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.
What are the most controversial topics in Buddhism?
matthewmartin
Amateur BodhisattvaSuburbs of Mt Meru Veteran
And what is the Buddhist way to deal with them? (yup, already heard about the rule about speech, not being divisive, etc-- which superficially sounds like just not talking about sensitives issues, i.e. leave the debate about sensitive issues who don't care much about those rules)
Vegetarianism, laxity (i.e. pragmatics vs the ascetic ideal), weapons, murder in self defense, national defense, abortion, the literal vs metaphorical interpretation of rebirth & karma come to mind as topics that modern society and the various branches of Buddhism haven't reached consensus on.
I've heard there is a system of structure debate in the Tibetan tradition, anyone know about that?
Vegetarianism, laxity (i.e. pragmatics vs the ascetic ideal), weapons, murder in self defense, national defense, abortion, the literal vs metaphorical interpretation of rebirth & karma come to mind as topics that modern society and the various branches of Buddhism haven't reached consensus on.
I've heard there is a system of structure debate in the Tibetan tradition, anyone know about that?
0
Comments
Those topics you view as controversial only seem to be that way in forums such as this. Out in the world there seems to be a greater emphasis on practice. It's hard to argue with someone when the whole room is meditating.
Not compatible as emptiness implies potential for change whereas nothingness implies, well... Nothing.
For me the most controversial subject is should I practice Buddhism or tell others where they are going right . . .
Trungpa Rinpoche is a controversy magnet. The mere mention of his name online seems to bring out the worst.
Michael Roach has his share.
Geshe Kelsang Gyatso.
Ole Nydahl.
Abortion - rights and wrongs.
Killing in self-defence
Vegetarianism.
On a lesser scale:
Re-birth
karma (collective, past deeds, people born with disabilities, etc)
Self/Not-self
The First Noble Truth.
That word 'suffering' causes a whole lot of it.
And the very idea of a list of rules.
- Can Buddhists believe in a creator God?
- Is Buddhism a philosophy or religion?
- If it is a philosophy, can one practice it along with another religion?
- Is Buddhism the "only true path" to the cessation of suffering?
- Is SGI a cult?
What is the Buddhist way of dealing with such topics? Understanding, compassion, open-mindedness, and being willing to hear the other side before making concrete conclusions.
I'd also add that one of the most controversial issues in Buddhism can be whether or not being gay is ok. I hate to even mention it because it's such a sensitive topic, but given that there are texts (not sutras, but commentaries/interpretations) in the Mahayana that get a bit Puritanical, this can be an issue. Though for the most part, Buddhists tend to be live-and-let-live types, and interpret the relevant precept broadly rather than narrowly.
It concerns me that those whose only contact with Buddhadharma is via online forums
Might think that this is what Buddhadharma is like.
It isn't.
I am beginning to wonder if online Dharma is possible...which of course is likely to be controversial in itself.
I don't consider the 'behavior' of online sanghas such as NB as anything but what a bunch of human beings do when they come together for a common goal. The Buddhadharma isn't 'here', or even specific to a real life temple or sangha. The Buddhadharma is THIS. It's everywhere you look because it is 'behind' your eyes looking out
I don't get too worked up about 'only' having an online sangha, I don't even see it that way. Just that more people here practice the Practice than I interact with IRL.
I admit I have a TON of neurotic residue about being around people practicing something spiritual (or self-improvement, life-improvement) in groups. It's all reaction, on my part, admittedly. The urge to compare myself against the APPARENT behavior of others in their practice is strong and the crap that comes up in my head is annoying and destructive. Obviously, being with RL folks doing this is the next step BECAUSE of the above
The online thing turns out to have been a great start for me, though. I'm an information seeker, and independent thinker and need a solid, self-generated base so I can focus on where to seek training specific to where I am going. Where I'm going is becoming more and more clear, thus my search for a teacher is going to be more specific and I hope to spend less time 'interviewing', getting my hopes up and dashed over and over until I find someone who resonates and off we go.
Online dharma IS possible because it is happening right here and now. Individual intention is the key. I believe online dharma has its limitations, and a sincere seeker will encounter the limits and move beyond them into RL. These are only my opinions of course. Some have little or no choice because of where they live, and the onus is on their sincerity and intention to work with what is available.
Gassho
I have also learnt a lot from reading all the posts but try to stay away from those are trying to 'out Buddha' each other with relentless bickering as it is counter productive and confusing for me.
So thanks to everyone really
Like that comment about Bodhisattva Vows being a bunch of "shall nots" or something like that. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Someone could pick that up and run with it and all it will do is create confusion and prejudice. That's not to mention that person could walk into a Mahayana sangha and drop that in conversation or teaching, get corrected and be massively embarassed.
I'm of the opinion, boards like this should actively discourage discussions of things like emptiness. Nobody online really understands it and shouldn't be discussing it based on their misunderstanding.
This is peoples' karma we're dealing with, for chrissakes.
I wonder, too, if Dharma presented online is possible, especially on the context of an open forum. I think if the presentation is offered by someone with more than just street creds, such as Ven. Samahita, there's a chance that someone might get the right instruction but in a free-for-all like we have here, I have my doubts.
One thing that I'd get if I'd just go to one of the local centers/temples/viharas is that in any particular place, I could assume that most people agree on broad doctrinal issues. For example, among SGI, they aren't going to be arguing over the efficacy of mantras, the Thai Vihara isn't going to be arguing for and against if Amitabha is a god/if Pure Land Sutras were preached by the historical Buddha, etc.
This is meant to be kindly rather than critical.
But Buddhadharma simply is not an individual endeavour..that's why the Buddha left THREE jewels.
This of course cuts across a certain type of modern axiomatic mindset which values individuality above all things and fails to see that all that arises is interdependant.
_/\_
a nice platform to have for social interactions about Buddhism.
It's up to each person to find out if who they hang out with...here..
or IRL...is saying the 'right' stuff....hahaha
It's a good place to talk out the controversies..hahaha
:eek2:
Right... Totally get what your saying.
Like what if someone new comes here and misses their chance to see the truth, the way and the light of Zen because some other poser here is just horsing around with a flashlight.
Really???
Sorry @how and @Chaz, I beg to disagree.
There are no dumb questions.
Ohhhhh This is like me begging you not to think or a purple elephant.
IMO Enlightenment & Nirvana are better described by what they are not, but only to deal with the graspings that do not yet understand, going, going, always going on, always becoming...............!
Eventually such questioning, loses the questioner and the best definition turns out to be that loss.
Aaaarrrgghhh. Who you calling Dumb!
'!" am a 'buddha' and experience 'Nirvana' and 'Samsara'
'You' are an ignorant 'buddha' and without knowing it experience 'Nirvana' and 'Samsara'
You don't have to end suffering in this lifetime, thats what being incarnated as a human human is about, so don't end suffering, live with it and see it for what it is - you just have to develop equanimity. Ta da - that might enable you to end your suffering1
Good luck with that.
I was only allowed one call...
No wait..that was somewhere else.
Stephen Batchelor
SB is controversial because he wants to be.
Batchelor's "agnostic" approach toward rebirth is responsible for many followers of Buddhism sticking with the Dharma, rather than abandoning it. That's a real service to the Dharma. He's controversial because some Buddhists choose to view him that way. That's their choice.
But that was replaced with other controversies, as people have this innate drive to ask "Why not...?" and the Sangha is a living, changing thing whether we accept it or not. In China, Buddhism evolved into Chan and then there was a Northern and Southern school who argued about who had the correct lineage and practice, sudden versus gradual enlightenment being the huge controversy. Gradual lost the battle when they lost their royal patronage.
So we have a new, modern list of controversies today. The next generation will laugh at our list and create their own.
See, controversy is not a bad thing. It means even in defending what is passed down to us, we must actually use our minds and think, not just parrot what we have been taught.