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.
Swearing is simply expressing yourself. It has little to do with right or wrong speech unless you are aiming it at someone, or calling someone something rude in their absence.
Yes, but my main point is that you dont see The Buddha using vulgar language anywhere in the suttas. If we are serious about being buddhists AND practicing the 8 fold path shouldn't we actually take the Buddha as our example? I dont believe he avoided vulgar language for no reason or just because it wasn't a habit of his. If one believes in the Buddhas teachings to be true why not practice avoid certain words. I think doing so allows for other factors of the 8 fold path to become much stronger.
I don't mean to be argumentative, but the suttas don't contain any of the Buddhas words, but stories taken from memory of what he said many years before. There is no way to know what his words actually were. If I were to talk to someone from one hundred fifty years ago, there is a good chance that we would have trouble with understanding each other about many things. No, I like to think that the Buddha was a guy who was awake and knew when cursing would get his message across and when to refrain from cursing because he might offend someone.
Thais are not perfect, anymore than are those from any other country. But I wish everyone on this forum could experience the effort to which Thais generally go out of their way to interact in a pleasant way with each other and with visitors. Then they'd get right speech and how much it contributes to the enjoyment of life for others.
Swearing is simply expressing yourself. It has little to do with right or wrong speech unless you are aiming it at someone, or calling someone something rude in their absence.
Yes, but my main point is that you dont see The Buddha using vulgar language anywhere in the suttas. If we are serious about being buddhists AND practicing the 8 fold path shouldn't we actually take the Buddha as our example? I dont believe he avoided vulgar language for no reason or just because it wasn't a habit of his. If one believes in the Buddhas teachings to be true why not practice avoid certain words. I think doing so allows for other factors of the 8 fold path to become much stronger.
I don't mean to be argumentative, but the suttas don't contain any of the Buddhas words, but stories taken from memory of what he said many years before. There is no way to know what his words actually were. If I were to talk to someone from one hundred fifty years ago, there is a good chance that we would have trouble with understanding each other about many things. No, I like to think that the Buddha was a guy who was awake and knew when cursing would get his message across and when to refrain from cursing because he might offend someone.
Im not trying to be argumentative here either. I understand theres no proof these are the buddhas words..however If we are to call ourselves buddhist we must know that buddhism exists, historically because of the oldest written teachings. Thus the nikayas. Every single school of buddhism today would not exist if not for these teachings. The nikayas say the teachings would be split off and other teachings would be created and thats what happened. Granted other schools have much benefit and are in accordance with the original but not everything is. This is why there is argumentative issues between theravada and mahayana. What continues to surprise me is how many overlook what I stated above. if we are to claim being buddhists then what do we follow? what and where did buddhism come from? You see, its about what we know, what is the physical "thing" we can look at that stamps itself as original? All christians share the bible and agree it to be the "word of god" if they had as many different bibles as we have "buddhisms" they would be in the same boat as us...and the question would be the same. Whats the origin of this religion? Gotama, according to the suttas, is responsible for buddhism. All traditions agree..why cant we all agree then, that what we should be practicing is found in the *proven* original texts? otherwise we are just buffet buddhists. Myself included from time to time.
... All traditions agree..why cant we all agree then, that what we should be practicing is found in the *proven* original texts? otherwise we are just buffet buddhists. Myself included from time to time.
If they stand the test of time, yes. But, times have changed in 2,000 years, and I think you have to put all teachings in that context.
In regard to buffet Buddhism. What so bad about it?
1. The first book about Buddhism I ever read I bought in Thailand after visiting several Buddhist temples. It was a Theravadan book translated from Thai. To paraphrase its preface: {As you read this book, consider each of its teachings. Accept those you can and incorporate them into your life. Set aside those you cannot yet accept; later in your journey you may still find they ring true}.
2. Isn't complaining about buffet Buddhism really a subtle way of saying someone isn't a real Buddhist, when in reality we each have to find our own path?
3. If a totally amoral person picked up a book about Buddhism and said, "I am moved. I am going to adjust my behavior and follow 7 of the 8 noble truths." Would you say, "I'm sorry. You'll have to remain totally amoral. With Buddhism it's all or nothing at all."
I'm going to be honest with you, anyone who simply accepts 100% of anything -- including Buddhist thought -- isn't really thinking.
Although it still annoys me a bitwhen pretentious people have Buddha statues as decoration just to show off and yet live a very unbuddhist life and/or know nothing about Buddhism it doesn't bother me so much.
I think it is more about what is socially acceptable, and if we aren't personally bothered by curse words for example there is someone else who is for sure, but it is not limited to just curse words. It can be expanded to include other things such as derogatory comments about race, sexual orientation, or one's size for that matter.
The fact is we don't live in isolation from others, so our thoughts and behavior are not just about us, and even our silence can have an impact but it can also be used unskillfully. Speaking out has the potential to make derogatory comments less socially acceptable, at least in our immediate social environments like the home or workplace, but it is often a risky and a difficult thing for one to do, especially when you represent a minority voice, so it is easier to remain silent of which I'm far more than I should be.
The important thing is intention. But even someone showing off this could be a 'relatively' positive thing because they are elevating these belongings. If I buy a guitar but never play it I still may in the future learn to play. Likewise if you do not practice (study, meditate) the shrine could be like that guitar some day. I also don't see any harm in a non-Buddhist admiring some quality of Buddhism such as serenity and then putting up a statue.
3
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
edited July 2013
With 50 years of teaching under his belt and many people translating it only makes sense to be a buffet Buddhist.
We still debate today on what is exactly meant by certain things.
I try to refrain from swearing but am not always successful. Never when it may offend, however.
[1] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[2] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[3] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
[4] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[5] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[6] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."
---- ABHAYA SUTTA MAJJHIMA NIKAYA 58
Thanks much! Seems mostly to hinge on whether what we say is of positive value, i.e., Beneficial.
Comments
If I were to talk to someone from one hundred fifty years ago, there is a good chance that we would have trouble with understanding each other about many things.
No, I like to think that the Buddha was a guy who was awake and knew when cursing would get his message across and when to refrain from cursing because he might offend someone.
This is why there is argumentative issues between theravada and mahayana.
What continues to surprise me is how many overlook what I stated above. if we are to claim being buddhists then what do we follow? what and where did buddhism come from? You see, its about what we know, what is the physical "thing" we can look at that stamps itself as original?
All christians share the bible and agree it to be the "word of god" if they had as many different bibles as we have "buddhisms" they would be in the same boat as us...and the question would be the same. Whats the origin of this religion?
Gotama, according to the suttas, is responsible for buddhism.
All traditions agree..why cant we all agree then, that what we should be practicing is found in the *proven* original texts?
otherwise we are just buffet buddhists. Myself included from time to time.
In regard to buffet Buddhism. What so bad about it?
1. The first book about Buddhism I ever read I bought in Thailand after visiting several Buddhist temples. It was a Theravadan book translated from Thai. To paraphrase its preface: {As you read this book, consider each of its teachings. Accept those you can and incorporate them into your life. Set aside those you cannot yet accept; later in your journey you may still find they ring true}.
2. Isn't complaining about buffet Buddhism really a subtle way of saying someone isn't a real Buddhist, when in reality we each have to find our own path?
3. If a totally amoral person picked up a book about Buddhism and said, "I am moved. I am going to adjust my behavior and follow 7 of the 8 noble truths." Would you say, "I'm sorry. You'll have to remain totally amoral. With Buddhism it's all or nothing at all."
I'm going to be honest with you, anyone who simply accepts 100% of anything -- including Buddhist thought -- isn't really thinking.
The fact is we don't live in isolation from others, so our thoughts and behavior are not just about us, and even our silence can have an impact but it can also be used unskillfully. Speaking out has the potential to make derogatory comments less socially acceptable, at least in our immediate social environments like the home or workplace, but it is often a risky and a difficult thing for one to do, especially when you represent a minority voice, so it is easier to remain silent of which I'm far more than I should be.
'relatively' positive thing because they are elevating these belongings. If I buy a guitar but never play it I still may in the future learn to play. Likewise if you do not practice (study, meditate) the shrine could be like that guitar some day. I also don't see any harm in a non-Buddhist admiring some quality of Buddhism such as serenity and then putting up a statue.
We still debate today on what is exactly meant by certain things.
I try to refrain from swearing but am not always successful. Never when it may offend, however.
Thanks much! Seems mostly to hinge on whether what we say is of positive value, i.e., Beneficial.