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.
First Precept's interpretation...In the Tibetan Tradition?
minimayhen88
Veteran
Dearest all,
The more I read on this topic, the more confused I get and the more I seek clarity :-) ;
How is the ~ First Precept ~ generally interpreted within those Tibetan Buddhist traditions?
I wish to take the First Precept as a (Refuge) Vow. But before doing so, I would like to find out more about it's true meaning. I had always thought that the First Precept - meant 'harmlessness' ("do no harm") to oneself and others, in thought, word and deed. But when I started reading books about Tibetan Buddhism, it almost always states, simply 'No Killing.' This is different to some other Buddhist tradions, that state the First Precept, more often as 'Do no harm.'
No Killing seem's too simple to me,,,, and being 'Harmless' seems far more complete. What I would like to ask, is whether or not this is simply a matter of definition. Or in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, does the First Precept mean 'No Killing' and nothing more?
I hope this makes sense and I would be So very grateful of your opinions / help,
With love, hugs and compassion,
Claudie x
The more I read on this topic, the more confused I get and the more I seek clarity :-) ;
How is the ~ First Precept ~ generally interpreted within those Tibetan Buddhist traditions?
I wish to take the First Precept as a (Refuge) Vow. But before doing so, I would like to find out more about it's true meaning. I had always thought that the First Precept - meant 'harmlessness' ("do no harm") to oneself and others, in thought, word and deed. But when I started reading books about Tibetan Buddhism, it almost always states, simply 'No Killing.' This is different to some other Buddhist tradions, that state the First Precept, more often as 'Do no harm.'
No Killing seem's too simple to me,,,, and being 'Harmless' seems far more complete. What I would like to ask, is whether or not this is simply a matter of definition. Or in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, does the First Precept mean 'No Killing' and nothing more?
I hope this makes sense and I would be So very grateful of your opinions / help,
With love, hugs and compassion,
Claudie x
0
Comments
Also, the Tibetan traditions vary. I explained to you, at length, in a PM exactly what is required, as I understand the teachings, in the tradition I follow (Karma Kagyu). I also explained that there are different levels of understanding of the precept, and that our understanding increases as we practice.
I don't know what you are confused - opinions vary, between traditions and within traditions. Different dharma teachers have different emphases on the precept, and very often, what is revealed to a newbie is quite different to what is revealed to a more experienced practitioner. You start off with 'baby steps'.
IMHO you need to experience Buddhist practice first-hand, find a teacher and stick to one tradition for a while, so you can get to know what is involved. Otherwise you are putting the cart before the horse.
You are getting conflicting information because you are reading stuff from all over the place. Until you have the basics under your belt, you will not be ready for further teachings. It's nothing to do with intelligence or academic ability, it's practicalities. Buddhism is a *practice*. You learn by doing, and a good teacher will help guide you through.
If I were you, I'd put the books aside and find a teacher. In the meantime, meditation will help you start to focus on what is important. I venture to suggest that different perspectives on the first precept are not your priority at the moment. Start with the Four Noble Truths.
Perhaps if you say where you are, other members can suggest Buddhist groups for you.
A lot of Buddhism in Swindon seems to be associated with the New Kadampa tradition, which is controversial. To avoid this site being accused of libel, I suggest you Google them.
Unfortunately, the NKT websites simply describe themselves as Tibetan Buddhist, without any mention of the many different Tibetan traditions, such as Gelug (the Dalai Lama's tradition), Kagyu, Nyingma and Sakya. Actually, NKT is a break-away group from the rest of Tibetan Buddhism.
My only experience of NKT is that I found them rather authoritarian. They certainly would you expect to study their materials, rather than your current pick and mix approach. But again, they have a huge emphasis on meditation as central to your practice.
There is a Theravada retreat centre near Swindon in Bradford on Avon, called Aukana. Theravada is a tradition which puts great emphasis on the study of Buddhist scriptures, especially the Pali Canon. Their meditation practice tends to be very simple, much like Ch'an.
http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/12506/first-precept-tibetan-buddhist....please-help-im-so-confused-x#Item_12
This is the third duplicate thread this week. Are you trying to set a new record? :dunce: