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 seems to be the most common buddhist misunderstanding
@Supertramp You make an important point: yes, we can certainly learn from Christian people and even priests. Dharma is everywhere, not just from Buddhists, although Christians may be offended if you called it dharma.
Seeing this "as it is", means seeing that suffering is only an illusion and that the world is constructed, by each individual, from their own minds. It is like we all have a virtual-reality helmet on, with a different game, but we mistakenly assume we're all playing the same game! (Buddhists would call this "game" samsara) Buddhism aims to take the VR helmet off, thus liberating us from the suffering that it causes.
So when we, with our VR helmets on, say another person also has a VR helmet on, we're not trying to offend them or disrespect them! We're just saying it how it is.
Still, despite our mutual delusions, we are all also capable of revealing the true nature of reality (Nirvana/Nibanna), even if we know nothing of Buddhism. Some people have a remarkable intuitive understanding of dharma, in their kindness, wisdom or awareness of the superficiality of this so-called reality.
I am blessed by some wonderful Christian friends. One for instance, fosters and adopts disabled children. Her adopted daughter died last summer, aged 15 months, from a severe chromosome disorder. She was devastated and it was the day before the adoption went through legally so technically she wasn't even supposed to bury the child, although that has all been sorted out now. However, since Christmas she's been fostering another baby who is waiting to go to his adoptive home (cooling-off period for the birth mother). Amazing woman.
But I think that those who call priests arrogant are probably speaking out of hurt and it is probably particular priests whom they've encountered, who were arrogant. It is not fair to tar them all with the same brush. I had a family friend when I was a kid who was a Catholic priest and a lovely man.
As Buddhists, we're not supposed to react with aversion, but as you've noticed, a lot of us are new in our practice and still have a way to go. It took me a long time to get over my personal aversion to Christians. I still don't like Christianity, but I've resolved my aversion to their religion.
I used to be a very intolerant person towards any kind of religion, especially those that have dogmas in their beliefs. I'm not sure when exactly this changed or more specifically what made this change but a couple of years ago I found myself more tolerant towards christianity and other religions. It changed in such a way that I don't even need to be tolerant towards them anymore but I understand why they need it and do not try to change it. I don't need to tolerate it anymore. Today I'm still intolerant towards certain kinds of people, but I try to remember that even these people can teach me something.
I can't get my head around this. Why do we use this word craving if its so inaccurate?
Definition 1 and 2 sound basically the same. Except if we take example #2 of ending craving. We would essentially not care about the outcome of the thing we long for; want greatly; desire greatly...
...To me Buddhism has a very nihilistic view.
We must stop putting so much weight into language. On a message board, this may be a very difficult task. We are all looking at words, not just speaking them.
Pain/pleasure is a duality. It is a delusion. It is not reality.
"Craving" is a word, that is, a symbol. With some insight through the practice of mindfulness, we can gain an opportunity to see where unhealthy attachments play a role in our life. When I speak of "unhealthy", I speak of something that is not beneficial in alleviating suffering for ourselves and other sentient beings.
The realization of what "craving" is in the context of our guide for practice is to be found through practice, not language. If we look to language to find realization about language, we will go around and around in a circle indefinitely.
Coming from a western perspective, we tend to put weight into belief systems and language: neither of which encompass experience. Experience comes from practice. Practice gives no easy, clear cut answers that language (symbols) does. This is because reality and the symbols used to describe it are two different things. Language will always be insufficient in reflecting this.
Comments
Seeing this "as it is", means seeing that suffering is only an illusion and that the world is constructed, by each individual, from their own minds. It is like we all have a virtual-reality helmet on, with a different game, but we mistakenly assume we're all playing the same game! (Buddhists would call this "game" samsara) Buddhism aims to take the VR helmet off, thus liberating us from the suffering that it causes.
So when we, with our VR helmets on, say another person also has a VR helmet on, we're not trying to offend them or disrespect them! We're just saying it how it is.
Still, despite our mutual delusions, we are all also capable of revealing the true nature of reality (Nirvana/Nibanna), even if we know nothing of Buddhism. Some people have a remarkable intuitive understanding of dharma, in their kindness, wisdom or awareness of the superficiality of this so-called reality.
I am blessed by some wonderful Christian friends. One for instance, fosters and adopts disabled children. Her adopted daughter died last summer, aged 15 months, from a severe chromosome disorder. She was devastated and it was the day before the adoption went through legally so technically she wasn't even supposed to bury the child, although that has all been sorted out now. However, since Christmas she's been fostering another baby who is waiting to go to his adoptive home (cooling-off period for the birth mother). Amazing woman.
But I think that those who call priests arrogant are probably speaking out of hurt and it is probably particular priests whom they've encountered, who were arrogant. It is not fair to tar them all with the same brush. I had a family friend when I was a kid who was a Catholic priest and a lovely man.
As Buddhists, we're not supposed to react with aversion, but as you've noticed, a lot of us are new in our practice and still have a way to go. It took me a long time to get over my personal aversion to Christians. I still don't like Christianity, but I've resolved my aversion to their religion.
Pain/pleasure is a duality. It is a delusion. It is not reality.
"Craving" is a word, that is, a symbol. With some insight through the practice of mindfulness, we can gain an opportunity to see where unhealthy attachments play a role in our life. When I speak of "unhealthy", I speak of something that is not beneficial in alleviating suffering for ourselves and other sentient beings.
The realization of what "craving" is in the context of our guide for practice is to be found through practice, not language. If we look to language to find realization about language, we will go around and around in a circle indefinitely.
Coming from a western perspective, we tend to put weight into belief systems and language: neither of which encompass experience. Experience comes from practice. Practice gives no easy, clear cut answers that language (symbols) does. This is because reality and the symbols used to describe it are two different things. Language will always be insufficient in reflecting this.
Sit. Eat. Sleep. Meditate.