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.
Modern Dali Lama(s) vs Buddha
Is it just me, or is there a pretty big difference when comparing the two?
The information that is said about buddha reminds me so much of the bible,
where rules are strict and unforgiving, things are always in copious amounts and grandiose, and the cynic in me says exaggerated.
My theory is because it got passed by word of mouth?
And the modern dalai lamas seem to be the opposite. Everything they say is so believable, and forgiving.
Agree, Disagree?
The information that is said about buddha reminds me so much of the bible,
where rules are strict and unforgiving, things are always in copious amounts and grandiose, and the cynic in me says exaggerated.
My theory is because it got passed by word of mouth?
And the modern dalai lamas seem to be the opposite. Everything they say is so believable, and forgiving.
Agree, Disagree?
0
Comments
Great prophets and teachers do tend to have their words twisted over time. It happened to Jesus, it happened to the Buddha. But the basics still work: the 4 Noble Truths, mindfulness, compassion, wisdom, the Eightfold Path.
In the another thread it was mentioned that buddha banished a follower who had told an executioner to kill compassionately with a single blow,
and in the same thread, there was a quote from the 14th dalai lama saying how it is reasonable to fight back, in the context of firearms. Which we all know are meant to kill.
Its not that I dont like either, I just have always thought this and wanted to know if others did or didnt.
Be aware, jay, that the DL has also said and written that sex is for procreation only. But he's also said that given the overpopulation of the Earth, birth control is ok. (Sex for pleasure leads to attachment, see, and away from the ending of suffering, that's the rationale.) He's said that gay sex is not kosher, but when speaking to a gay audience, he's said it's ok as long as no one is harmed. So the DL has many sides. I just thought I'd point that out. He has a strict side, and a mellow side.
Person may have been implying: simplify. Keep it to the 4 Nobles. That's everything in a nutshell.
Poor old Gautama. Poor old Jesus. Poor old Gandhi. Poor old Hitler.... and that's not to mention Lizzy O'Toole who lived down the block and died last week.
My view is that it is all up to us whether or not we decide to credit the abundant bs.
I still mentioned that buddhisms has rules in the original message, so I still stand corrected, but I was just quoting zidangus.
So the question is not, what does Buddhism say about this-and-that, but how do you feel about it? Would you kill out of self defense? If so, why? And if not, why not? Investigating those motives, that's important; not blindly following rules, that will teach you nothing.
The Buddha was a very forgiving fellow. Just one example: There is this sutta about when he met murderers that were sent to kill him, he embraced them within his sangha.
I simply noticed a contradiction between what are generally regarded as the authorities on Buddhism.
I didn't say i believed or followed in one or the other blindly.
I was talking in general here. I was not intending to be personal. Sorry if it came across differently.
With metta,
Sabra
BTW -- there is nothing wrong or bad about having an agenda. Buddha had an agenda. HHDL has one or more agendas.
Guatama Buddha : born of the virgin Maya around 600bc.
Dionysus : Greek god, born of a virgin in a stable and turned water to wine.
Quirrnus : early Roman saviour, born of a virgin.
Attis : born of a virgin nama in Phrygia 200 BC
Adonis : Babylonian god -born of virgin Ishtar.
Krishna : Hindu god- born of the virgin devalued in 1200 BC
Zoroaster : born of a virgin 1500- 1200 BC
Mithras: born of a virgin in a stable on December 25 600 BC. His resurrection is celebrated in Easter.
You're contradicting yourself, and zidangus said nothing about the number of rules influencing their severity, you drew that inference from Zid's post. Are you having trouble following the discussion? We're just trying to address your OP and subsequent questions. Getting a hostile vibe, here. We're just trying to help. You posted a good topic.
I will answer your question even though you haven't told me what my fake one is supposed to be.
I post on NB to learn. I want to learn peoples opinions and why. I have an agenda to learn. Please elaborate because I think there is some confusion here I can solve.
I just want people to understand what I meant. Im sorry.
Start again.
so back on topic, to clarify, @Dakini and @sabre You both are 100% right on my wrong terminology on my original post. Thank you for setting me straight.
this is why I posted, to learn!
I think if you read the sutras, you'll find passages that seem very strict, and others in which the Buddha displays understanding of human failings, and kindness. Buddhism can come across as Puritanical in some ways--no attachment allowed, is it ok to wear make-up, is it ok to dress fashionably, or is that attachment, is it ok to have a relationship and marry, or are we all supposed to be monastics, etc. etc. So it can be confusing.
Mod Edit:
What, like this one?
I guess my view is they're both a mixed bag, the DL and the Buddha. But the DL giggles a lot more, especially when he's in the West. Watch Al Jazeera--they're good at catching him during annoyed or angry moments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_in_Buddhism
which informs any one who cares to listen, why suffering exists, and how to ultimately escape from suffering.
I think for lay Buddhist, the Buddha would have been happy if you understood on a basic level the four noble truths, and not expect you to follow a strict set of monastic rules. I mean yes there are a many rules set out for Buddhist monks, and below are some examples
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhistworld/layguide.htm
but to be at a stage in which you can follow these rules with real commitment, you must be pretty far down the Buddhist path. If on the other hand you are lay, which I presume you are, then as I said a basic understanding of the four noble truths are all you really need to put the core of Buddhas teachings into practice in everyday life and to ignite the flame within you that may one day take you as far down the Buddhist path as the monks who do follow a strict set of monastic rules.
I do not know what you mean in the second part of your post, but all I can say is, I have a lot of respect for the DL, but he is not the Buddha, and if the DL says anything which contradicts what the Buddha taught in his core teachings, then I'm afraid, I will disagree with the DL every time.
One source defining "precept":
1. a rule or principle for action
2. a guide or rule for morals; maxim
Another source of synonyms for defining "rule":
"regulation - law - precept - reign - norm - government"
But I like having a more well-rounded view of HHDL. A speech he gave in Japan after the crisis, when he was on his way to the US, was very forceful and frank. I like seeing him in get-tough mode.
I also don't ever recall him saying anything about killing someone else in self defense. Not that he didn't I've just never heard it so some source would also be nice about that.
Is killing ever permissible?