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.
No Such Thing As A "Good Buddhist"
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yes Jeffrey you can and you should if you care for them. Call them up and sit with them.
It's a non-sequitur. I was being facetious in response to your facetiousness.
A Theravadin?
Actually you can call him or her a Buddhist. Who cares about their practice? None of my damned business.
The Buddha
When we start on the path we are judgemental, based on preferences we decide what is good or bad or by labelling skilful/unskilful think we have found a better dichotomy.
Eventually we turn that discernment on our practice and behaviour and stop these notions of duality. We become so opposed to our capacity to label or explain in terms of our preferences and tendency to gossip about others attainments or behaviour that we allow the elephant in the room to be no part of the discussion. 'It is all good', is the mindless assertion . . .
Eventually we start to realise this is not so good or skilfull. Bad teachers, students, pseudo practitioners become prevalent. Before you know it something bad happens. We still do not want our equilibrium tipped, so whatever . . . life is like that etc . . .
Good thing we also can find those who point at others, knowing they are pointing to themselves . . . or am I just being bad again . . .
I know, but "good" can mean practising effectively, as opposed to "bad" meaning practising incorrectly or not at all. I'm not sure how else we can pin down these descriptions in a meaningful way.
OK, then please elaborate. It's easy to accuse people of "ranting" when we disagree with their views. And I don't accept the validity of the implied comparison between the shameful behaviour of some Buddhists in Myanmar and a member here rejecting the idea of God for example. It seems to me like a strawman.
Eventually we turn that discernment on our practice and behaviour and stop these notions of duality.
Yes, but we're not practising in a vacuum, and we can learn a lot by observing how others approach their practice.
Exactly so.
Just because a person is a beginner, teacher, conflicted or Tara shines from their nether regions does not make them good or bad in some absolute sense but we do have the commonality of language where we generalise. That causing or continuing suffering in ourselves or others is a bad thing. In a similar way spreading skilfull means, joy and healing cheer (or a necessary kick up the Tara) is a good thing if it moves us to the far shore.
We do judge and maybe we should BUT paradoxically not in a judgemental or unhelpful way. A good teacher is also a exemplifier. We can expect a little more wisdom, skilfull behaviour, if not they are just another dharma refuge seeker.
So we do observe, we do judge, we do try to discern. Well I do anyways. Gosh I am just so partial to real life changing dharma, which I think is a good thing . . .
Is either assment valid? Who are you to asses the practice of anyone, including yourself? Who are you to choose what to label it? Most times another's assesment isn't worth the time to listen let alone consider.
If you want to dwell in that sort of dalistic thinking in order to make some moral sense of the world around you, yoi regardless of anytthing I may say, but I assure you it is really of not value.
There was a leader of Germany who was a vegetarian, worked against envirnomental polution and raise his country out of a crushing economic depression. Pretty good guy, right? His name was Adolf Hitler. Not so good now.
There was a tibetan Buddhist teacher who came to the west, worked tirelessly to propogate the Dharma, established practice and retreat centers all over the word, invited to finest teachers to instruct and empower his students, established institutions of learning and practice and wrote dozens of books on practice that have survived the decades since his death. Awesome right? At least based on that criteria he is. Well he was also a hopeless alchoholic who drank himself to death and had a penchant for the ladies. Now what? Bad?
How we make these assumptions and assessments are often based purely on very subjective analysis. The criteria is so subjective as to be basically meaningless and useless in discussion.
We have to label everything. We just have to. Labeling is judgment. Putting words to it is elaboration. Wanna lsay something's bad? Go ahead. I think it's as meaningless as saying nothing.
You can say that a "good" Buddhist is one that avoids creating bad karma to anyone including oneself, and tries to create good karma for everyone. I might agree with you though that there might not be any "bad" Buddhists, because "bad" or evil is actually part of our nature.
How exactly does one create "bad karma to anyone" else?
By using them to break a precept I guess.
Hmmmmm.
I am still trying to figure out what the point of this thread is.
I have two drakes (male ducks) that fight through a hole in the fence. They gnash their bills at each other and every now and then one or the other gets a bald spot. They sit chest to chest with the fence between them just go at it for hours sometimes
.
Like buying dope from someone, maybe. Or seducing someone's wife, particularly in a country where she could be killed or imprisoned for it. Or even shunned.
It about the validity of applying terms like good and bad to others.
If that seems straw man or unacceptable *shrugs* then I guess that's your issue to deal with.
Sounds too much like blaming someone else for one's misfortune. I think we each create our own Karma. In the example given, the dope seller still has the ability to refuse.
I am in agreement with @Chaz with many/most of his comments above, particularly how he demonstrates the human nature of the guru!
Good or bad - opposing ends of a spectrum, and we all know from watching the news how wide the spectrum is; and how great and good it can be and also how sad and defiled it is also - that is samsara! But the guru should show you the obverse, even if they must demonstrate bad habits!
You can choose to walk through life blindly, or with your eyes wide open!
I am looking for an ophthalmic surgeon who can give me rose-coloured visual implants, but thats not going to happen in this lifetime (maybe in another one), and when they are available the side effects of looking at the world through such implants might be just as heart-breaking...
Yes but if my actions creates misery for someone else, is it my karma or theirs?
Has Hitler been brought into this thread yet? There is an example of someone who caused a lot of otherwise normal guys to do make evil karma. Or perhaps just gave them the opportunity.
People should realise that their actions, or what they are doing at the instant they recognise they are doing them is karma - and as A Hitler has been dead for a significant time,his actions, although remembered particularly at this time of the year are now irrelevant. Although we should learn from his mistakes that in a democratic world to become so power-hungry, will cause you nothing but trouble and strife. Most people are too well educated these days to be led to extremist views - oops forgot about middle east crisis! but in the civilised western/european world such characters will be obvious these days...
Okay, I guess a soldier and a few other people are forced to carry out someone else's will. I can see that.
and Tea Partiers!
Response to a Logician
by Milarepa
I bow at the feet of my teacher Marpa.
And sing this song in response to you.
Listen, pay heed to what I say,
forget your critique for a while.
The best seeing is the way of "nonseeing" --
the radiance of the mind itself.
The best prize is what cannot be looked for --
the priceless treasure of the mind itself.
The most nourishing food is "noneating" --
the transcendent food of samadhi.
The most thirst-quenching drink is "nondrinking" --
the nectar of heartfelt compassion.
Oh, this self-realizing awareness
is beyond words and description!
The mind is not the world of children,
nor is it that of logicians.
Attaining the truth of "nonattainment,"
you receive the highest initiation.
Perceiving the void of high and low,
you reach the sublime stage.
Approaching the truth of "nonmovement,"
you follow the supreme path.
Knowing the end of birth and death,
the ultimate purpose is fulfilled.
Seeing the emptiness of reason,
supreme logic is perfected.
When you know that great and small are groundless,
you have entered the highest gateway.
Comprehending beyond good and evil
opens the way to perfect skill.
Experiencing the dissolution of duality,
you embrace the highest view.
Observing the truth of "nonobservation"
opens the way to meditating.
Comprehending beyond "ought" and "oughtn't"
opens the way to perfect action.
When you realize the truth of "noneffort,"
you are approaching the highest fruition.
Ignorant are those who lack this truth:
arrogant teachers inflated by learning,
scholars bewitched by mere words,
and yogis seduced by prejudice.
For though they yearn for freedom,
they find only enslavement.
Yes, that does happen occasionally but it seems to be to do with particular personalities rather than with the views they are expressing.
We have to label everything. We just have to. Labeling is judgment. Putting words to it is elaboration. Wanna lsay something's bad? Go ahead. I think it's as meaningless as saying nothing.
So in your mind there's no difference between good and bad, correct and incorrect, ethical and non-ethical, skillful and unskillful, Right Speech and wrong speech, Right View and wrong View, etc?
In your mind there is no place for discernment at all in Buddhist practice?
Yes, or you could say a "good" Buddhist is somebody who acts skillfully. Obviously it isn't an either / or thing, behaviour is relative.
I think this thread has meandered here and there, up and down, near and far, and like the curate's egg....
It's time it was put to bed for an afternoon nap. If it needs re-awakening, maybe the OP could let me know, but until then, it's goodnight from me, and it's goodnight from him.
I leave you with this little ditty:
And so much bad in the best of us,
That it hardly behooves any of us
To talk about the rest of us.
>
Edward Wallis Hoch.