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?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
If someone does not follow the precepts then they do not follow the precepts. We need not embellish on that that they are not buddhists.
Can you link me where buddha said not following a precept makes you not a buddhist? For a layperson.
The opinions we read of course vary, but they also vary between schools of Buddhism and various teachers.
has been studied by people who devoted
their lives to uncovering the facts.
The trouble with the people on this forum
not all , of course, is they make Buddhism
out to be whatever they want it to be.
Anyone can write a book about Buddhism.
But how much does the author really know about
about Buddhism?
Everybody has an opinion on evolution,
but how much credence would you give
to the opinions of a church pastor?
We could definitely benefit from listening
to experts on Buddhism.
were so many people who like to quote
the suttas on this forum' or ' I dont really
care what the suttas say' truly reflect the
ignorance and arrogance of some people.
Depending on the conversation, I tend to be pretty careful when someone asks me "what I am" in terms of religion. I rarely say "I'm a Buddhist" or "I'm a Christian". I reserve answers like that for (for example) hospital forms. But in a discussion I usually would say something like, "Well, I try to use some principles of Buddhism in my life and some principles of Christianity." Which I think is different (though not necessarily worse) than the person who might say "I'm a Buddhist", but is what people might consider a "lazy Buddhist".
Personally, when it comes to the 5 Precepts, I am strict about them, although with the issue of eating meat, I do...but I think that is a hazy one. Or maybe that's me making excuses.
In my sample of one, it is possible to have a loving relationship with a special individual that does not detract from one's practice, in fact the opposite - it complements it.
I think we need to admit that we are uncertain, that we don't know that being a lay person necessarily means being less enlightened - it may be the opposite. The dharma is not measured in terms of hours on the cushion or degrees of abstinence, but usually in terms of intention, effort, ability and sila. Of course, the precepts are a foundation and questioning some precepts does not mean a free for all. Many of the precepts were defined in a premodern world in which there was no TV and gender relations were entirely different and there were major consequences of sex such as having children. It was also a world where there was little room for change and was highly regulated in terms of caste and religious practice. Except among the rich there was little time for a hybrid option like western lay buddhists with significant amounts of spare time to practice: it was either homemaker or homeleaver. Ironically, the Buddha was one of the latter and was an itinerant Sadhu - not a monk. If we are uncertain we need to be open to learn.
exactly, buddha speaks love in this field and anything against this is not in line with the precepts of innately all beings. because it's the true nature of oneself and all.
Do you believe that in the modern world somehow there are magically no longer major consequences of sex.... such as having children, having unwanted children when birth control methods fail, having abortions when birth control methods or relationships fail, experiencing damaging physical side effects from birth control methods, transmitting communicable diseases, perpetuating/experiencing sexual abuse and exploitation, perpetuating/experiencing emotional abuse and exploitation, and the generation of dysfunctional personal, family, and community relationships?
Thanks!
Am I perfect? No. But I try my best to fulfill those 5 Precepts.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/index.php
(Theravada)
and its sister forum,
http://www.dharmawheel.net/
(Mahayana/Vajrayana)
The Buddha's lesson on Right Verbal Action is for everyone to consider and practice.... as they are mindfully inclined to do, should they so wish.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-vaca/index.html
If we are here because of Buddhism - then let's keep that at the forefront.
this can be done by writing the member's name, preceding it immediately by the '@' symbol...
like so:
@DharmaField If the passage quoted is a page or while back, it helps continuity.**
Many thanks!
Namaste
All that is asked from the Buddha is that you try to follow the precepts. Some here seem to be saying, in other threads, that they don't even have to follow and so tend to be teaching those that come here that anything goes, such as in the Zen_World thread. It is one thing to steal, it is quite another to come on here and say it is okay to steal becuase the precept is too hard to follow or is old fashioned or whatever.
I have never come across anyone saying that, without at least adding that one must accept the consequences of NOT following them.
please be cautious about making sweeping accusatory statements of this nature.
It is both careless and inaccurate, and bestows an ill-deserved reputation on other participants.
For me, the only question is interpretation of some of the Precepts. Some, to me, seem rather straight forward (such as abstaining from intoxicating drinks and drugs which can cause heedlessness or not stealing). Others are slightly more vague and open to interpretation, and we often discuss such issues here on the forum.
We need these faculties to be able to each discern for ourselves, to what extent and under which circumstances, we consider the 5 precepts to be of influence to any specific, individual isolated experience....
It's not a generalised, sweeping Precept. there is much that depends on just how we abstain from [insert precept here].....
You know, when I am thinking of breaking a Precept, I try to be mindful and go through a mental exercise where I imagine myself having to write down a justification for my action.
For example, if someone said, "Here, take some of these drugs" or "Here, have a drink", for me personally there is no valid justification for that action. So I don't do it.
A few months ago there was a wild animal trying to burrow into the foundation of my house. It was much easier to justify taking the life of a sentient being, because there were clear dangers to me and my friends and my pets, although in the end I worked with the exterminator to resolve the issue with non-lethal means.
I would think if a person came on here preaching that no one has to follow the precepts, that a laymember, one who has taken refuge in Buddha would come on a refute this instead of just thinking, well, that is his/her opinion.
But in between those extremes, there is a lot of variation in views about the Precepts.
When one takes refuge in the Buddha one is saying that they are following the Buddha, and this includes the precepts. I am going to assume from your answer that you have not taken refuge. I remember once telling my teacher about a group of Buddhists who are breaking the precepts and are harsh towards others, and he said, They are not true Buddhists," but this doesn't mean that a Buddhist doesn't break a precept; it means that the Buddhists I was referring to didn't think the precepts were necessary.
http://www.world-faiths.com/Buddhism/buddhism.htm a simple lesson
one does not have to publicly and officially Take Refuge to declare themselves a Buddhist.
In fact, as far as I am aware, a Refuge Ceremony may be conducted privately, within the confines of one's own home, far from anyone. I personally do not feel this is a justified assessment, from a point of view that obviously differs in tradition to the one your teacher is speaking from. I have never met a Buddhist from any tradition who does not believe the precepts are necessary.
Most posters here are very into keeping the precepts as can be seen by this thread and their comments on it.
Aint it so.
Poster A, and some friends, feel some people do not follow the Precepts or follow them correctly.
Poster B, and some friends, disagree.
Poster A and friends should realize that everyone's path is different, that things are not black and white, and the paths of Poster B and friends do not harm A's practice. Poster A should also realize that not everyone here is Buddhist, and therefore the Precepts may not apply to *everyone.*
This is a forum, and therefore a place for discussion. Discussion means interpretations, opinions, experiences. If one is looking for a homogenus group, one has perhaps to the wrong place.
(Poster B and friends should realize that newcomers may need help getting cosy, if they are to stay.)
Have a beautiful day, everyone.
at least for a period of time.
if they are serious about ending samsara.
The creation and nurturing of right relationship through avoidance of sexual misconduct is a teaching of Buddhism.
The creation of dysfunctional and exploitative relationship through the use of sex because one just has this desire and cannot help oneself is not a teaching of Buddhism.
I think most Buddhists, new or otherwise, would put a lot of weight on the precept to avoid killing.
On the other hand, people have different approaches to intoxicants. Some believe that "not abusing intoxicants" is the precept, whereas others believe "not consuming intoxicants" is the precept.
If we're talking about the admittedly difficult subject of "sex with a teacher," it's still not clearcut, because there are many husband/wife lay teachers in the West (and there also were in Tibet, for example). If we're talking "abusive sex," I think we can safely say the issue is with the "abusive" part as much as it is with the sex part.
The West is very alcohol-oriented; I do think it is possible that, in striving to figure out what to do about the intoxicant precepts, "new" Buddhists might be seen as trying to avoid precepts. It could be, though, that we're just navigating the sometimes-agitated waters where Eastern and Western cultures meet.