Modern Buddhism?

mahayanaman

Hi, Mahayana man here.

I was just trying to find other peoples views on modern buddhism.
Do you like the way buddhism is developing to modern society?
Just wondering.

May you find peace in the teachings of Lord Buddha

Mahayana man

DharmaKitten

I voted "no", but really I find it impossible to answer with any certainty. Afterall, how shall we define "modernism"? Even within a single modern society, there is wide disagreement in terms of beliefs & philosophies. Personally, though, I do see that there are a lot of great ideas out there such as freedom of beliefs, equality among genders and races, et cetera.

mahayanaman

Hi,
Not many people replied but I think that yours will be the best(if any do reply).

May you find peace in the teachings of Lord Buddha

Mahayana man

zenmonk_genryu

Wouldn't the Buddhism of any age be 'modern' Buddhism?

federica

Absolutely spot on ZM.....

Mahayana Man, at the risk of sounding a bit confrontational, I'm not really sure what your aim is here... this is a well established site and we're all equal here....
It would be nice if you could at least go into the New Members Introduction Thread ( Lotus Lounge) and tell us a bit about yourself.... at the moment, I get the impression that you are trying to sound us out to see whether we come up to scratch- !!
So what's your point?

mahayanaman

Hi,

Ha ha ha...Nice one Federica.
Hmmmm what should I tell you first.

May you find peace in the teachings of Lord Buddha

Mahayana man

federica

Follow the format as given in this thread:

www.newbuddhist.com/forum/showthread.php?t=486

Start with that: Then we can get better acquainted.....

ajani_mgo

If it is messing Buddhism up, then I say goodbye Buddhism! After all should it not be a dynamically-changing thing?

Jerbear

I must agree with Ajani. One of the things that attracts me to Buddhism is the ability to be applied to any time in history. It's not based on a fixed event like the monotheistic religions, so it can be dynamic not static.

And this is interesting as my feelings on Buddhism change based on the situation. Sometimes, I think that karma isn't the best. Sometimes I think meditation is the best thing ever thought of by man. I'm trying to get to the point that my practice isn't based on feelings, but realizing that the truth of Buddhism is apllicable to any situation.

federica

The fact that you've said it - that you are realising it - means you're closer than you think..... :wavey:

Simonthepilgrim

Jerbear wrote:

................ One of the things that attracts me to Buddhism is the ability to be applied to any time in history. It's not based on a fixed event like the monotheistic religions, so it can be dynamic not static.

And this is interesting as my feelings on Buddhism change based on the situation. Sometimes, I think that karma isn't the best. Sometimes I think meditation is the best thing ever thought of by man. I'm trying to get to the point that my practice isn't based on feelings, but realizing that the truth of Buddhism is apllicable to any situation.

Whilst the Dharma may be "the same yesterday, today and tomorrow", Buddhism has evolved in many ways since the First Turning of the Wheel at Sarnath. It is that ability to learn and, thus, to arrive at different expressions of the inexpressible. As a group, here, we embody many of the different traditions and must be aware that they arose across time. There was not, nor does there seem any possibility of being, a once-for-all 'revelation'.

Padmasambhava, the Guru Rinpoche, said that 'treasures' would be revealed as we became ready to understand them. And the process continues today as it will tomorrow.

The splash of the Buddha Shakyamuni's awakening ripples out through time and space.

zenmonk_genryu

Jerbear wrote:

I'm trying to get to the point that my practice isn't based on feelings, but realizing that the truth of Buddhism is apllicable to any situation.

One painful lesson I've learnt is that a Buddhism apart from feelings is not either possible or of any use. Based on feelings may mean something else again though. Can you clarify that for me?

federica

.....Are we interchanging 'Feelings' with 'Emotions', by any chance.....?

Iawa

federica wrote:

.....Are we interchanging 'Feelings' with 'Emotions', by any chance.....?

How many ways can you split a hair? LOL

federica

With the right equipment.....? You'd be surprised....!

For clarification, I think for my part, I view 'feelings' as acute, temporary and superficial reactions to a stimulus....Emotions are the deep-seated, fundamental characteristics manifested, either habitually or occasionally, but that linger, or root and remain....These are the ones that need more 'working' on....
We can say, "You've hurt my feelings" but we don't say, "you've hurt my emotions".... Emotions are what power the feelings...

Does that make any sense to anyone? :scratch: :wavey:

Iawa

federica wrote:

With the right equipment.....? You'd be surprised....!

For clarification, I think for my part, I view 'feelings' as acute, temporary and superficial reactions to a stimulus....Emotions are the deep-seated, fundamental characteristics manifested, either habitually or occasionally, but that linger, or root and remain....These are the ones that need more 'working' on....
We can say, "You've hurt my feelings" but we don't say, "you've hurt my emotions".... Emotions are what power the feelings...

Does that make any sense to anyone? :scratch: :wavey:

Thanks for clarifying your stance.

For me I view the sequence as stimulus, registers to correlates, stimulates hypthalmus, release of proteins that trigger body feeling depending on judged depth of experience in conjunction with stored neuronal correlates. IE, resentimentalization of past events in the present. Hey, but that's just me! LOL

Actually, the processs takes microseconds to complete cycle. The more trained the mind is to observe events in present context seperate from stored corrrelates dramatically slows response, however , if mindfullness is not engaged previous behavior structures will be set into action. These have been my observances.

federica

Quite.

That's what I meant to say.

Simonthepilgrim

When I was first trained in psychotherapy, emotion was considered a separate 'function' within the mind/body/spirit complex, as distinct as 'thought'. After too many years of practice (Buddhist and professional), I am now convinced that we need a different model entirely.

My reading of Buddhist psychology certainly suggests that separating out emotion as a discrete function is to miss an important fact: emotion is an epiphenomenon, as Iawa describes. Emotions are the end-result of chemical interactions within the body and their effects on mind. As to which comes first, it all depends, because emotion is also situational.

Mind interprets body reaction is particular, habitual ways. Here is an experiment that anyone can try: tell a group of people the following story:

It is Christmas Eve and you have done no shopping. There are no presents yet bought, nor have you any food in the house. You go to the supermarket and load up the biggest trolly you can find. You arrive, with everything you need for a great Christmas, at the checkout just as the shop is closing. It is the only shop around and you suddenly realise, as your purchases are being checked, that you have left all your money, credit cards, etc, at home. You have no time to go back and get it before the shop shuts.

Now, get each pertson in the group to write down (one word if poss.) what they feel.

Compare what each has written and you wuill find that you have almost as many interpretations of the emotion as you have people.

You can say, "When I do this, adrenaline is released into the bloodstream at such-and-such a titration". You can predict the physical effects that such endocrine secretion will have but you cannot be certain how the person will interpret the body-sensations.

For more on this, you might like to look at Arnie Mindell's work and Robert Dilts' Logical Levels.

Celebrin

modernism .. lol...

way i see it buddhism is different for everyone, since its encouraged we follow what makes sense to us.. no specific buddhism exists let alone it being a name..

for example the idea of baggy robes, and baldy heads for me.. is not what i want.. and id have trouble in doing that.. i meditate and follow the path in my own way and all do so modernism is kinda irrelevant in my eyes

Jerbear

To clarify, I would have to say that it is more feelings on certain situations. I would most certainly agree that a Buddhism without feelings is useless and unworkable. I guess what I'm saying is that some of the implications of Buddhism get to me.

Genryu,
Look for a PM. Will explain more there since you asked.

Makarov

I think that Buddha would approve of most methods and practices that bring one closer to the path to enlightenment. Of course these "modern" approaches must not violate the Buddhas teachings or the vows a Buddhist takes when embarking upon the path.