

[Vajrahridaya]

 

No, really, "Truth IS a pathless Land", as J. Krishnamurti explaind.. any path excludes that which is 'not' the path.. even the 'path' that claims ALL.. 'truth' encompasses ALL paths, and ALL that which is not a path, rendering Truth 'pathless'.. forgive the intended humor in the paragraph above, but pay attention to the meaning..

 

Be well..

 

See in Buddhism, there is no absolute Truth, thus there is no universal substance that is the "Truth" that encompasses all paths. Like I said, I used to believe as you did with experience to support it. I realized, that this was part of Samsara. We come from one substance and merge into one substance to be re-expressed by one substance, the flow of the Tao. This is the play of Samsara and your philosophy is a part of this Samsara. There is a deeper truth.

 

The teaching of dependent origination/emptiness cuts through the oneness philosophy and experience. The "one" that everyone is revolving in and through needs to be cut through if liberation is to be realized.

[nac]

No need to get abusive with smilies and all. Don't appreciate that, at all.

Sorry, I was hoping the profanity would catch your attention and convey the force of my feelings on the subject.

 

Vajrahridaya has explained his stand on why it is necessary to convert. Like I does, some do it consciously and some unconsciously. Actually a christian thinks he is saving someone from satan and tries to convert. And a Buddhist for the sake of saving others from suffering. How are they different?

How is converting someone to Buddhism saving them from suffering? That's recruiting more workers to save other beings from suffering. Trust me, too many analogies is a bad idea.

 

I don't think sensible conversions based on ideology are that bad but Buddhists won't admit that they are as good or bad as any other religion. Vajrahridaya gets an applause from me for being frank and making no bull stories and smilies and trying to pretend.

Western pop psychology is too strong a meme for my arguments to penetrate. If you think V is simply being frank and I'm spouting bullshit hoping to draw converts to Buddhism, then there's nothing I can say or do that will make you think otherwise, except agreeing with V, which is of course out of the question. So let's drop this here.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

 

By the way, comparative religions section in e-sangha was closed long ago I guess?

 

Yes, I was saddened by that. Much of my conversion process was printed there. Another lesson in impermanence, eh?

[nac]

But you didn't and that was the whole point.

Did you read the rest of my post? And even if this point was valid, I suppose you'd go about admonishing both sides by never telling either side anything because both are equally guilty?

 

Do such arguments really help a community? Every forum degrades into screaming when such issues creep in.

What are you talking about? The point is, the goal of Buddhists really is different from the goal of Taoists, and novice Taoists should try to avoid the common obstacle of denying this truth and simply stating that Buddhists don't understand the true nature of Tao. That's all.

 

By the way, comparative religions section in e-sangha was closed long ago I guess? By the way generally Taoists have a higher regard for Buddhism than any Buddhist I have seen. Tao is universal and they cannot find issues with a universal concept behind their philosophy. Buddhists on the other hand need to attack the universalists, for whatever reason. Vajrahridaya thinks out of compassion for suffering human beings, and you have another reason?

This is only applicable to E-Sangha and affiliated forums. Some of these online Buddhists had an aversion to other religions I've never seen elsewhere. This was spread by a few key people like Namdrol, who was a Sakya fanatic. The funny thing is, Sakya Trizin Rinpoche has clearly stated that the only major practical difference between Buddhism and Taoism is the Buddha's emphasis on compassion.

[Raymond Wolter]

Sorry, I was hoping the profanity would catch your attention and convey the force of my feelings on the subject.

 

Interesting! Profanity is what you use to seek attention and convey the force of your feelings. Thanks. That put a rest to whatever I wanted to say. I guess a civil conversation is not something I can expect of you as your feelings multiply in force. I will get back to looking at my list of Qigongs. Most wasteful 20-so minutes I ever spent in my life.

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

The teaching of dependent origination/emptiness cuts through the oneness philosophy and experience. The "one" that everyone is revolving in and through needs to be cut through if liberation is to be realized.

No. There is only "ISness", contrasted by "IS NOTness", and the dynamic interplay of these fundamental Principles. Name it or claim it, and it is destroyed.. just 'Live' its boundless perfection, and all is revealed..

 

No 'paths', no gurus, no enlightenment, no fancy foreign word-play, no 'isms' Buddha's or Tao's, just simple direct english, and.. please translate this same simplicity into the languages necessary for the experiencers of other cultures to 'get it' without the rituals and paths that separate the experiencer from the direct experience of BEing..

[nac]

By the way generally Taoists have a higher regard for Buddhism than any Buddhist I have seen.

Then you haven't seen many Buddhists, because I and many other Buddhist practitioners identify with Taoism to an extent. This is especially prevalent among Zen practitioners, even in E-Sangha. The E-Sangha Zen community ran away to this forum: http://www.zenforuminternational.org/

 

Tao is universal and they cannot find issues with a universal concept behind their philosophy.

No see, this is a mistake. Some novice Taoists think that because the Tao is universal, Buddhism is an incomplete subschool of Taoism with a misunderstanding about the Tao. Other religions should be respected not only for their similarities, but also for their differences. This is the attitude adopted by most Buddhists and Taoists I've met in real life. I'm sure you've seen the monks (and rinpoche) on E-Sangha do the same.

 

Buddhists on the other hand need to attack the universalists, for whatever reason.

That's because this universality is illusory. Buddhists and Taoists aim for different goals, both of which are worthy. There is no universal, all-encompassing spirituality of which different schools represent unique fragments. That's the Buddhist position at any rate, and one that I subscribe to.

[Vajrahridaya]

Greetings..

 

 

No. There is only "ISness", contrasted by "IS NOTness", and the dynamic interplay of these fundamental Principles. Name it or claim it, and it is destroyed.. just 'Live' its boundless perfection, and all is revealed..

 

 

I'm not claiming it or naming it really. It's just that the depth of omniscience is not realized fully by merely surrendering to the state of neither being, nor non-being. Which is what the Buddha explained as part of his teaching.

 

Your realization is deeply peaceful and is wonderful, but it's not the end of the path... if liberation from Samsara is your goal that is. Which it doesn't seem that it is. So, your Taoist goal is different.

 

Which is my point.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[nac]

Interesting! Profanity is what you use to seek attention and convey the force of your feelings. Thanks. That put a rest to whatever I wanted to say. I guess a civil conversation is not something I can expect of you as your feelings multiply in force. I will get back to looking at my list of Qigongs. Most wasteful 20-so minutes I ever spent in my life.

So one profanity in two pages of typing and your time has been completely wasted. (I just wanted to make sure you didn't ignore that line ) There was no way I could have shown you your mistake. I hope your Taoist masters teach you what I couldn't. Have fun on your chosen path!

Edited June 18, 2010 by nac

[Raymond Wolter]

There was no way I could have shown you your mistake.

 

 

You assume I am mistaken, you assumed earlier you could teach me something and you assumed I wanted to learn from you. Too many assumptions. This is the difference between having a discussion, stating one's view vs. trying to convert, correct, impose etc. This is clear enough is it not?

 

If only people didn't spend all their time and effort in trying to show others their mistakes but rather look at their own dirty linens to wash, the world would be a far better place. Well, may be try washing other's linen once all of yours is dry and white

 

Let me ask you a question. What is your purpose on this forum? Engage in a discussion that tells others about their flawed views in the guise of discussion. And when someone disagrees, they are ignorant or not open minded. I read a series of your old posts and you always disagree with others. So you are not here except to state your disagreement with non-Buddhists? You should be a great master if you frequent online forums and spend your time trying to correct and point out mistakes.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Raymond Wolter

[nac]

You assume I am mistaken

You are mistaken because you never raised any rational objections to what I said.

 

you assumed earlier you could teach me something

That's what it means to be human IMHO. Learning from each other.

 

and you assumed I wanted to learn from you.

If you didn't, then I did waste your time, sorry. Why did you bother talking to me then?

 

Too many assumptions.

What is it that the the Wikipedians say? Assume good faith.

 

This is the difference between having a discussion, stating one's view vs. trying to convert, correct, impose etc.

No, it's obviously the difference between idle gossip and having a meaningful discussion. If you don't plan to change your beliefs no matter what I say, there's no use prolonging this pointless interlude in your life.

[nac]

If only people didn't spend all their time and effort in trying to show others their mistakes but rather look at their own dirty linens to wash, the world would be a far better place. Well, may be try washing other's linen once all of yours is dry and white

I assumed goof faith in you, you didn't for me. Enjoy your victory.

 

Let me ask you a question. What is your purpose on this forum? Engage in a discussion that tells others about their flawed views in the guise of discussion. And when someone disagrees, they are ignorant or not open minded. I read a series of your old posts and you always disagree with others. So you are not here except to state your disagreement with non-Buddhists? You should be a great master if you frequent online forums and spend your time trying to correct and point out mistakes.

Evidently, it was too much to hope that you would read my posts with an open, yet critical mind of objective neutrality.

 

PS. I come to this forum to talk about philosophical Taoism, but I always get dragged into these painful and endless discussions about Buddhism.

 

PPS. Moreover, I wanted to learn from you too. Instead, all you did was criticize me without offering any new perspectives, thus teaching me a very base and disappointing lesson about confirmation bias.

Edited June 18, 2010 by nac