The answer lies in the India/Nepal/Tibet Himalaya Regions afterall.. and definitely NOT in china/taiwan..

[ralis]

Are you doing anything other than what you describe with your awareness/intent?

 

Freeing the mind or more precisely a relaxed state of mind. The practice in and of itself deals with any mental constructs. It is very difficult to explain this practice. However, I will do my best to continue answering any questions.

[Aaron]

So a bunch of other people say things much more likely to be insulting, and much more often, and you go at me for one comment? Are you afraid of the others or something?

 

Thanks for the reminder about examining the intention though. And I mean that. Perhaps that was an insulting comment, I'm not entirely sure. But I didn't want to intentionally insult Seth, I actually like him otherwise.

 

 

 

It's a fact?

 

In any case, you would do well to apply your advices to yourself.

 

There are no such things as facts, but I like to say that, it adds emphasis. As far as other people, there are some members who I don't bother reading their posts anymore because they show a sincere lack of concern for others ideas. For many it's Buddhism or nothing at all. I prefer to not call myself anything or adhere to any codes of conducts.

 

Anyways, I'm sure you didn't mean to insult anyone and of course we can all get riled up, just a prodding of sorts to point out what I thought needed to be. It's not meant to be a reflection of who you are (and aren't).

 

I like to keep in mind that the only reason we can have Buddhism is because there is such a thing as no-Buddhism. So appreciate that others don't follow your path and that because they don't you can.

 

Aaron

[Aaron]

Dear Aaron,

 

I do not recall Buddhism a religion. It rather is a philosophy, which offers a vast amount of techniques to reach at certain points. I do practice some of them. And I do trust and belief in the ideas behind that. Which makes me, in your idea, a Buddhist :-)

 

I can understand what you mean, but please try to step one step out of yourself - and read your posts like if they were addressed to you.

I at least find there somebody preaching, saying how others have to behave, knowing everything better. I do not know what you do believe in - but I imagine that you cannot hold all of the ideas in there. Are you never ever angry? Are you always loving your neighbour as yourself?

I get this feeling that you do not like Buddhists, for which reason ever. That you expect us to be always aware of everything. And that you think you know how we have to behave. Which is weird. I do not say everybody in this forum behaves well. LIke in all forums and in real world. But honestly said, I think you are somewhere over the top as well.

I do not think I insulted anybody. If I did - I am sorry. I just have my way to talk - and it might come across sometimes not just caring and loving. Exactly like yours is quite heavy as well.

Just think how easy it is to feel insulted, when actually nobody ever did it.

Me for example - I could feel a little insulted by your first post. You do not even say what I did "wrong", you just say we all do not follow the right path. I actually do not think you really wanted to insult me - but with you're preaching and knowing all better-attitude you did put your finger on some point.

Ok - what now?

Never ever speak again with anybody until we are all enlightened? Or accept that we all are people who struggle, who fight (mainly without reason), who do stupid things out of fear, out of ego - and who learn everyday something more.

 

 

Hello Juju,

 

I'm just saying, don't be a hypocrite essentially (not you per se, but generally speaking). Don't call yourself something just because you agree with the philosophy. I believe that vegetarianism is a healthy lifestyle, but I eat meat, so I don't call myself a vegetarian. In the same way, there are many people who seem to philosophically agree with Buddhism, but don't follow the tenants. To be completely honest, I don't think Buddhism is any better than Christianity or any other religion (or philosophy), but it definitely isn't any worse either.

 

I try to be compassionate, honestly. Do I get angry? Sometimes, but I admit it, address it, and move on. I don't presume to call myself a Taoist or Buddhist, because I don't practice those philosophies. I simply try to be what I am. I have no deep held beliefs anymore and I find that if someone tells me something that sounds reasonable, I am more than happy to examine it.

 

I've spent the good part of the last several months studying Zen, even though I have no particular interest in Buddhism, simply because someone explained the concept of what Zen is and it made sense to me. I am not a Zen Buddhist mind you, but I do appreciate many of their beliefs (sans the religious dogma). Hold nothing sacred and nothing can be profane. Hold nothing to your bosom and nothing can be taken away.

 

All these things I say are dust and don't matter at all, unless you think they matter. In fact even thinking they matter doesn't change anything, it just creates the illusion that they matter. So in the end arguing about all of this stuff is silly, because it is all just dust. Now why do I discuss these things, because my cup is empty and I am willing to be filled.

 

Aaron

Edited June 4, 2011 by Twinner

[Pero]

So appreciate that others don't follow your path and that because they don't you can.

First of all, the second part makes no sense. As for the first part, I do. I don't bug people about what path they're following. They can follow whatever they want.

[C T]

 

I'm just saying, don't be a hypocrite essentially.....

.......because my cup is empty and I am willing to be filled.

 

Aaron

Declaration of the month!!

 

(btw, its Tenets, not tenants)

[Pero]

Also Aaron, your view of things seems a little naive to me. Just because someone calls himself a Buddhist it doesn't mean they're perfect. Buddhists are just sentient beings who try to follow to the Buddhist path, some are better at it and some of us are worse at it.

[Aaron]

First of all, the second part makes no sense. As for the first part, I do. I don't bug people about what path they're following. They can follow whatever they want.

 

There is an experience of Buddhism that stems from no belief to belief. You can't have belief without something to refer it to, no-belief. If there is only belief, there is no point of reference.

 

Aaron

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Aaron]

Declaration of the month!!

 

(btw, its Tenets, not tenants)

 

 

Hello Cowtao,

 

Thanks for correcting my grammar, it's much appreciated. Your compassionate conduct is truly a gem by which all Buddhists should cling. *bow* One of the reasons I never listen(ed) to what you (and some others) say is because you don't seem authentic. Everything you say is scripted, as if you're repeating what you've already heard. I think it's hard to consider someone to have had an authentic experience, when you can read what they say they've experienced almost verbatim from the Buddhist Handbook. Perhaps if you explained the experience using your own words, it would make it more plausible.

 

Anyways, good luck on the Buddhist crusade, I'm sure Buddha's rooting for you.

 

Aaron

 

edited in order to express my tenants more clearly.

Edited June 4, 2011 by Twinner

[ralis]

Hello Cowtao,

 

Thanks for correcting my grammar, it's much appreciated. Your compassionate conduct is truly a gem by which all Buddhists should cling. *bow* One thing I notice is that Vaj us is passionate, but he isn't condescending (rather he doesn't seem to intentionally be.) You, of course, are on my do not bother to read list, because of comments like this.

 

Aaron

 

Actually Vajraji is condescending. He hasn't posted today. Must have been a heavy duty party last night!

[steve]

I do not recall Buddhism a religion. It rather is a philosophy, which offers a vast amount of techniques to reach at certain points. I do practice some of them. And I do trust and belief in the ideas behind that. Which makes me, in your idea, a Buddhist :-)

 

Juju,

I will respectfully disagree with the position that Buddhism is not a religion.

 

I think that if you ask most Buddhists throughout Asia, they would consider Buddhism more a religion than a philosophy.

In the West, we are biased by our conditioning to associate religion with the Abrahamic religions' monarchical and paternalistic portrayals of God. Furthermore, many in the West have little frame of reference for understanding the cultural aspects of Buddhism and, therefore, have tended to utilize its philosophy and discard cultural aspects. Interestingly, some would say that Buddhism, to a large extent, was a vehicle to remove much of the cultural baggage from Hinduism to allow it to be more approachable for exportation, notwithstanding the profound metaphysical differences. Buddhism views spirituality in a different manner from Western religious traditions (as does Daoism for that matter) but that does not mean that it is not a religion.

 

I'm not a huge fan of the Wikipedia, but I do think this paragraph from it's definition of religion is a reasonable one and supports my position.

"Religion is a cultural system that establishes symbols that relate humanity to spirituality and moral values.[Clifford Geertz - Religion as a Cultural System 1973] Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature."

[Aaron]

Can You Spot The Sexual Innuendo?

 

 

Hello Jack,

 

You happen to be one of the others I'm talking about when I responded to Cowtao. It's nice to see you continue to appreciate the more extreme forms of compassion, i.e. ridiculing and diminishing others. Buddha is rooting for you I'm sure.

 

Aaron

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[steve]

Freeing the mind or more precisely a relaxed state of mind. The practice in and of itself deals with any mental constructs. It is very difficult to explain this practice. However, I will do my best to continue answering any questions.

I get it - that's perfect. When I practice meditation, I do exactly what you are describing for a bit before starting the nei-yeh exercises. When I first started, I used to keep the eyes closed. Sight is very distracting during some of the exercises. Later, however, I began to experiment with leaving the eyes open, though relaxed, and allowing the visual input to be there at the same time as the inner work. I'll definitely try the sky gazing - I've done similar work with candle, trees, ocean, wildlife...

Thanks

[Aaron]

Actually Vajraji is condescending. He hasn't posted today. Must have been a heavy duty party last night!

 

Well hopefully he had fun. I guess my point is that he doesn't seem to be intentionally condescending. You can tell when he intends to be rude. Yes he might think he knows the truth, but his actions seem genuinely motivated by the idea that he "knows" the truth, so he's not saying things to be rude or arrogant, unless you piss him off, then he becomes rude or arrogant.

 

I personally may disagree with Vaj, but he is one of the few Buddhists on this site I'm willing to discuss things with. Also he is more prone to explain things in his own words, which I think is an admirable quality.

 

Aaron

[Pero]

There is an experience of Buddhism that stems from no belief to belief. You can't have belief without something to refer it to, no-belief. If there is only belief, there is no point of reference.

 

I'm not really sure how this is related. Everyone can follow the Buddhist path. Even if everyone followed it, I could still follow it too. It does not follow that if everyone is following Buddhism I cannot.

Even if the only religion present would be Buddhism, it would still be Buddhism. It just wouldn't differentiate itself from other religions as there would be no need for it.

I actually think it's closer to the opposite of what you said. I can follow Buddhism because there still are other people who follow it. If there were none, I would not be able to follow it. If people don't follow the same religion it's much more likely they'll be hostile to someone who would.

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Aaron]

I'm not really sure how this is related. Everyone can follow the Buddhist path. Even if everyone followed it, I could still follow it too. It does not follow that if everyone is following Buddhism I cannot.

Even if the only religion present would be Buddhism, it would still be Buddhism. It just wouldn't differentiate itself from other religions as there would be no need for it.

I actually think it's closer to the opposite of what you said. I can follow Buddhism because there still are other people who follow it. If there were none, I would not be able to follow it. If people don't follow the same religion it's much more likely they'll be hostile to someone who would.

 

Actually no. When there is only one thing, that is the original source. Buddhism is a construct of the mind, not a reality mind you. It is an experience that can be defined by its ideology and philosophy. These ideas are contrasted with other ideas, hence the reason it is a distinct philosophy. The reason you follow it is because you can identify those parts that appeal to you, compassion for instance. The key is to look at the different concepts and how they are linked. For instance cruelty and compassion are the opposites of the same experience. We prefer one aspect of the experience more than the other, but we could not really appreciate that experience without having something to refer it to, the negative aspect of that experience. In the same way, yes you may have Buddhism, but not in the same sense that you experience it now, because there would be no way for you to actually appreciate it. Or as Lao Tzu said, "If all the world saw beauty as beauty, that in itself would be ugly."

 

We all like to think how nice it would be to have simply one world religion, but then we would have to decide which religion? Of course the answer is the one that "I" think is best. That's the problem though, what "I" think is best, may not be what you think is best. That's why I say appreciate the differences.

 

Aaron

 

edit- when there is nothing that is the source. If there is only one thing, then that is the force of creation. Sorry for confusing that.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Twinner

[ralis]

Juju,

I will respectfully disagree with the position that Buddhism is not a religion.

 

I think that if you ask most Buddhists throughout Asia, they would consider Buddhism more a religion than a philosophy.

In the West, we are biased by our conditioning to associate religion with the Abrahamic religions' monarchical and paternalistic portrayals of God. Furthermore, many in the West have little frame of reference for understanding the cultural aspects of Buddhism and, therefore, have tended to utilize its philosophy and discard cultural aspects. Interestingly, some would say that Buddhism, to a large extent, was a vehicle to remove much of the cultural baggage from Hinduism to allow it to be more approachable for exportation, notwithstanding the profound metaphysical differences. Buddhism views spirituality in a different manner from Western religious traditions (as does Daoism for that matter) but that does not mean that it is not a religion.

 

I'm not a huge fan of the Wikipedia, but I do think this paragraph from it's definition of religion is a reasonable one and supports my position.

"Religion is a cultural system that establishes symbols that relate humanity to spirituality and moral values.[Clifford Geertz - Religion as a Cultural System 1973] Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature."

 

 

Thanks for stating this. On many occasions, I have posted academic quotes as to why Buddhism is a religion. The Buddhists here have condemned me for that.

[C T]

Hello Cowtao,

 

Thanks for correcting my grammar, it's much appreciated. Your compassionate conduct is truly a gem by which all Buddhists should cling. *bow* One of the reasons I never listen(ed) to what you (and some others) say is because you don't seem authentic. Everything you say is scripted, as if you're repeating what you've already heard. I think it's hard to consider someone to have had an authentic experience, when you can read what they say they've experienced almost verbatim from the Buddhist Handbook. Perhaps if you explained the experience using your own words, it would make it more plausible.

 

Anyways, good luck on the Buddhist crusade, I'm sure Buddha's rooting for you.

 

Aaron

 

edited in order to express my tenants more clearly.

Let this parrot repeat something for you to consider -

 

"Meditation is participatory observation. What you are looking at responds to the process of looking. What you are looking at is you, and what you see depends on how you look." - Bhante Gunaratana

 

I challenge you to find a purported experience-sharing post of mine that you can read from a buddhist handbook. Otherwise, i will consider this slanderous, and would expect an open apology.

[ralis]

I get it - that's perfect. When I practice meditation, I do exactly what you are describing for a bit before starting the nei-yeh exercises. When I first started, I used to keep the eyes closed. Sight is very distracting during some of the exercises. Later, however, I began to experiment with leaving the eyes open, though relaxed, and allowing the visual input to be there at the same time as the inner work. I'll definitely try the sky gazing - I've done similar work with candle, trees, ocean, wildlife...

Thanks

 

I think the whole point is one of a visual/feeling experience while the analytical part liberates. Language creates separation.

[Aaron]

Let this parrot repeat something for you to consider -

 

"Meditation is participatory observation. What you are looking at responds to the process of looking. What you are looking at is you, and what you see depends on how you look." - Bhante Gunaratana

 

I challenge you to find a purported experience-sharing post of mine that you can read from a buddhist handbook. Otherwise, i will consider this slanderous, and would expect an open apology.

 

Well I challenge you to find one that isn't. I'm sure you think it's an authentic experience, but keep in mind if it comes from transmission, then the chances that you'll explain it differently than someone else who experienced it through transmission is very slim, since the whole purpose of transmission is to ensure that you have the "authentic" experience. It's not really a knock on you, just an observation. Otherwise I refer you to the actual "Buddhist's Handbook". The description of the phenomena you and others talk about is very similar, hence the reason I made the comment.

 

Aaron

[C T]

Well I challenge you to find one that isn't. I'm sure you think it's an authentic experience, but keep in mind if it comes from transmission, then the chances that you'll explain it differently than someone else who experienced it through transmission is very slim, since the whole purpose of transmission is to ensure that you have the "authentic" experience. It's not really a knock on you, just an observation. Otherwise I refer you to the actual "Buddhist's Handbook". The description of the phenomena you and others talk about is very similar, hence the reason I made the comment.

 

Aaron

Man.... i give up. I absolutely, unreservedly surrender. May victory be yours, may the spoils be mine.

Edited June 4, 2011 by CowTao

[Pero]

In the same way, yes you may have Buddhism, but not in the same sense that you experience it now, because there would be no way for you to actually appreciate it. Or as Lao Tzu said, "If all the world saw beauty as beauty, that in itself would be ugly."

Perhaps, but appreciation is kind of irrelevant. Even if it weren't, ones appreciation of Buddhism doesn't have to come because other religions are present, that is, comparing it to other religions. It can come because of Buddhism itself.

[goldisheavy]

Language creates separation.

 

I disagree with this statement.