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.
Dalai lama urges Christians not to convert to Buddhism
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 October 2006
* Sorry, not prepared to do this.... That, to my naive mind just seems as if you are evading the question, taking your ball back,and refusing to play.....and besides, others may wish to continue. If you no longer wish to participate - don't participate. It really is that simple. *
Having spent an hour or two re-reading and pondering the contributions to this thread, I am aware that a number of different points have been raised.
* The matter of the relationship between some Christians and some Buddhists;
* The actual meaning of HHDL's words on the matter of 'conversion';
* Side issues on a specific Buddhist group/'church';
* Theism/deism in Buddhism.
* Ad personam aspersions on this contributor's belief structure;
* Determinism vs 'free will'.
Most of these are raised but not pursued, questioned but not answered.
On the matter of HHDL's 'exoteric' teachings, I would agree with Xing Ping insofar as HHDL's public teachings could be so characterised. There is a very good reason for this and one which accords, as I see it, with a compassionate approach to a wider, non-Buddhist audience.
The teachings of Tantra and the Third Turning of the Wheel are deemed, by many teachers, to be 'advanced' and 'difficult'. It is advised that these teachings and practices be approached only after the basics are well-established. If these are the 'esoteric' teachings to which Xing Ping alludes without mentioning or specifying, HHDL's approach is entirely in line with the long traditions of Mahayana Buddhism.
To state, as in earlier posts, that HHDL "does not transmit" is to ignore the experience of many of his direct disciples.
[Federica: Thank you for keeping this thread open. To have closed it on a direct slur on and inaccuracy about HHDL as a genuine Dharma teacher would have been unfortunate.]
@Xing Ping: Why not try to understand that many thousands, if not millions, of people have come to take the Dharma seriously because of HHDL and his words? Your statement that they "do not survive real practice" (post #36) is offensive to those for whom it is quite clearly untrue. It may, however, be your own experience. Does the fault lie in the words or in the practice? Some of us have arrived at a point where no words survive, being nothing more than sketchy maps of a vaster territory. Perhaps we move from this position of non-words; I don't know. What I do know is that I treasure the words that helped me to the place where they are no longer all that I can hold dear.
Having spent an hour or two re-reading and pondering the contributions to this thread, I am aware that a number of different points have been raised.
* The matter of the relationship between some Christians and some Buddhists;
* The actual meaning of HHDL's words on the matter of 'conversion';
* Side issues on a specific Buddhist group/'church';
* Theism/deism in Buddhism.
* Ad personam aspersions on this contributor's belief structure;
* Determinism vs 'free will'.
Most of these are raised but not pursued, questioned but not answered.
On the matter of HHDL's 'exoteric' teachings, I would agree with Xing Ping insofar as HHDL's public teachings could be so characterised. There is a very good reason for this and one which accords, as I see it, with a compassionate approach to a wider, non-Buddhist audience.
The teachings of Tantra and the Third Turning of the Wheel are deemed, by many teachers, to be 'advanced' and 'difficult'. It is advised that these teachings and practices be approached only after the basics are well-established. If these are the 'esoteric' teachings to which Xing Ping alludes without mentioning or specifying, HHDL's approach is entirely in line with the long traditions of Mahayana Buddhism.
To state, as in earlier posts, that HHDL "does not transmit" is to ignore the experience of many of his direct disciples.
[Federica: Thank you for keeping this thread open. To have closed it on a direct slur on and inaccuracy about HHDL as a genuine Dharma teacher would have been unfortunate.]
@Xing Ping: Why not try to understand that many thousands, if not millions, of people have come to take the Dharma seriously because of HHDL and his words? Your statement that they "do not survive real practice" (post #36) is offensive to those for whom it is quite clearly untrue. It may, however, be your own experience. Does the fault lie in the words or in the practice? Some of us have arrived at a point where no words survive, being nothing more than sketchy maps of a vaster territory. Perhaps we move from this position of non-words; I don't know. What I do know is that I treasure the words that helped me to the place where they are no longer all that I can hold dear.
I agree with this statement very much & would like to voice my support for it.
Aside from this I have a few questions for Xing Ping:
-How are you defining exoteric/esoteric transmission? It is my understanding that HHDL conducts empowerment ceremonies & entertains private audiences, having very specific discussions with individuals, not limited to exoteric subject matter.
-Do you suggest that the HHDL should give Secret Mantra or Deity Yoga initiations/empowerments in a public setting? Do you think he should discuss the doctrine of Shunyata esoterically to non-practitioners? (it is my understanding that this is discouraged if not forbidden in the Mahayana tradition)
-Do you think that exoteric speech cannot possibly transmit Dharma in any way?
-In what way do you deem yourself to have the authority to speak for 'American Buddhism'? What is your definition of 'American Buddhism', for that matter?
To follow up on not1, I would say that Xing Ping simply doesn't understand the nature of teachers. A bodhisattva on the level of the Dalai Lama is always transmitting the Dharma, whether it be obvious or not to the onlooker. To understand the nature of the teacher is to know that.
To follow up on not1, I would say that Xing Ping simply doesn't understand the nature of teachers. A bodhisattva on the level of the Dalai Lama is always transmitting the Dharma, whether it be obvious or not to the onlooker. To understand the nature of the teacher is to know that.
Palzang
That goes for every enlightened being, whichever religion they ascribe to. As Jesus once said: "By your actions shall they know me", so by the actions of HHDL, we shall know the Buddha and the Dhamma.
Like so many others here, I don't have a dharma teacher to call my own. So I decided a while ago to get as many books by HHDL as I could and use him primarily, but not exclusively, as my teacher and as a role model. Through his books and recorded teachings I have learned a great deal. Through his example I've learned even more. Thank goodness I'm not American since according to Xing Ping I wouldn't have learned anything. (That last sentence rhymed!)
Xing Ping my friend, you have stated that it is the opinion of the American Sangha.
What is your personal take of the HHDL, reasoned beyond the stance that it too is the opinion of the American Sangha?
Dear and loyal friend: My 'takes' are not reasoned. They are direct perceptions before the verbal mind. And the more I write about them, the more disjunct the words get, and the less I write about them, the more confusion there is. But I guarantee you that my perceptions are real.
IMO, the Dalai Lama is a bona fide Bodhisattva, and his intentions are good. He is also one of the worst administrators I have ever encountered. The idea that he could ever have headed the government of Tibet is a phantasy, pure and simple. But he is good at PR. He teaches exoterically, and he does not transmit to Westerners, because he just can't handle the administrative responsibilites involved, i.e., he has no real-world way to interpret or understand the feedback that results from the Buddhadharma actually practiced by a Westerner. Failing in those perceptions, he cannot delegate with respect to the transmission of his lineage either.
My question to you is that, whether do you accept the Buddha's open-minded opinion, that there is more than one way to Nirvana? :rockon:
I cannot imagine the Buddha having an opinion. I have opinions. The Buddha had the Buddha-eye, which is the ability to see simultaneously from all points of view. And he chose to teach only 84,000 ways to Nirvana. Only one is necessary for any given person, and that person does not attain on that way unless and until he or she focuses on it exclusively. Having attained in any Dharma-gate, one understands them all. This is the condition of a real lineage holder in the Mahayana tradition.
Dear and loyal friend: My 'takes' are not reasoned. They are direct perceptions before the verbal mind. And the more I write about them, the more disjunct the words get, and the less I write about them, the more confusion there is. But I guarantee you that my perceptions are real.
IMO, the Dalai Lama is a bona fide Bodhisattva, and his intentions are good. He is also one of the worst administrators I have ever encountered. The idea that he could ever have headed the government of Tibet is a phantasy, pure and simple. But he is good at PR. He teaches exoterically, and he does not transmit to Westerners, because he just can't handle the administrative responsibilites involved, i.e., he has no real-world way to interpret or understand the feedback that results from the Buddhadharma actually practiced by a Westerner. Failing in those perceptions, he cannot delegate with respect to the transmission of his lineage either.
No offense, but unless you have rid yourself of all defilements & have perfect wisdom, as well as clairvoyance, then even your most vivid, compelling perceptions are going to be unreliable & misleading. Sorry, but that applies to me as well. If you have a gut feeling, that's fine I guess, but what my gut feeling says on this is quite opposed to what you are saying. What my perceptions are telling me is that you are wrong.
So maybe we should discontinue this line of discussion altogether.
No offense, but unless you have rid yourself of all defilements & have perfect wisdom, as well as clairvoyance, then even your most vivid, compelling perceptions are going to be unreliable & misleading. Sorry, but that applies to me as well. If you have a gut feeling, that's fine I guess, but what my gut feeling says on this is quite opposed to what you are saying. What my perceptions are telling me is that you are wrong.
So maybe we should discontinue this line of discussion altogether.
Thanks
_/\_
metta
I didn't post to you, did I?
I already tried to discontinue this thread, of which I am the author, but the moderator had other ideas. Since she doesn't listen to me, why don't you mention it to her?
With all due respect, I'm not sure why that matters. If you truly wish this thread to die, then don't cast any more aspersions at His Holiness without backing up your statement with facts that can be verified. BTW, to what extent have you encountered HHDL to make the previous statement that he is such a bad administrator? This statement doesn't seem to match up with what I've heard elsewhere & I am interested in hearing how you've come to such a divergent POV.
I already tried to discontinue this thread, of which I am the author, but the moderator had other ideas. Since she doesn't listen to me, why don't you mention it to her?
It would be nice if you would quit deflecting responsibility for your own statements. Since you are the one who keeps making these statements, I don't plan on mentioning it to the moderator any time soon.
I am not sure where the idea might arise that His Holiness does not "transmit to Westerners". During my own stay in Dharamshala, I met half a dozen people from the US, Australia and Europe who were studying with him and had received transmissions. Were they wrong, or are you Xing Ping? Nothing wrong with getting things wrong: admitting it and learning is one way to move ahead.
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
I already tried to discontinue this thread, of which I am the author, but the moderator had other ideas. Since she doesn't listen to me, why don't you mention it to her?
* Manners, Xing Ping....
If you wish your responses to be person-specific, I suggest you send them to that person as a PM...If you choose to post on open forum, you have to expect a response from others, should they so choose....
I did listen to you, and I gave you my reasons for not closing the thread, and further advice on how to not remain involved, by abstaining from further contributions....didn't I?
You have chosen yourself to remain involved, therefore the choice - and its consequence - are your issues to deal with, not mine. *
You are attempting to create division in this sangha, Xing Ping. As a result of this and your general tone, I don't take a single word you write seriously. You have ruined any credibility you may have had in my eyes. That is the fruit of what you have sown.
Alright, Xing Ping, you were expecting a reply from me isn't it?
I quote N1N2:
No offense, but unless you have rid yourself of all defilements & have perfect wisdom, as well as clairvoyance, then even your most vivid, compelling perceptions are going to be unreliable & misleading. Sorry, but that applies to me as well. If you have a gut feeling, that's fine I guess, but what my gut feeling says on this is quite opposed to what you are saying. What my perceptions are telling me is that you are wrong.
Ah, here's my reply to you. As for the other question, I don't think I hold a proper English degree to launch into a discussion on semantics with you.
....................
I already tried to discontinue this thread, of which I am the author, but the moderator had other ideas. Since she doesn't listen to me, why don't you mention it to her?
Perhaps, from this experience, you may learn that, when you start something, it may spiral out of your control. As a result, you may wish to be more circumspect in what you start.
And to add my two cents worth, I would only urge you, Xing Ping, to reread and truly take to heart the advice from Dudjom Rinpoche. You are treading on dangerously thin ice when you start making spurious spiritual claims and making judgments concerning enlightened beings. 'Nuff said...
I have just been listening to The Food Programme on BBC Radio 4. They are sharing food at a Sikh gurdwara. There is a wonderful Sikh speaker who explains that Sikhism does not seek to make converts because their belief is that all paths lead to God. Despite the attempts by many to isolate HHDL within a Tibetan bubble or, eve, a Buddhist one, he obviously speaks to many hearts and a wide understanding. From all parts of the belief spectrum, inclusing unbelief, his example and writings are constantly being cited.
Perhaps this can cause some discomfort among those for whom one path, one dharma, one tradition are 'existentially' necessary.
Being Buddhist in a xtian culture/family is tough, if you do it you better be sure. Thats my experiance, and understanding of what HHDL advises.
I asked my Abbott if Sri Lankans think you have to be born Buddhist to be Buddhist. He said no, and so far as I can tell the Monks and laypeople accept me like any other.
I've noticed recent quotes from HHDL where he advises us to practice our religion, which ever it is, seriously. I intend to take his advice, and go to a Buddhist retreat where the place and the conditions are devoted to Buddhism. I accept other religions, but I dont see any benefit from all rolled into one.
I believe the Dalai Lama is totally aware of what he is talking about and he argues for good reasons. He seems to know there are many different motivations for many westerners to turn to Buddhism, some mabye more interested in turning their backs to their own culture, others simply seek spiritual advice they could maybe easily get within their own framework of religions.
Further, one has to remember that the Dalai Lama has a responsibility for his people and he needs sympathy in the mostly christian west. On top of that, it woud be funny to claim Buddhism is not into proselytizing of others and then claim one should convert to Buddhism. The one who seriously loves the Buddhadhamma will practice it, wether or not he is labeld as Buddhist, i believe in that and i think the Dalai Lama acts the best he can do.
Being Buddhist in a xtian culture/family is tough, if you do it you better be sure. Thats my experiance.
Your experience creates the images by which you view the world. Don't trust what you see. There's more to life than what one knows is going on, because because our perception is only partial. Reading what you wrote reminded me of what J. Krishnamurti said.
"Is it not possible to live in this world without ambition, just being what you are? If you begin to understand what you are without trying to change it, then what you are undergoes a transformation. I think one can live in this world anonymously, completely unknown, without being famous, ambitious, cruel. One can live very happily when no importance is given to the self; and this also is part of right education.
The whole world is worshipping success. You hear stories of how the poor boy studied at night and eventually became a judge, or how he began by selling newspapers and ended up a multi-millionaire. You are fed on the glorification of success. With achievement of great success there is also great sorrow; but most of us are caught up in the desire to achieve, and success is much more important to us than the understanding and dissolution of sorrow."
I've noticed recent quotes from HHDL where he advises us to practice our religion, which ever it is, seriously. I intend to take his advice, and go to a Buddhist retreat where the place and the conditions are devoted to Buddhism. I accept other religions, but I dont see any benefit from all rolled into one.
I totally agree, SLP. While I have tremendous respect for other religions and other paths, I think it is crucial to pick one and follow it to the exclusion of all others. That doesn't mean I can't study and learn from other paths, but I have to remain true to the one I'm on or I'll go nowhere.
Palzang I personnally don't confuse the structure of practice with what it is intended to support. Fixing solidity onto any concept no matter how noble is a form of dellusion. IMO
I'm not quite sure what your point is, Iawa, but I do know that going around picking and choosing what you like to believe in and avoiding what you don't is a sure recipe for disaster on the path.
Once again I feel I'm in over my head. I just want to make my thoughts clear, and take my lumps as I deserve.
If Nibbana is what you seek, why go to a teacher other than the Buddha?
Isn't it possible that some people might miss out on the teachings that would help them greatly due to Buddhists being too accomodating to eternalists?
Acceptance and agreement are not the same thing. I'm Buddhist, I want my teachers to talk Dhamma to me, and treat me like a Buddhist.
It's a fine line I know. My big mouth about Buddhism nearly caused my marriage to end. I think His Holiness does a great job in this, his wisdom has helped me alot in communicating with my devoutly xtian wife.
I'm a beginner, but I'm sure Ive been Buddhist for a long time and just didn't know about the teachings untill now. Brian said; This is a website for people new to Buddhism. I say; Shouldn't we try to refrain from confusing them?
Hi Friends,
Last night I had the opportunity to stay late after meditation. What a rare and wonderfull thing it is to me to have personal time with a Buddhist Monk. I highly recommend it if you get the chance.
One other layperson stayed as well. This person is very well liked, very intelligent, successfull, kind, caring, compassionate, happy, just one of those people it's very pleasant to be around."Born Buddhist", that is raised Buddhist by Buddhist parents in a Buddhist culture. Knows the Chants by heart, knows the proper etiquette. From the first time I went I thought this is someone I should get to know, someone who could help me along the Path.
Well.... yes and no. Come to find out the "Buddhism" this person has been tought is more like if you took Christianity and replaced God with Buddha. The parents took this person to Temple to pray to Buddha and ask him for stuff, you know like Christians pray to God. This person is having to reconcile the two now. It's not a big terrible problem, a little bit of a shock maybe at times, and like I said I admire the this person either way.
I just wanted to share this so you might know I'm not being anti-Christian, just anti-confusion.
When I tell people I am a Buddhist, I use it quite loosely. Many have been taken aback by my syncretic attitude. I grew up Christian, chose Buddhism, debate as a staunch atheist, politically independent. I find value in many different philosophies of this time and the past. When we commit ourselves so much to a name or doctrine, we easily forget that it is just another attachment.
Look at all the things I used to describe myself. Buddhist, former Christian, atheist, independent, philsopher. Is that all I have to show for myself at the end of life? A few useless titles? Of course titles are not a bad thing. We couldn't converse with one another if we didn't apply names to things. But we become so consumed by titles that soon we break off into our own little groups sealing ourselves from everyone else. Eventually, we may become so blinded by titles that we see fit to attack others because of their inferior groups. We wouldn't admit this, but it is what goes on in our minds.
As far as picking and choosing go, how else would you have it? We chose Buddhism did we not? Choice is not always the most comfortable thing, but there is no better way!
we are ourselves, we make idel choices and make false indentities based on ignorance. There is no true way of any religion as this is perception, so its impossible to really be any religion.Nothing really has a name, and descriptions aren't really needed for the majority of things and times.
I thought i was a buddhist but tbh.. im not att all, there is no proper or real 'buddhism' so it really doesn't apply.. Calling urself anything is just another stereotype and should be ignored..
if you can fully comprehend urself and everything else.. you might then wanna label urself but others still won't understand cus they ain't perfect..
labels just don't work in any sense.. some chavs asked me " Dave, are you a Reb or a Pleb?"
i can't answer that because there is no true definition of either, and the ignorance involved in either answer is the same with all things.. There is no answer in perception.. there is no truth in general observation.. merely personal speculation
I think that the true ability of the Dalai Lama - is how he deals with the kind of criticism that people such as Xing Ping aim at him. He responds with pure compassion and tolerance.
The mainland Chinese government are constantly pursuing a path of propaganda against th Dalai Lama. In an attempt to re-write history, and justify their armed aggression against the sovereign nation of Tibet.
Chinese outside of China, that is the Diaspora - do not, and have not supported the stance of the Communist government of mainland China. On Xing Ping's personal 'myspace', you will find a picture of the daughter of the last Panchen Lama, who describes herself as a true 'Chinese Patriot' - ethnic Tibetans of course, do not view themselves as 'Chinese'.
It is all politics of course, and I think politics should be separated from 'Buddhism'. The problem with the mainland, is that one often masquaraids as the other. Xing Ping, please open your Mind's Eye.
HHDL XIV spoke in Toronto, Canada in October 2007 where he again spoke on this topic. The gist of his words that people should not change their religion - only follow it sincerely and entirely in the spirit of its founder. All religions is their purest form will take people to a state of recognition of oneness with others. He added, "... and if you are a free thinker, then choose as you like!".
So on this occasion, he left the door open. If someone has "lost" their religion then I suppose they would then be a "free thinker" and so free to choose any religion or path, including Buddhism, according to his direction.
From my perspective, this is good advice. It's unlikely in the first place the that a practicing adherent of any religion is going to wake up one morning and say to themselves, "Wow do I ever feel rested. I think I will be a Muslim today, Shinto is so dull". There is a whole lot to learn to get into the flow of any unfamiliar spiritual path. It would be better to expend that effort to get to the realization of oneness in their current religious or spiritual path.
I am biased towards Buddhism, and so is HHDL. I think that when a person gets to the experience of oneness, that traditional, non-Buddhist, religions can't give it context. Therefore at that point those people would naturally migrate from their old way, through free-thinking, to Buddhism. It's a natural progression. That's the way it worked for me anyway.
He uses skillful means to encourage religious harmony, self-development regardless of current religion, and leaves the door open for those open lotuses who need the warm light of Buddhism to come into full bloom.
Namaste,
VajraYatu
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
HHDL XIV spoke in Toronto, Canada in October 2007 where he again spoke on this topic. The gist of his words that people should not change their religion - only follow it sincerely and entirely in the spirit of its founder. All religions is their purest form will take people to a state of recognition of oneness with others. He added, "... and if you are a free thinker, then choose as you like!".
So on this occasion, he left the door open. If someone has "lost" their religion then I suppose they would then be a "free thinker" and so free to choose any religion or path, including Buddhism, according to his direction.
From my perspective, this is good advice. It's unlikely in the first place the that a practicing adherent of any religion is going to wake up one morning and say to themselves, "Wow do I ever feel rested. I think I will be a Muslim today, Shinto is so dull". There is a whole lot to learn to get into the flow of any unfamiliar spiritual path. It would be better to expend that effort to get to the realization of oneness in their current religious or spiritual path.
I am biased towards Buddhism, and so is HHDL. I think that when a person gets to the experience of oneness, that traditional, non-Buddhist, religions can't give it context. Therefore at that point those people would naturally migrate from their old way, through free-thinking, to Buddhism. It's a natural progression. That's the way it worked for me anyway.
He uses skillful means to encourage religious harmony, self-development regardless of current religion, and leaves the door open for those open lotuses who need the warm light of Buddhism to come into full bloom.
Namaste,
VajraYatu
From my own conversation with HHDL, I can say that he views both Christianity and Buddhism as equally valid ways to achieve loving-kindness.
Comments
* The matter of the relationship between some Christians and some Buddhists;
* The actual meaning of HHDL's words on the matter of 'conversion';
* Side issues on a specific Buddhist group/'church';
* Theism/deism in Buddhism.
* Ad personam aspersions on this contributor's belief structure;
* Determinism vs 'free will'.
Most of these are raised but not pursued, questioned but not answered.
On the matter of HHDL's 'exoteric' teachings, I would agree with Xing Ping insofar as HHDL's public teachings could be so characterised. There is a very good reason for this and one which accords, as I see it, with a compassionate approach to a wider, non-Buddhist audience.
The teachings of Tantra and the Third Turning of the Wheel are deemed, by many teachers, to be 'advanced' and 'difficult'. It is advised that these teachings and practices be approached only after the basics are well-established. If these are the 'esoteric' teachings to which Xing Ping alludes without mentioning or specifying, HHDL's approach is entirely in line with the long traditions of Mahayana Buddhism.
To state, as in earlier posts, that HHDL "does not transmit" is to ignore the experience of many of his direct disciples.
[Federica: Thank you for keeping this thread open. To have closed it on a direct slur on and inaccuracy about HHDL as a genuine Dharma teacher would have been unfortunate.]
@Xing Ping: Why not try to understand that many thousands, if not millions, of people have come to take the Dharma seriously because of HHDL and his words? Your statement that they "do not survive real practice" (post #36) is offensive to those for whom it is quite clearly untrue. It may, however, be your own experience. Does the fault lie in the words or in the practice? Some of us have arrived at a point where no words survive, being nothing more than sketchy maps of a vaster territory. Perhaps we move from this position of non-words; I don't know. What I do know is that I treasure the words that helped me to the place where they are no longer all that I can hold dear.
What is your personal take of the HHDL, reasoned beyond the stance that it too is the opinion of the American Sangha?
My question to you is that, whether do you accept the Buddha's open-minded opinion, that there is more than one way to Nirvana? :rockon:
I agree with this statement very much & would like to voice my support for it.
Aside from this I have a few questions for Xing Ping:
-How are you defining exoteric/esoteric transmission? It is my understanding that HHDL conducts empowerment ceremonies & entertains private audiences, having very specific discussions with individuals, not limited to exoteric subject matter.
-Do you suggest that the HHDL should give Secret Mantra or Deity Yoga initiations/empowerments in a public setting? Do you think he should discuss the doctrine of Shunyata esoterically to non-practitioners? (it is my understanding that this is discouraged if not forbidden in the Mahayana tradition)
-Do you think that exoteric speech cannot possibly transmit Dharma in any way?
-In what way do you deem yourself to have the authority to speak for 'American Buddhism'? What is your definition of 'American Buddhism', for that matter?
_/\_
metta
Palzang
That goes for every enlightened being, whichever religion they ascribe to. As Jesus once said: "By your actions shall they know me", so by the actions of HHDL, we shall know the Buddha and the Dhamma.
Palzang
Dear and loyal friend: My 'takes' are not reasoned. They are direct perceptions before the verbal mind. And the more I write about them, the more disjunct the words get, and the less I write about them, the more confusion there is. But I guarantee you that my perceptions are real.
IMO, the Dalai Lama is a bona fide Bodhisattva, and his intentions are good. He is also one of the worst administrators I have ever encountered. The idea that he could ever have headed the government of Tibet is a phantasy, pure and simple. But he is good at PR. He teaches exoterically, and he does not transmit to Westerners, because he just can't handle the administrative responsibilites involved, i.e., he has no real-world way to interpret or understand the feedback that results from the Buddhadharma actually practiced by a Westerner. Failing in those perceptions, he cannot delegate with respect to the transmission of his lineage either.
I cannot imagine the Buddha having an opinion. I have opinions. The Buddha had the Buddha-eye, which is the ability to see simultaneously from all points of view. And he chose to teach only 84,000 ways to Nirvana. Only one is necessary for any given person, and that person does not attain on that way unless and until he or she focuses on it exclusively. Having attained in any Dharma-gate, one understands them all. This is the condition of a real lineage holder in the Mahayana tradition.
No offense, but unless you have rid yourself of all defilements & have perfect wisdom, as well as clairvoyance, then even your most vivid, compelling perceptions are going to be unreliable & misleading. Sorry, but that applies to me as well. If you have a gut feeling, that's fine I guess, but what my gut feeling says on this is quite opposed to what you are saying. What my perceptions are telling me is that you are wrong.
So maybe we should discontinue this line of discussion altogether.
Thanks
_/\_
metta
I didn't post to you, did I?
I already tried to discontinue this thread, of which I am the author, but the moderator had other ideas. Since she doesn't listen to me, why don't you mention it to her?
With all due respect, I'm not sure why that matters. If you truly wish this thread to die, then don't cast any more aspersions at His Holiness without backing up your statement with facts that can be verified. BTW, to what extent have you encountered HHDL to make the previous statement that he is such a bad administrator? This statement doesn't seem to match up with what I've heard elsewhere & I am interested in hearing how you've come to such a divergent POV.
It would be nice if you would quit deflecting responsibility for your own statements. Since you are the one who keeps making these statements, I don't plan on mentioning it to the moderator any time soon.
_/\_
metta
* Manners, Xing Ping....
If you wish your responses to be person-specific, I suggest you send them to that person as a PM...If you choose to post on open forum, you have to expect a response from others, should they so choose....
I did listen to you, and I gave you my reasons for not closing the thread, and further advice on how to not remain involved, by abstaining from further contributions....didn't I?
You have chosen yourself to remain involved, therefore the choice - and its consequence - are your issues to deal with, not mine. *
I quote N1N2:
Ah, here's my reply to you.
Perhaps, from this experience, you may learn that, when you start something, it may spiral out of your control. As a result, you may wish to be more circumspect in what you start.
Palzang
Perhaps this can cause some discomfort among those for whom one path, one dharma, one tradition are 'existentially' necessary.
Imo sounds like an oxymoron, all my verbals are of an auditory nature,:p
Being Buddhist in a xtian culture/family is tough, if you do it you better be sure. Thats my experiance, and understanding of what HHDL advises.
I asked my Abbott if Sri Lankans think you have to be born Buddhist to be Buddhist. He said no, and so far as I can tell the Monks and laypeople accept me like any other.
I've noticed recent quotes from HHDL where he advises us to practice our religion, which ever it is, seriously. I intend to take his advice, and go to a Buddhist retreat where the place and the conditions are devoted to Buddhism. I accept other religions, but I dont see any benefit from all rolled into one.
Further, one has to remember that the Dalai Lama has a responsibility for his people and he needs sympathy in the mostly christian west. On top of that, it woud be funny to claim Buddhism is not into proselytizing of others and then claim one should convert to Buddhism. The one who seriously loves the Buddhadhamma will practice it, wether or not he is labeld as Buddhist, i believe in that and i think the Dalai Lama acts the best he can do.
Your experience creates the images by which you view the world. Don't trust what you see. There's more to life than what one knows is going on, because because our perception is only partial. Reading what you wrote reminded me of what J. Krishnamurti said.
"Is it not possible to live in this world without ambition, just being what you are? If you begin to understand what you are without trying to change it, then what you are undergoes a transformation. I think one can live in this world anonymously, completely unknown, without being famous, ambitious, cruel. One can live very happily when no importance is given to the self; and this also is part of right education.
The whole world is worshipping success. You hear stories of how the poor boy studied at night and eventually became a judge, or how he began by selling newspapers and ended up a multi-millionaire. You are fed on the glorification of success. With achievement of great success there is also great sorrow; but most of us are caught up in the desire to achieve, and success is much more important to us than the understanding and dissolution of sorrow."
In Gassho
I totally agree, SLP. While I have tremendous respect for other religions and other paths, I think it is crucial to pick one and follow it to the exclusion of all others. That doesn't mean I can't study and learn from other paths, but I have to remain true to the one I'm on or I'll go nowhere.
Palzang
Palzang
What is the text for mental formations again?
What formed the image that preceeded the statement?
Simon, do you care to take it from here?
Palzang
Once again I feel I'm in over my head. I just want to make my thoughts clear, and take my lumps as I deserve.
If Nibbana is what you seek, why go to a teacher other than the Buddha?
Isn't it possible that some people might miss out on the teachings that would help them greatly due to Buddhists being too accomodating to eternalists?
Acceptance and agreement are not the same thing. I'm Buddhist, I want my teachers to talk Dhamma to me, and treat me like a Buddhist.
It's a fine line I know. My big mouth about Buddhism nearly caused my marriage to end. I think His Holiness does a great job in this, his wisdom has helped me alot in communicating with my devoutly xtian wife.
I'm a beginner, but I'm sure Ive been Buddhist for a long time and just didn't know about the teachings untill now. Brian said; This is a website for people new to Buddhism. I say; Shouldn't we try to refrain from confusing them?
Last night I had the opportunity to stay late after meditation. What a rare and wonderfull thing it is to me to have personal time with a Buddhist Monk. I highly recommend it if you get the chance.
One other layperson stayed as well. This person is very well liked, very intelligent, successfull, kind, caring, compassionate, happy, just one of those people it's very pleasant to be around."Born Buddhist", that is raised Buddhist by Buddhist parents in a Buddhist culture. Knows the Chants by heart, knows the proper etiquette. From the first time I went I thought this is someone I should get to know, someone who could help me along the Path.
Well.... yes and no. Come to find out the "Buddhism" this person has been tought is more like if you took Christianity and replaced God with Buddha. The parents took this person to Temple to pray to Buddha and ask him for stuff, you know like Christians pray to God. This person is having to reconcile the two now. It's not a big terrible problem, a little bit of a shock maybe at times, and like I said I admire the this person either way.
I just wanted to share this so you might know I'm not being anti-Christian, just anti-confusion.
Have a beautifull day!
they are nothing but nothing but words..
i have been a buddhist since i was, being a buddhist is being me
Look at all the things I used to describe myself. Buddhist, former Christian, atheist, independent, philsopher. Is that all I have to show for myself at the end of life? A few useless titles? Of course titles are not a bad thing. We couldn't converse with one another if we didn't apply names to things. But we become so consumed by titles that soon we break off into our own little groups sealing ourselves from everyone else. Eventually, we may become so blinded by titles that we see fit to attack others because of their inferior groups. We wouldn't admit this, but it is what goes on in our minds.
As far as picking and choosing go, how else would you have it? We chose Buddhism did we not? Choice is not always the most comfortable thing, but there is no better way!
I thought i was a buddhist but tbh.. im not att all, there is no proper or real 'buddhism' so it really doesn't apply.. Calling urself anything is just another stereotype and should be ignored..
if you can fully comprehend urself and everything else.. you might then wanna label urself but others still won't understand cus they ain't perfect..
labels just don't work in any sense.. some chavs asked me " Dave, are you a Reb or a Pleb?"
i can't answer that because there is no true definition of either, and the ignorance involved in either answer is the same with all things.. There is no answer in perception.. there is no truth in general observation.. merely personal speculation
I am the all and the one
The mainland Chinese government are constantly pursuing a path of propaganda against th Dalai Lama. In an attempt to re-write history, and justify their armed aggression against the sovereign nation of Tibet.
Chinese outside of China, that is the Diaspora - do not, and have not supported the stance of the Communist government of mainland China. On Xing Ping's personal 'myspace', you will find a picture of the daughter of the last Panchen Lama, who describes herself as a true 'Chinese Patriot' - ethnic Tibetans of course, do not view themselves as 'Chinese'.
It is all politics of course, and I think politics should be separated from 'Buddhism'. The problem with the mainland, is that one often masquaraids as the other. Xing Ping, please open your Mind's Eye.
Thank you.
Palzang
Thank you for your correction.
So on this occasion, he left the door open. If someone has "lost" their religion then I suppose they would then be a "free thinker" and so free to choose any religion or path, including Buddhism, according to his direction.
From my perspective, this is good advice. It's unlikely in the first place the that a practicing adherent of any religion is going to wake up one morning and say to themselves, "Wow do I ever feel rested. I think I will be a Muslim today, Shinto is so dull". There is a whole lot to learn to get into the flow of any unfamiliar spiritual path. It would be better to expend that effort to get to the realization of oneness in their current religious or spiritual path.
I am biased towards Buddhism, and so is HHDL. I think that when a person gets to the experience of oneness, that traditional, non-Buddhist, religions can't give it context. Therefore at that point those people would naturally migrate from their old way, through free-thinking, to Buddhism. It's a natural progression. That's the way it worked for me anyway.
He uses skillful means to encourage religious harmony, self-development regardless of current religion, and leaves the door open for those open lotuses who need the warm light of Buddhism to come into full bloom.
Namaste,
VajraYatu
From my own conversation with HHDL, I can say that he views both Christianity and Buddhism as equally valid ways to achieve loving-kindness.