Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Some more quick questions:Is there any type of exocommunication within Buddhism where someone could be "cast out" from their religion/temple etc.Most religions seem to have some opposement to science explaining the world what is Buddhism's opinion on science?
To the first question: I'm not sure, probably in some sects. Certainly if you enroll as a monk in training in a Buddhist monastery and they don't think you can cut the mustard, they'll kick you out. But again Buddhism is a religion that can, by laypeople, be practiced alone or in small groups, after learning how to meditate. To the second question, Buddhism as such doesn't have an opinion :club:. But since Buddhism does not have a creator god and is not much interested in creation myths, Buddhists have been very accepting and encouraging towards science. The Dalai Lama has said that quantum mechanics is in accord with Buddhism, and certainly evolution as well. Here's an article by the Dalai Lama about science.
A Collaboration Between Science and ReligionJanuary 14, 2003 By His Holiness Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama These are times when destructive emotions like anger, fear and hatred are giving rise to devastating problems throughout the world. While the daily news offers grim reminders of the destructive power of such emotions, the question we must ask is, what can we do to overcome them? Of course such disturbing emotions have always been part of the human condition—humanity has been grappling with them for thousands of years. But I believe we have a valuable opportunity to make progress in dealing with them, through a collaboration between religion and science. With this in mind, I have, since 1987, engaged in an ongoing series of dialogues with groups of scientists. Organized by the Mind & Life Institute, they have been on topics ranging from quantum physics and cosmology to compassion and destructive emotions. I have found that while scientific findings offer a deeper understanding of such fields of knowledge as cosmology, it seems that Buddhist explanations can sometimes give scientists a new way to look at their own field. Our dialogue has provided benefits not just for science, but also for religion. Though Tibetans have valuable knowledge about the internal world, we have been materially backward partly because of a lack of scientific knowledge. Buddhist teachings stress the importance of understanding reality. Therefore, we should pay attention to what modern scientists have actually found through experiment and through measurement the things they have proved to be reality. At the beginning of these dialogues there were very few of us from the Buddhist side at first just myself and two translators. But recently, we have started to introduce modern science studies in our monasteries, and at our most recent science dialogue there were twenty or so Tibetan monks in the audience.The goals of the dialogue are on two levels. One is at the academic level, the expansion of knowledge. Generally speaking science has been an extraordinary tool for understanding the material world, making vast progress in our lifetime—though ofcourse there are still many things to explore. But modern science does not seem to be as advanced regarding internal experiences. In contrast, Buddhism, an ancient Indian thought, reflects a deep investigation into the workings of the mind. Over the centuries many people have carried out what we might call experiments in this field and have had significant, even extraordinary, experiences as a result of practices based on their knowledge. Therefore, more discussion and joint study between scientists and Buddhists scholars on the academic level could be usefulfor the expansion of human knowledge. On another level, if humanity is to survive, happiness and inner peace are crucial. Otherwise the lives of our children and their children are likely to be unhappy, desperate and short. The tragedy of 11th September 2001 demonstrated that modern technology and human intelligence guided by hatred can lead to immense destruction. Material development certainly contributes towards happiness - to some extent - and a comfortableway of life. But this is not sufficient. To achieve a deeper level of happiness we cannot neglect our inner development. I feel, for example, that our sense of fundamental human values has not kept pace with powerful new developments in our material abilities. For that reason I have been encouraging scientists to examine advanced Tibetan spiritual practitioners, to see what effects of their spiritual practice might be of benefit to others, outside the religious context. One approach would be to take the help of scientists in trying to make the workings of these inner methods clear. The important point here is to increase our understanding of the world of the mind, of consciousness, and of ouremotions. Experiments have already been carried out that show some practitioners can achieve a state of inner peace, even when facing disturbing circumstances. The results show such people to be happier, less susceptible to destructive emotions, and more attuned to the feelings of others. These methods are not just useful, but cheap: you don’t need to buy anything or make anything in a factory. You don’t need a drug or an injection. The next question is how are we to share these beneficial results with people beyond those who happen to be Buddhists. This does not concern Buddhism as such or any other religious tradition—it is simply a matter of trying to make clear the potential of the human mind. Everybody, whether rich or poor, educated or uneducated, has the potential to lead a peaceful, meaningful life. We must explore as faras we can how that can be brought about. In the course of that exploration, it will become obvious that most disturbances are stimulated not by external causes but by such internal events as the arising of disturbing emotions. The best antidote to these sources of disruption will come about through enhancing our ability to handle these emotions ourselves. Eventually we need to develop an awareness that provides the ways and means to overcome negative, disturbing emotions ourselves. The spiritual methods are available, but we must make these acceptable to the mass who may not bespiritually inclined. Only if we can do that will these methods have the widest of effect. This is important because science, technology, and material development cannot solve all our problems. We need to combine our material development with the inner development of such human values as compassion,tolerance, forgiveness, contentment and self-discipline.
From http://www.dalailama.com/Apparently there's a whole wikipedia entry on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_scienceFrom that page:
The American physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer made an analogy to Buddhism when describing the Heisenberg uncertainty principle thusly: If we ask, for instance, whether the position of the electron remains the same, we must say 'no;' if we ask whether the electron's position changes with time, we must say 'no;' if we ask whether the electron is at rest, we must say 'no;' if we ask whether it is in motion, we must say 'no.' The Buddha has given such answers when interrogated as to the conditions of man's self after his death; but they are not familiar answers for the tradition of seventeenth and eighteenth-century science. J. R. Oppenheimer, Science and the Common Understanding, (Oxford University Press, 1954) pp 8-9.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'll agree with the posters above that all of that has been written in this thread has been very interesting and enlightening (see what I did there?) and I appreciate everything that has been shared as I'm sure others do to.I'd just like to add that I'm slowly learning a little bit about Buddhism as a whole and all that goes along with it and the part I like the most is that I have yet to come across anything that directly contradicts my own "secular" values. My main problem with Christianity and other religions has never been the supernatural beliefs they hold (though I often find them ridiculous) but the parts/stories/teachings of them that are morally wrong and disturbing. Often these other religions either sweep these parts under the rug or try and interpret them in a positive light but neither of these approaches clears my own conscience.So far in my buddhist learnings I haven't encountered anything about the Buddha spreading his word by the sword or condemning the killing of thousands of "evil" people and thats what is encouraging me to learn more about it. That and the lack of judgement placed upon people who disagree with the religious leaders.Some more quick questions:Is there any type of exocommunication within Buddhism where someone could be "cast out" from their religion/temple etc.Most religions seem to have some opposement to science explaining the world what is Buddhism's opinion on science?As always thanks for the opportunity to learn.
Thanks for the kind words. I'm glad people are finding this useful. Tim's already answered well the questions about science and excommunication. As he said, monasteries will ask you to leave if you're not a good monk, but in general, I don't know of any group that is so rigid you can be thrown out for disagreeing. That's so _not_ the Buddhist way that I had never even considered it a possiblity until you asked.I'm with you in that it's not as much the supernatural stuff I have a problem with as it is the all-too-natural...the killing, the hatred of outside groups, and the many immoral ways the Bible's "moral" code has been put to use. I approached faith with a lot of curiosity. I read the entire Bible, Genesis to Revelation, plus several books of scholarship (Bart D. Ehrman is a good one). [Just as an aside, it never ceases to astonish and appall me that so many so-called Christians HAVE NOT READ all of their own "holy book." I dunno -- it's only the blueprint to _saving your eternal soul_, how important could it be? Nah, I'd rather just have a preacher tell me what's in there, read bits and pieces out of context, and thump it when I need to.]Decided that didn't work for me, so I read a few books on Judaism (again, historical and contextual scholarship, as that's my leaning). Not my style, either. Read some of the Vedic texts and books on Hinduism. Too many gods to keep straight, too much feeding and draping and pouring milk on statues for me. Finally, got to Buddhism and found my home, intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually (whatever that word means). Had it not worked, I would have gone (rather skeptically) to Islam. Skipped it in my West-to-East direction because I was pretty certain I wasn't going to like it.IMHO, if you're searching for a faith at all (and nothing wrong with not having one), that's the way to do it. Know all of them, from the inside. Don't read what Christians say about Hinduism -- read what Hindus say of it, and vice versa (not that anyone in this country would do the vice-versa). Read scholarship on all of it. Try to learn how the modern version came to us from the past, and what turns it took along the way. And then ask yourself how the moral code in the books is actually played out in the real world. Are practitioners judgmental or cruel? Are they intellectually lazy? Are they warlike or violent? Or are they kind, peaceful people who are unafraid of honest questions?Colin McGinn is a philosopher (and atheist) who was asked by Bill Moyers if logic had any place in faith. Of course it does, he said, no matter what you believe, if it doesn't follow its own internal logic -- i.e., if it contradicts itself -- it's got a problem even on its own terms. If an outsider cannot ask questions of it, or is told that it will only make sense once he or she becomes a believer, then it cannot stand up to honest inquiry and it has a problem in terms of the real world. In short, he said, faith can be and _should_ be subject to logic. Not that logic can lead you to faith, necessarily, but that you should never have to discard logic in order to have faith. I find that fits well with Buddhism.I respect DN's faith because he's clear that it's all about being a better person and embodying the best of Christianity in his words and actions. I love the idea of embodying faith -- Buddhists put a lot of emphasis on it, saying, "What you do moment-to-moment is what you are." You cannot call yourself patient if moment to moment you are tapping your foot or watching the clock. You cannot call yourself hard-working if you're slacking off on a poker forum during the workday (oops!). He gets that. But I'm appalled at the number of Christians who seem to use their faith as a reason to feel they're better than everyone else, because they're chosen or saved or whatever, or, worse, treat Jesus as a cosmic slot machine, i.e., praying for a new car or help with their cable bill. I see that a lot around here. There's a range, but when you're used to seeing the low end of the range like 90% of the time, it makes it harder to align yourself with the little 10%, even though you know they are doing it right. I know it's rude, but when people ask me why I'm not a Christian, I tell them, "Two reasons: one, I've read the Bible; and two, other Christians."
Link to post
Share on other sites

Awakening the Buddha Within : Tibetan Wisdom for the Western WorldHave you read this book?I was thinking of picking up Hagen's book at lunch today but some reviews say it would still be a little to hard to grasp for someone completely new to the whole concept and this book would be a better starter. Any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awakening the Buddha Within : Tibetan Wisdom for the Western WorldHave you read this book?I was thinking of picking up Hagen's book at lunch today but some reviews say it would still be a little to hard to grasp for someone completely new to the whole concept and this book would be a better starter. Any thoughts?
I haven't, but I did just read his _Buddha Is as Buddha Does_, and he's a very clear, engaging writer with a good knack for explaining things. Personally, I didn't find Hagen hard, but his wasn't the first book I read on the subject, so I was probably already primed for it and may not be the best judge on how easy it would be for beginners.Give _Awakening_ a shot, and let us know what you think!
Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't, but I did just read his _Buddha Is as Buddha Does_, and he's a very clear, engaging writer with a good knack for explaining things. Personally, I didn't find Hagen hard, but his wasn't the first book I read on the subject, so I was probably already primed for it and may not be the best judge on how easy it would be for beginners.Give _Awakening_ a shot, and let us know what you think!
If you highlight a book title and then hit the little "u" up above the posting area it'll underline it for you. Of course you probably already know that and just save yourself time with the underscore thingies, but I can't help myself.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If you highlight a book title and then hit the little "u" up above the posting area it'll underline it for you. Of course you probably already know that and just save yourself time with the underscore thingies, but I can't help myself.
Actually, I didn't -- still a newbie. Thanks! Also just laziness and force of habit from plain-text e-mails and not wanting to stop typing long enough to reach for mouse.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I grew impatient waiting (not in a bad way, just bored at work and wanted to go to the bookstore) and I picked up Hagens book. I was skimming it and it seemed interesting. I will post when I am done with my thoughts and such. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Books about Buddhism that I have read and would highly recommend:The Dharma Bums, by Jack KerouacZen and the Art of Archery, by Eugene HerrigalThe Diamond Sutra - this is very short and can be read in under an hour. The Wikipedia page links to a few different English translations at the bottom, available free online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_SutraNote: I don't have my copies in front of me so I don't know which translations of the sutras I've read. In my experience, (good) book stores will have multiple translations of certain sutras or writings, so I usually grab up a few different translations, compare a few sentences, read the back cover or whatever to see how well respected this translation is, and then buy a copy that seems best to me. In my understanding, there aren't really any canonical English translations - everything in the canon is in Sanskrit or other ancient languages. Ok back to the list - The Gateless Barrier: Zen Comments on the Mumonkan: This is a collection of Zen koans (parables/stories which are intermittently presented to monks undergoing Zen training, designed to empty one's mind), with ancient comments by Mumon, and modern comments by Zenkai Shibayama. I very highly recommend this one.I may think of more later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am only about 25 pages in but I like it. I am not a huger reader because I have been spending most of my days in a Business Law book but I like it. I can see some religions reading this and getting offended though.

The moral teachings that derives from the buddha-dharma is not a goody-goody code of behavior where we pretend virtue, curry favor, or promise to be good so that we can claim a reward at some later date. Rather, sound morality takes place wholly in the moment. It is based on the immediacy of Reality, on how we actually live. Our "reward" is in immediacy, in here and now, not in a never-never land
I think I am in love.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so if I already believe in pretty much everything I've read about Buddhism, what's the point? I guess I'm saying...if most of the teachings seem like good common sense, what has being Buddhist (or at least knowing a lot about it) changed in you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, so if I already believe in pretty much everything I've read about Buddhism, what's the point? I guess I'm saying...if most of the teachings seem like good common sense, what has being Buddhist (or at least knowing a lot about it) changed in you?
It's made me much more aware than I used to be about how much control I have over my thoughts and emotions, i.e., they don't just arise in me out of nowhere and they don't control me. I'm the force that creates them and I can guide my thoughts to being controlled by my highest aspirations as a person rather than by leaping, tumbling "monkey mind," as Buddhism calls the usual random flow of thoughts (not to start a monkey discussion here).It's also made me a lot more appreciative of moment-to-moment life -- the smell of boxwoods walking to work, the quirks in my husband that might otherwise drive me crazy, etc., as I was saying on page 2 of this thread. I feel more expansive, I guess, is the way to put it.There are a lot of calls in Buddhism to let go of the pressure to prefer, the need we seem to feel in America to have a loud, 25-words-or-less opinion about EVERYTHING. Once I did that, I felt much more peaceful. I care about politics, but I don't get to control what happens in it, so I don't worry about it. I vote, after learning every candidate's position, but I can't stare at CNN for hours hooked on every twist and turn of the news cycle. I used to be that way, convinced I would miss something 'important' if I didn't stay plugged in to media constantly. Finally, I realized all I was missing was sensationalism and empty hype. Now, I read headlines online every day, but the television is only on for poker, Futurama, and a couple of other special things (okay -- Project Runway and NASCAR). And I feel more peaceful because of that, too.The following is a passage from the book I'm currently writing:---What makes this practice worth the effort is the freedom, relaxation, and sense of ease that come with this clearing away of mental undergrowth. To someone who has never attempted Buddhist or similar practice, it is almost unexplainable. It sounds to them like unending work, like rigid, neurotic self-control, like exhausting effort. What it is instead is a discipline that is anything but rigid, one that accepts failure from time to time – after all, we can’t catch and direct every thought, so we have to accept failures hundreds of times a day (honestly, but without recrimination) – while still retaining enough kindness and warmth toward ourselves to keep making the effort to be happier and wiser. It is a freedom that comes from a clear, uncluttered mind, and an open curiosity toward new people or ideas, willingness to accept things on their own terms rather than trying immediately to pigeonhole them in our pre-conceived world. To quote Goldstein again:As we face the inevitable difficulties and challenges of working with our minds, the temptation will always be to look for some easier way, some other teacher or method. This misses a crucial point in practice: difficulties are part of the path. After some time ... I began to appreciate the strength that comes from extending beyond the boundaries of comfort zones. Given my own deep-seated inclination toward ease and comfort, a mantra that in times of choice helped me remember the possibility of extending limits was “Choose the difficult.” It may be unpleasant in the short term to “choose the difficult,” but in the long run you will always wind up liking yourself better, going further, and respecting yourself more if you do.---That sums up my feelings -- and it's the first time any part of my book has seen the light of day other than between me and my editors!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, i've heard about this thread for days now and find in pretty interesting as well.Having grown up Catholic and skeptical at a young age I began to question everything about religon and throughout most of high school and college would read about many various religons and philosphies/philosophers. A high school teacher and given me a book to read which got me pretty interested in Buddhism but it was really the Jack Kerouac books that interested me the most. The last chapter in On the Road is an amazing read. For those not familiar with him he was known as the original hippie and creator of the whole 60's genre. He was also a Woody Guthrie type hobo, that hopped trains alot and partied excessively. So yeah, a good read.I then took Karate when I was 21 for a few years and the "owner" was heavily into Buddhism and talked me into coming to well, meetings I guess. We mostly drank green tea and sat in a circle and talked/meditated. I went about a dozen times over a couple years and liked it, but I was a single parent with a baby and didn't really have the time. I did read a ton more on it back then.As was said in this thread alot, most people vastly misunderstand Buddhism as a religon. I think back then, 26 years ago, that it did help me lead a better life and offer some insights to myself and behaviour that I still use today.I would love nothing more than sitting in a circle with Speedz and SBriand and holding hands humming.

Link to post
Share on other sites
As was said in this thread alot, most people vastly misunderstand Buddhism as a religon.
in fact, a lot of buddhists and religious scholars are of the opinion that buddhism isn't a "religion," properly speaking, at all. personally, i could care less what you call it, but it seems to me that it's best discussed alongside other, more proper, religions.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay, i've heard about this thread for days now
Who's been talkin' smack about my thread?
I would love nothing more than sitting in a circle with Speedz and SBriand and holding hands humming.
Awwww...add Checky (and his kitten avie) and Tim and I'm there.I think what you say about Buddhism helping you live a better life and giving you insight to yourself and your behavior is exactly it. That's what it's there for, and that's pretty much all it's there for.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Who's been talkin' smack about my thread?Awwww...add Checky (and his kitten avie) and Tim and I'm there.I think what you say about Buddhism helping you live a better life and giving you insight to yourself and your behavior is exactly it. That's what it's there for, and that's pretty much all it's there for.
No one was talking smack, some of us all post in the same thread and nothing but good things have been said.
Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Mumonkan:"The wind was flapping a temple flag, and two monks were arguing about the flag. One said, "The flag is moving." The other said, "the wind is moving." They could not agree, no matter how hard they debated. The sixth patriarch, Eno, happened to come by and said, "Not the wind, not the flag. It is the mind that is moving!" The two monks were struck with awe."Southern Buddhist I'm interested if you have studied koans at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites
No one was talking smack, some of us all post in the same thread and nothing but good things have been said.
Just kidding. I'm really glad people have liked it. You all are a really thoughtful and insightful group, and there's been so much kindness and respect in this thread.
"The wind was flapping a temple flag, and two monks were arguing about the flag. One said, "The flag is moving." The other said, "the wind is moving." They could not agree, no matter how hard they debated. The sixth patriarch, Eno, happened to come by and said, "Not the wind, not the flag. It is the mind that is moving!" The two monks were struck with awe."Southern Buddhist I'm interested if you have studied koans at all?
Only through books, not with a teacher. I love them, because I tend to be highly logical and rationalistic, and I like the way koans subvert this and force me outside my comfort zone, force me to grow. I'm rather charmed by the very koan you quote. I've also heard it told as a Zen joke:The wind was flapping a temple flag while four monks were meditating. One said, "Flag is flapping." The second said, "Wind is flapping." The third upstaged them and said, "Mind is flapping." The fourth, senior monk came out of his meditation and said sternly, "Mouths are flapping!"
Link to post
Share on other sites
"The wind was flapping a temple flag, and two monks were arguing about the flag. One said, "The flag is moving." The other said, "the wind is moving." They could not agree, no matter how hard they debated. The sixth patriarch, Eno, happened to come by and said, "Not the wind, not the flag. It is the mind that is moving!" The two monks were struck with awe."
whoa man that's deep.... pass the bong dude
Link to post
Share on other sites
whoa man that's deep.... pass the bong dude
:club: That was one of the more 'straightforward' koans, similar to the one hand clapping, which is also a classic Zen koan. Most of them are a bit more intricate. Here is another very well known one:
"A monk asked Joshu, a Chinese Zen master: `Has a dog Buddha-nature or not?'Joshu answered: `Mu!'"
And Mumon's poem regarding it:
Has a dog Buddha-nature?This is the most serious question of all.If you say yes or no,You lose your own Buddha-nature.
Mu is the Chinese symbol for nothing or no, but of course all sentient beings have Buddha-nature. As I learned it, when this koan was/is presented to monks, the method is for the master to yell the MU! at the top of his lungs, startling the monk.Another koan I remember a professor of mine telling is "What is your original face before your mother and father were born?"One of the best/most famous Western koans: "What happens to the hole when the cheese is gone?" - Bertolt Brecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff so far as I've stated before I'm quite enjoying this thread. It seems like most of the people in this thread spreading their knowledge are from the Western world and thus had a very low chance of being born into a buddhist family meaning they had to convert on their own sometime in life which is basically where I'm coming from if you couldn't tell.Anyways one more question about buddhism I had is how do they deal with rule/law breakers. Now ideally no one would ever murder someone else but in reality we all know it happens. Does buddhism lay out specific rules/policies on such crimes as murder or do they leave that to the legal department and try and avoid such situations?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyways one more question about buddhism I had is how do they deal with rule/law breakers. Now ideally no one would ever murder someone else but in reality we all know it happens. Does buddhism lay out specific rules/policies on such crimes as murder or do they leave that to the legal department and try and avoid such situations?
"The Great Way is not difficult, just avoid picking and choosing.""As soon as one speaks, that is picking and choosing.""Do not avoid picking and choosing."This one does not pick and choose. This one does not avoid picking and choosing. This one neither picks and chooses nor avoids picking and choosing. My shouts fill the heavens and the earth and I rain fists upon you like breaking waves: It is just this.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyways one more question about buddhism I had is how do they deal with rule/law breakers. Now ideally no one would ever murder someone else but in reality we all know it happens. Does buddhism lay out specific rules/policies on such crimes as murder or do they leave that to the legal department and try and avoid such situations?
Buddhists might have a hard time meting out the death penalty, but they would not have a hard time at all with punishment. This is where karma comes into play again. It may have been your karma to murder that busload of nuns, and it may have been their karma to be murdered by you, but now, because of that act, it's your karma to spend the rest of your life in jail, or maybe be executed. Your actions caused your karma, so punishment after rule-breaking is only natural. There's no giving of free passes, but notice that there's also really no hate or vilification or judgment, either. It's just all proceeding as it should.And Spademan really gets it. He's got the angry Zen master vibe, the kind of teacher who would happily be beating his students with a stick, but he totally gets it. The injunction against picking and choosing is one I like a lot as well. I think of it often. "Just This" is exactly it, but I don't think it can be the beginning instruction. It must come later, when the student is ready to hear its fullness and completeness.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am scared. I was reading Hagen's book this morning and he had me look at a picture and figure out what it was. He said it would be hard and I would feel uncomfortable and frustrated but the minute it becomes clear I will feel relieved and such and that is I guess that is what it would feel like when I finally see. I swear I looked at that picture for 15 mintues. Took a break, looked at it again. I gave up and looked on page 140 for the answer and I looked at the picture again for 10 minutes knowing what it is supposed to be and I can't see it. It is really frustrating me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...