Welcome home! Please contact
lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site.
New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days.
Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Is New Buddhism About Ignoring Precepts?
Comments
perhaps the person who have the setback would have avoided many fights with the family if he had continued his progress instead, freeing himself of his anger etc...
and ultimately;
let say you did not have all of those set backs.
people may come to you as you are a source of inspiration and you would then be able to help them.
let say you did have the set backs, people not coming to you and therefore perhaps miss their one chance to be guided in the right direction.
Now repeat the process.
These people therefore not inspire anyone to liberate themselves etc...
in the end maybe thousands of people not being free (and not following any precepts therefore perhaps not caring about killing sentient beings, so perhaps thousands of animal lives...) as a indirect result of our decision that supposedly only affected ourself.
I do think, however, that you're taking my example too far. I said "a drink". If I take "a drink" tonight, alone, I have broken my commitment to fulfilling the Precept(s). When I was a Principal I was a leader, and that one drink wouldn't have affected my job performance the next day or beyond.
I agree, that if I build on that one drink -- like my father did -- it would have affected my performance over time, and could have led to all that you mentioned...not that I was that influential.
So I agree with your general premise, but I do see it a matter of degrees.
I started this site for people, specifically Westerners, who have zero experience with Buddhism. I'm talking utter ignorance like my dear, sweet departed grandmother who thought Buddhists were orange-robed Christians—her worldview literally couldn't comprehend a non-Christian existence.
Many of us are raised in cultures that completely ignore Buddhism; at most it's a footnote in the local bookstore, a "religion for Asians", or a special on evening television. In Western pop culture, it's a religion for weirdo celebrities, and most middle Americans would be hard pressed to tell you the difference between Buddhism, Hare Krishna, Hinduism, and Kung Fu movies.
This site was founded on the idea that Westerners who come from these types of backgrounds need a safe place where there are no stupid questions. Do Buddhist celebrate Christmas? Was Buddha a real person? Is the fat Buddha in Chinese restaurants a God that Chinese people worship? How can I be happy?
Anything else that this site has become is a direct result of the people who choose this as their online home. We have monks, laypeople, born again Christians, Muslims, and people from every internet-connected nation on Earth visiting here. It's going to be wild and diverse and crazy; that's what we love about it.
There is no "What is this site?". It is a place where @Lincoln, @Jason, @Federica, @Mountains, @Cloud, @ShiftPlusOne, and myself will keep things nice so that everyone can talk about Buddhism at any level, freely, and without fear of being ripped a new asshole for saying something someone else disagrees with or thinks is stupid. Nothing more, nothing less.
precepts are not like that.
You undertake these precepts because you know its harmful
to yourself if you break them. Karma, remember?
That does not mean that nobody breaks the precepts.
Even monks break their rules.
What follows is confession, acknowledgement and forgiveness.
Of course, some major rules when broken, the monk has to disrobe.
In this day and age, nobody needs to kill anything, and if the animal belonged to someone else, it's theft.... your hypothesis meets mine.....
Are Cloud and Shift still around?
I've been here 7 years, and he's still my hero.....!
Fede...your posts lately have been right on point. I will be "liking" you alot.....:)
Jason....Loved the MLKJR piece on your blog.
The protest/strike/voice-up is upon us.
May we support each other in the causes that benefit all of us.
"The five precepts are training rules, which, if one were to break any of them, one should be aware of the breech and examine how such a breech may be avoided in the future. The resultant of an action (often referred to as Karma) depends on the intention more than the action itself. It entails less feelings of guilt than its Judeo-Christian counterpart. Buddhism places a great emphasis on 'mind' and it is mental anguish such as remorse, anxiety, guilt etc. which is to be avoided in order to cultivate a calm and peaceful mind."
This sounds so much better than the unyielding orthodox approach some people here seem to follow.
Newcomer or not, IMO the OP is just as responsible for creating a good or bad climate for discussion here as those he is criticizing.
I wonder what grounds your teacher said that a group is not buddhist. Did buddha say that a layperson who breaks a precept is not buddhist? Like a said if you break a precept you break a precept. Any additional stigma added is concoction or sankara. Buddha did say to watch who you spend time with and are around. But that is a different story than saying someone is not a buddhist which is not true in my opinion and has no precedent in scripture or living traditions. Of course all (due) respects to your teacher and I am not here to contradict him.
So if I don't steal I am impacting someone negativity? if I don't kill?
This thread reminds me of what a teacher once told me. Any religion in its beginnings degenerates shortly thereafter, as do threads. SMILE.
Regarding myself I was a drinker for awhile but interestingly I was a vegetarian at that time. Now I eat meat but I have given up drinking. From that standpoint I can neither criticize a hunter or drunk. Without being a hypocrit at least.
No, I don't allude to the imponderables teaching at all....
Right, let me elaborate....
We take and keep the vows as a matter of course.
They are precepts we abide by, and while no situation exists, that places us in having to make that choice, then keeping them is done with the same ease as getting up and pouring ourselves a glass of water.
However, if we are placed in a direct situation where we have to make a mindful choice, and we have to decide whether doing - or not doing - something will be skilful, mindful and appropriate - then the reasons for having to make that choice, and the ramifications, are going to impact on someone else.
what situation might you find yourself in, where you may be faced with the choice of stealing something - or not?
what situation might you find yourself in, where you may be faced with the choice of killing something - or not? indeed.
I am.
I was only asking why you can't practice without making vows. Maybe I misread something you wrote and in fact you are not saying that you can't practice without making vows. The Thai monasteries that you mentioned don't even require it for practicing with them.
More like "Seems to be a matter of how serious we intend to be"
— AN 6.63
How we appear is not kamma, intention is kamma. A person who can keep the precepts 100% all the time, does not even need them to begin with. In that situation, they become completely useless. They are practice tools. If you have already perfected the practice, there is no more use for any tools. They are most useful for people who have trouble keeping them.
Though a case could be made for setting a goal for yourself, and taking a challenge, and thereby developing a discipline. But I think if one is too casual with keeping the precepts, they become kind of meaningless, don't they? There's no opportunity there for developing a discipline, if you say, "oops! oh well, it's ok. Better luck next time". idk :-/
i think its also important to understand the reasons the precepts exist. they are not about judgement, right, wrong, or being a good or bad Buddhist in any way. they each have unique functions in helping us make progress on the path. unless you are an Ajahn I don't think you can really look at a fellow Buddhist and pass judgement on them based on there inability to adhere to the precepts... i mean really, is ANYONE here adhering to the 5 precepts 100%? probably not... it takes MAJOR commitment and progress in practice.
my understanding of the precepts is as follows:
1-3, harming, stealing, lying. these 3 are intrinsic functionings of the universe, much like gravity or the magnetic and nuclear forces... they are universal laws, inherent and intrinsic... when intention to harm meet action unskillful karma is made. these 3 are simply ways to avoid the worst possible type of unskillful karma you can make for yourself.
4, sexual misconduct... because sexual desire is so incredibly powerful, it can cause us to disregard the other precepts in order to get sex... it also creates unbelievably strong attachment in the mind.
5, intoxicants. simply because intoxication clouds the mind and retards mindfulness and concentration.
I'm saying that it may not be essential to make vows in order to practice Buddhism.
I'm saying there is no essential difference between a lay practitioner and a monastic in terms of their being responsible or not.
I'm saying that our apparent actions can be indicative of how serious we are in practicing Buddhism, and in this way I agree with the OP. Indeed, the fact that we are not monastics and indulge in this online debate may be somewhat indicative of our seriousness.
What do we agree on:
1) it is a lay practitioners choice whether to take precepts
2) if a lay person does not take precepts they are not serious
3) it is 'better' to be serious - you get to advance three squares
4) collect 200 dollars for passing go
No, the obvious solution is to take the precepts and try to keep them, because that is precisely what they are for. A person that can always keep the precepts, does not even need to take them to begin with. For a person that can always keep them, they are useless and unnecessary.