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.
Well I guess my whole original post is being a bit misinterpreted. The whole point to me posting the questions and the answers that I gave, were based on the understanding I have so far of what I have read. I have mentioned I am rather new and do not have all the answers, hence posting what I did to get responses from you all so I may properly understand the teachings of Buddha.
I never said what I had said was right, or that I was concrete that they were the proper answers. If my understanding is "stupid" or "ignorant" to be more PC, than rather than be demeaning about it, tell me how I could go about it the right way. That is all I asked, not for someone to worry about more PC terms to use to explain my misunderstanding of the teachings, etc...
Thank you though to the people that have tried to explain a better way for me. I guess it is not time for me to try and have these conversations until I understand more. Thank you!
And please note that I didn't mean to imply that you are stupid or anything like that. I meant that the attitude that some people take of using karma as a blame game to make them feel superior is stupid, not your question, which is not only a good one, but an important one as nearly everyone who begins to study Buddhism runs up on the shoals of karma. Sometimes they get stuck there, so they need a little tug to get them through it. That's all I meant, regardless of what bf might think!
And please note that I didn't mean to imply that you are stupid or anything like that. I meant that the attitude that some people take of using karma as a blame game to make them feel superior is stupid, not your question, which is not only a good one, but an important one as nearly everyone who begins to study Buddhism runs up on the shoals of karma. Sometimes they get stuck there, so they need a little tug to get them through it. That's all I meant, regardless of what bf might think!
Palzang
Thanks for the post, I guess I was misinterpreting the posts you were making then and I apologize for that.
Okay, I've been thinking about your question a lot and I think it comes down to this:
I just have a hard time with the "religious" talks as I have very firm opinions about other relgions.
I think that may be where the tension inside could be coming from. If I'm understanding properly I think I may have the same tension you do and I think one of the ways we can make this a little smoother for ourselves would be to let go of our firm opinions of other religions. I know, that's a tall order. But if we start to view other religions as having the same goals as Buddhism and other people as wanting the same things we do, ie; happiness and the end to suffering, then the sharp edges of our opinions can be smoothed out somewhat.
If we open our minds to other religious traditions in a broader way and see the underlying good in them and what they share with Buddhism, then we can talk to others about the things that Buddhism shares with their religion. Talking about broader ideas, ones that all humans regardless of religion can relate to, will help to bridge the gap and make these conversations more comfortable and useful.
Forgetting about changing someone's mind and forgetting about their attempts to change ours is also helpful. Concentrating on what we all share as fellow beings will make the conversation warm and friendly instead of politely adversarial. I hope this helps a little bit because this is an extremely important question.
When all else fails go to the Dalai Lama. He certainly knows how to talk to people of other religious faiths in a fruitful and friendly way! lol!
Okay, I've been thinking about your question a lot and I think it comes down to this:
I think that may be where the tension inside could be coming from. If I'm understanding properly I think I may have the same tension you do and I think one of the ways we can make this a little smoother for ourselves would be to let go of our firm opinions of other religions. I know, that's a tall order. But if we start to view other religions as having the same goals as Buddhism and other people as wanting the same things we do, ie; happiness and the end to suffering, then the sharp edges of our opinions can be smoothed out somewhat.
If we open our minds to other religious traditions in a broader way and see the underlying good in them and what they share with Buddhism, then we can talk to others about the things that Buddhism shares with their religion. Talking about broader ideas, ones that all humans regardless of religion can relate to, will help to bridge the gap and make these conversations more comfortable and useful.
Forgetting about changing someone's mind and forgetting about their attempts to change ours is also helpful. Concentrating on what we all share as fellow beings will make the conversation warm and friendly instead of politely adversarial. I hope this helps a little bit because this is an extremely important question.
When all else fails go to the Dalai Lama. He certainly knows how to talk to people of other religious faiths in a fruitful and friendly way! lol!
Brigid, rightly named for the Goddess,
You've said it!
Le seul malheur de l'homme..... Pascal said.........is our inability to sit still and quiet. Everybody is so busy trying to prove they are right, when there are so much more important matters at hand.
You mention HHDL. Here's a story that one of his bodyguards told me. They were in California. HHDL was speaking at some conference or other - very high profile, important people, you know the sort of thing. Theyt werre staying at a posh hotel and, on his arrival, he went up in the lift with HHDL. By the time they got out at the right floor, His Holiness had found out the liftman's name, the name of his wife and children, how much he earned and whether he was happy. When they left, a week later, every member of the hotel staff, including those off duty, were there to say goodbye. The Dalai Lama stopped and spoke to each one, remembering their names and details. From my own experience of the man, I would say that he gives less than a fig for what separates us. He just loves what unites us.
We waste so much time confusing opinion and fact. We confuse truth and fact! One of the reasons that the teaching of science is so important is precisely because it shows what can and what cannot be deemed provable - and how to go about it.
Time and again, we, here, have spoken, as you do now, about happiness and the end of suffering. We assert that this is a laudable aim and that, Taking Refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha, we are treading (however tottering our steps) the Noble Eighfold Path which we believe, according to the Fourth Noble Truth, is the way to freedom from suffering. Others assert that they have found different ways. Some of these appear to us to be more, or less, 'skillful'. That may be true: alcohol, meditation, drugs, prayer, therapy - all proposed as longer or shorter-term escapes from suffering. And the reality is that they all have elements that work.
I feel as if we were in the age before pharmacology had isolated the active ingredients of plants: the local herbalist would mix feverfew and the bark of a local tree (willow, perhaps), and your feverish headache would go. Today we take an aspirin and, trust a finer titration because we understand the components. We have found out - and now synthesise - the active ingredient.
In the same way, I suggest, both Jesus and the Buddha invite us to test, test, and test again, to refine the active ingredients of 'spiritual liberation'.
In some ways, it is like Edison and his thousands of different filaments which failed before he came up with carbonised cotton. And some discoveries rather boggle the mind. Whoever (and how?) discovered that shark's liver oil shrank piles? These sort of discoveries or the development of higher mathematics, physics, etc. come from moments of illumination occurring within long periods of hard graft. It also requires the ability to be open to many possibilities, to 'think outside the box'. If the box is a set of religious beliefs and tenets, they may not be ours but there may be something inside the box that is worth preserving or promoting. Taking a 'black box' approach to other people's opinions means that we have to reject the whole lot. To mix my metaphors like a politician, we risk throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Okay, I've been thinking about your question a lot and I think it comes down to this:
I think that may be where the tension inside could be coming from. If I'm understanding properly I think I may have the same tension you do and I think one of the ways we can make this a little smoother for ourselves would be to let go of our firm opinions of other religions. I know, that's a tall order. But if we start to view other religions as having the same goals as Buddhism and other people as wanting the same things we do, ie; happiness and the end to suffering, then the sharp edges of our opinions can be smoothed out somewhat.
If we open our minds to other religious traditions in a broader way and see the underlying good in them and what they share with Buddhism, then we can talk to others about the things that Buddhism shares with their religion. Talking about broader ideas, ones that all humans regardless of religion can relate to, will help to bridge the gap and make these conversations more comfortable and useful.
Forgetting about changing someone's mind and forgetting about their attempts to change ours is also helpful. Concentrating on what we all share as fellow beings will make the conversation warm and friendly instead of politely adversarial. I hope this helps a little bit because this is an extremely important question.
When all else fails go to the Dalai Lama. He certainly knows how to talk to people of other religious faiths in a fruitful and friendly way! lol!
Brigid, thanks again for a reply that makes absolute sense. This is the approach I will try to take if the situation ever comes up. Making something more comfortable between to people chatting about their religions should make it a non-offensive situation to both. Great idea and thank you.
Simon, the story you mention is vaguely familiar. I heard the same thing on a podcast, not sure which one at the moment but I heard the identical story just a couple weeks ago, like I said, on a podcast. Thanks for sharing it again!
You're so welcome, LFA. I hope I'm right minded enough to take my own advice when the subject comes up next time for me, too. Although my father and I talk about religion a lot and we never, ever argue about it. He sometimes gets a bit of a glazed look in his eyes when I'm talking about Buddhism... but we never argue.
Thank you so much, Simon! I'm honoured by your compliment. It's funny that you mention Edison and his 4 thousand or so failures. I was just watching a movie the other day in which that very fact was a sort of sub-theme, or it may have been a TV show. In any case, according to the writers of the movie/TV show, when Edison was asked about these failures he responded that they had not been failures...he'd in fact discovered 4,000 ways how NOT to make a lightbulb.
I must thank you, LFA, for starting this thread because it's reminded me of something very important that I too often forget; it was Christianity and Christians that laid the foundation for me to find and follow the Buddhist path. The qualities that I hold paramount and so dear to me, like kindness, compassion, empathy, love, respect, perseverance and so on, were first modeled for me by Jesus and I owe Christianity a huge debt. I'd really be doing a great disservice to the Buddha, Jesus and myself if I ever thought of Christianity with anything other than gratitude, love and great respect.
Another thing that I just thought of while reading this thread...
I have found (and been guilty of) that during discussions of religion - there also comes a strong sense of ego. I have found that during discussions, you could be making a point about something the person you are having the discussion with has never thought about before. Or never been taught. But, since you aren't a part of ministers that have taught them what they know - what you say couldn't possibly hold water.
So, that brings me back to the teachings of Buddha. There is nothing wrong with finding the truth in teachings of other great teachers. And if, when being questioned about your beliefs, there is nothing wrong in not knowing, or not having an opinion, or not knowing how your beliefs address a certain situation.
When we start feeling ego rise up within us regarding something - we need to look at what ego is how very little it means and how detrimental it can be.
There is this really, really cool person out here on this site that actually has a wonderful quote on his signature. I can't remember who they are, but they're dead sexy. It goes like this:
"If, like a broken gong, you silence yourself, you have approached Nibbana, for vindictiveness is no longer in you." - Dhammapada v134
-bf
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited August 2006
Nope....Dunno.....Guess he must be the quiet, shy retiring type.....
But actually, good points BF... I can relate...If I've ever gotten into this kind of discussion, I have recently had the good fortune to have the thought go through my head...."Do I actually NEED to be right.....?"
Do I NEED to be right? What does that mean? You could be right or be wrong and without ego - it truly wouldn't matter. Did the Buddha NEED to be right? If someone brought an argument to him that made total sense in their religion (but didn't make sense to the Buddha's teachings) - did that make the Buddha any less enlightened?
-bf
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited August 2006
No, but I bet he had a different attitude....I think he probably smiled to himself, at the person's resistance,and just though about letting the poor misguided finally find out for themselves....sometimes,just stepping back may be enough to make the other person think twice....who knows?
Another thing that I just thought of while reading this thread...
I have found (and been guilty of) that during discussions of religion - there also comes a strong sense of ego. I have found that during discussions, you could be making a point about something the person you are having the discussion with has never thought about before. Or never been taught. But, since you aren't a part of ministers that have taught them what they know - what you say couldn't possibly hold water.
So, that brings me back to the teachings of Buddha. There is nothing wrong with finding the truth in teachings of other great teachers. And if, when being questioned about your beliefs, there is nothing wrong in not knowing, or not having an opinion, or not knowing how your beliefs address a certain situation.
When we start feeling ego rise up within us regarding something - we need to look at what ego is how very little it means and how detrimental it can be.
-bf
Sounds like more discourse on the skanda- mental formations
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited August 2006
Surely we can associate any form of self-analysis with the Skandas? I guess it is obvious really, that these Five Aggregates are ever-present, ever manifest...... we forget to refer to them as such, don't we....? Good reminder, I guess....So much to remember....!
Comments
Yeah, there sure are! Tons of 'em. Take me, for example...
:eek2:
And please note that I didn't mean to imply that you are stupid or anything like that. I meant that the attitude that some people take of using karma as a blame game to make them feel superior is stupid, not your question, which is not only a good one, but an important one as nearly everyone who begins to study Buddhism runs up on the shoals of karma. Sometimes they get stuck there, so they need a little tug to get them through it. That's all I meant, regardless of what bf might think!
Palzang
Thanks for the post, I guess I was misinterpreting the posts you were making then and I apologize for that.
Okay, I've been thinking about your question a lot and I think it comes down to this: I think that may be where the tension inside could be coming from. If I'm understanding properly I think I may have the same tension you do and I think one of the ways we can make this a little smoother for ourselves would be to let go of our firm opinions of other religions. I know, that's a tall order. But if we start to view other religions as having the same goals as Buddhism and other people as wanting the same things we do, ie; happiness and the end to suffering, then the sharp edges of our opinions can be smoothed out somewhat.
If we open our minds to other religious traditions in a broader way and see the underlying good in them and what they share with Buddhism, then we can talk to others about the things that Buddhism shares with their religion. Talking about broader ideas, ones that all humans regardless of religion can relate to, will help to bridge the gap and make these conversations more comfortable and useful.
Forgetting about changing someone's mind and forgetting about their attempts to change ours is also helpful. Concentrating on what we all share as fellow beings will make the conversation warm and friendly instead of politely adversarial. I hope this helps a little bit because this is an extremely important question.
When all else fails go to the Dalai Lama. He certainly knows how to talk to people of other religious faiths in a fruitful and friendly way! lol!
Brigid, rightly named for the Goddess,
You've said it!
Le seul malheur de l'homme..... Pascal said.........is our inability to sit still and quiet. Everybody is so busy trying to prove they are right, when there are so much more important matters at hand.
You mention HHDL. Here's a story that one of his bodyguards told me. They were in California. HHDL was speaking at some conference or other - very high profile, important people, you know the sort of thing. Theyt werre staying at a posh hotel and, on his arrival, he went up in the lift with HHDL. By the time they got out at the right floor, His Holiness had found out the liftman's name, the name of his wife and children, how much he earned and whether he was happy. When they left, a week later, every member of the hotel staff, including those off duty, were there to say goodbye. The Dalai Lama stopped and spoke to each one, remembering their names and details. From my own experience of the man, I would say that he gives less than a fig for what separates us. He just loves what unites us.
We waste so much time confusing opinion and fact. We confuse truth and fact! One of the reasons that the teaching of science is so important is precisely because it shows what can and what cannot be deemed provable - and how to go about it.
Time and again, we, here, have spoken, as you do now, about happiness and the end of suffering. We assert that this is a laudable aim and that, Taking Refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha, we are treading (however tottering our steps) the Noble Eighfold Path which we believe, according to the Fourth Noble Truth, is the way to freedom from suffering. Others assert that they have found different ways. Some of these appear to us to be more, or less, 'skillful'. That may be true: alcohol, meditation, drugs, prayer, therapy - all proposed as longer or shorter-term escapes from suffering. And the reality is that they all have elements that work.
I feel as if we were in the age before pharmacology had isolated the active ingredients of plants: the local herbalist would mix feverfew and the bark of a local tree (willow, perhaps), and your feverish headache would go. Today we take an aspirin and, trust a finer titration because we understand the components. We have found out - and now synthesise - the active ingredient.
In the same way, I suggest, both Jesus and the Buddha invite us to test, test, and test again, to refine the active ingredients of 'spiritual liberation'.
In some ways, it is like Edison and his thousands of different filaments which failed before he came up with carbonised cotton. And some discoveries rather boggle the mind. Whoever (and how?) discovered that shark's liver oil shrank piles? These sort of discoveries or the development of higher mathematics, physics, etc. come from moments of illumination occurring within long periods of hard graft. It also requires the ability to be open to many possibilities, to 'think outside the box'. If the box is a set of religious beliefs and tenets, they may not be ours but there may be something inside the box that is worth preserving or promoting. Taking a 'black box' approach to other people's opinions means that we have to reject the whole lot. To mix my metaphors like a politician, we risk throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Brigid, thanks again for a reply that makes absolute sense. This is the approach I will try to take if the situation ever comes up. Making something more comfortable between to people chatting about their religions should make it a non-offensive situation to both. Great idea and thank you.
Simon, the story you mention is vaguely familiar. I heard the same thing on a podcast, not sure which one at the moment but I heard the identical story just a couple weeks ago, like I said, on a podcast. Thanks for sharing it again!
Thank you so much, Simon! I'm honoured by your compliment. It's funny that you mention Edison and his 4 thousand or so failures. I was just watching a movie the other day in which that very fact was a sort of sub-theme, or it may have been a TV show. In any case, according to the writers of the movie/TV show, when Edison was asked about these failures he responded that they had not been failures...he'd in fact discovered 4,000 ways how NOT to make a lightbulb.
I must thank you, LFA, for starting this thread because it's reminded me of something very important that I too often forget; it was Christianity and Christians that laid the foundation for me to find and follow the Buddhist path. The qualities that I hold paramount and so dear to me, like kindness, compassion, empathy, love, respect, perseverance and so on, were first modeled for me by Jesus and I owe Christianity a huge debt. I'd really be doing a great disservice to the Buddha, Jesus and myself if I ever thought of Christianity with anything other than gratitude, love and great respect.
I have found (and been guilty of) that during discussions of religion - there also comes a strong sense of ego. I have found that during discussions, you could be making a point about something the person you are having the discussion with has never thought about before. Or never been taught. But, since you aren't a part of ministers that have taught them what they know - what you say couldn't possibly hold water.
So, that brings me back to the teachings of Buddha. There is nothing wrong with finding the truth in teachings of other great teachers. And if, when being questioned about your beliefs, there is nothing wrong in not knowing, or not having an opinion, or not knowing how your beliefs address a certain situation.
When we start feeling ego rise up within us regarding something - we need to look at what ego is how very little it means and how detrimental it can be.
There is this really, really cool person out here on this site that actually has a wonderful quote on his signature. I can't remember who they are, but they're dead sexy. It goes like this:
-bf
But actually, good points BF... I can relate...If I've ever gotten into this kind of discussion, I have recently had the good fortune to have the thought go through my head...."Do I actually NEED to be right.....?"
Do I NEED to be right? What does that mean? You could be right or be wrong and without ego - it truly wouldn't matter. Did the Buddha NEED to be right? If someone brought an argument to him that made total sense in their religion (but didn't make sense to the Buddha's teachings) - did that make the Buddha any less enlightened?
-bf
Sounds like more discourse on the skanda- mental formations
-bf
OK.....and BF got in before me....yetaggen!!
Yetaggen - isn't that the Buddha's teachings for repeating occurances of one's inaction or slothfulness?
-bf