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.
How does a person qualify to be identified as a Buddhist?
HamsakagoosewhispererPolishing the 'just so'Veteran
That is a transparent excuse to argue @kavee. Interesting behavior from such a new member. Yeah, OK!!! WE SEEE YOUUUUUUU!!!! There . This is a great place, have a seat, we'll keep noticing you, we promise.
@federica said:
Please do not make set comments you cannot then back up.
It would be nice if we could always do that, but sadly it isn't always possible.
There is plenty of information to be gained in meditation centers. Many of the meditation instructors I know caution against trying to learn meditation without guidance because of psychological problems that could arise if the wrong path is taken.. Personally, I've never come across anyone who had become psychotic as a result of unguided practice. I have encountered people with some pretty strange ideas, coming from unguided practice. I suspect this was due, in part, to outstanding and unresolved mental health issues, but that's all the more reason for guidance.
@Hamsaka said:
Interesting behavior from such a new member. Yeah, OK!!! WE SEEE YOUUUUUUU!!!! There . This is a great place, have a seat, we'll keep noticing you, we promise.
Is it a complement or asking me to shut the freeking mouth
@Jeffrey said:
I haven't taken refuge because my teacher is in Wales and I am in USA. I have studied and meditated for 14 years though with 8 of those with my Sangha. I guess I am not a Buddhist haha.
I also know the secret handshake
You don't have to take refuge in the ceremonial sense, although many have found it helpfull on the path.
What's important is actually taking refuge. If you do that, you're a Buddhist.
You don't have to do the ceremony with your teacher. Seeing as your teacher has connections to both the Kagyu and Nyingma lineages there are probably representative sanghas near you where you could participate. The night I took refuge vows, at a kagyu center, there were a number of people I knew from the local Shambhala center taking their vows, too.
It was fun. I had been sitting cross-legged and when the time came for hair-cutting, I was called first. My legs had both gone numb and I had to beg off untill I got feeling back. I little embarrassing, but all good.
I guess I should explain a bit more. If you read again, what I wrote was "Unless you do not know what you are doing, it can make you go crazy" (it means meditation). Then I went into noting one such indication is that they think have become enlightened. The word "crazy" is used loosely to mention "not normal", but never intended in the meaning of a "psycho". There are certain stages of meditation where we encounter visions and experience finding utopia. These are traps people eventually falls, and a teacher should be there to help us getting out of the situation. I have seen people think they have attained Nirvana, or lesser terms Dhyana, and act as superior to everybody else, and eventually finding their own cults. Meditation was there even before Buddha and there are many ways to do meditation. However, according to Theravada Buddhism, only one way is preached by Buddah, which is wippassana meditation, which intern leads to Nirvana.
Hope this is enough to clear the unpleasantness aroused by misinterpreting my comment.
@kavee said:
However, according to Theravada Buddhism, only one way is preached by Buddah, which is wippassana meditation, which intern leads to Nirvana.
Don't take this personally, but there are many teachers (Mahayana) who say the exact same thing about Shamatha - the kind of meditation the Buddha taught, blah, blah.
I think most people don't care if it was Shamatha, Vipassana, both, or if the Buddha just hired @lobster to deal with all that.
My teacher says that shamata leads to subtler levels of consciousness from which you can have vipashyana. But the vipashyana is how you actually uproot your wrong views.
@Chaz said:
many teachers (Mahayana) who say the exact same thing about Shamatha
Settlement is the literal meaning of Samatha (pali word), and in the context its the settlement or calmness of the mind. Samatha meditaiton is the basic mindfulness. There are many way to calm the mind, thus many meditation techniques existed, even before Buddha's time. The most common in Buddhism is Anapansathi (mindfulness of breathing) which is (according to ancient text) endorsed by Buddha. Samatha Meditation does calms the mind but it does not take you to the goal of Nirvana. For that, you need Vidharshana. This is what ancient text says.
1) Samatha Meditation - Existed before Buddha, and commonly practiced by Brahmans in India. This can lead to mind conditioning and various Dhayana states and also can give some extraordinary capabilities.
2) Vidarshana Meditation - Discovered by Buddha as the only path to Nirvana (according to ancient text). There are various methods to it, which is out of the discussion.
If Nirvana is the goal, then must start from Samatha, even Buddha did that in his pre-enlightenment period (according to ancient text). Then next progression is on Vidharshana, if the ultimate goal is Nirvana. Else they can settle and experience the benefits of Samatha alone. Any authentic Vidharshana center will prepare the students from Samatha. There no shortcuts.
The mushroom meditation practice centers with various self titled teachers can say and do anything. That's one good thing about Buddhism, there is nobody to control, so you are safe from crusaders or head choppers.
@kavee said:
Samatha Meditation does calms the mind but its not take you to the goal of Nirvana.
Well, the same Mahayana teachers say that Shamatha is a "complete practice' and all that's needed to achieve enlightenment. They take a more liberal view, not excluding other practices from the goal.
Proponents of various techniques such as Metta, Tonglen, Mahamudra and Dzogchen also promote their practice the same.
Samatha Meditation can exists alone, but it wont take one to Nirvana.
Vidarshana cannot exist alone, but start with Samatha. Once we get experienced, Samatha stage can be quickly attained and progress into the Vidharshana. As with anything else, practice make things perfect and this flow will become second nature.
@kavee said:
Samatha Meditation can exists alone, but it wont take one to Nirvana.
What if I said that the Dalai Lama teaches Shamatha as a complete practice?
0
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
I just frown a bit when people say things as if they're certain, like a car mechanic saying "you'll never fix that unless you've gone to mechanic school". Things are rarely so black and white. People can figure things out, or else no one would have figured anything out.
@vinlyn said:
Okay, what Buddhist background and culture did you come from?
We don't need to see a birth certificate to know a bit more about your background, @kavee.
I cringe when I hear people throw preposterous comments like your "meditation can make you crazy" and then pretend to back their opinion with due credentials.
Without getting into particulars, what exactly are your Buddhist background and culture?
@Skeeterkb: Hope all these comments inspire you to continue delving into Buddhism.
Sorry you don't have a group or teacher nearby because that helps a lot.
But there is so much reading material and youtubes available that should guide your steps until something comes up.
@dharmamom said:
preposterous comments like your meditation can make you crazy
I am afraid you (and few others) failing to see my point. Why you cringe on one sentence, and there are enough comments from me on the same subject spread in threads, which is quite enough to understand my view. I have also made an explanation elsewhere what I mean on the very word of "crazy". If somebody is blindly cling into Buddhism, then the statement can hurt, I do understand and I do apologize for any pain, but it was never my intention.
As a born Buddhist, it hurts me when I see people use Buddha statue as a garden lantern or a book pedestal, but it never hurts my intellectual understanding of Buddhism, as I don't get easily upset upon the surface value.
If something I have said hurt anybody in this forum, I do apologize and it was never my intention. But I do stress the fact that please understand my view in its entirety.
Okay if you are so inquisitive, then you let us know your background, and then I will express my background on the forum
A good example of how broad the sense of being able to call oneself Buddhist is is to see how different views different people have that call themselves Buddhist.
@kavee I am not going to come down on you since so many have already. But for the sake of illustrating my point...
I too come from a Buddhist country (Sri Lanka) and I believe almost the opposite of all you said.
One must question first to get answers and critically examine what is being said to be able to judge by own experience. Kalama suttam.
Following the differents suttas describing meditation and practise. I see no problem to meditate without a teacher. But it is far more difficult.
And I have not even considered the issue of a buddha for garden gnome nor how adequate or not it is to call a bar buddha bar.
Still I would not contest your claim to be Buddhist!
In this broad allowing sense there are no real limits to quarter in a Buddhist in. This is also in accordance with the Dhamma.
The only thing I usually say is that I will respect anybodies right to call themselves Buddhist if they so please as long as they respect my right not to see them as Buddhists if I so please.
EDIT: That did not really answer original question... But being a Buddhist is maybe best defined by the following. I do not remember which sutta.
To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to purify one's mind—this is the teaching of the Buddhas
Meditation Practice should not be considered as a Fitness or Zumba class. It is perhaps (just perhaps) not an ideal DIY weekend project which can be self taught from a book. There can be self-taught and self-titled teachers out there whom students should be aware of, since it may be (just may be) not the Buddhism nor nirvana they are after. These commodity variety are good for anything else but attaining Nirvana.
I recently met a person from Switzerland, came here on a holiday. The way I was introduced to him (by a third person) probably aroused his curiosity, and he shook my hand saying I am a Buddhist too (very enthusiastically). Religion or Philosophy was never my intention of the meeting, but I said "Okay good, well what made you a Buddhist". The answer was, he was practicing meditation for 11 years. So he claimed he was a Buddhist because he was practicing "meditation" for so many years. I myself didn't come close to that many years. To make the long story short, he goes to a weekly meditation practice for that many years, under a teacher who happen to be an enlightened one (at least from his perspective). He was energetic and full of positive attitude, and probably some reminiscence of his practice. He was sure that he can become enlightened if he keep practicing for another 5 years or so (and his teacher has graded and graduated him eventually).
@Victorious said:
To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to purify one's mind—this is the teaching of the Buddhas
This is from Dhammapada, a well known phrase. It surely is a teaching of buddha but if one does not ready to accept ancient text (as I have seen few times in the forum), then it will be an issue
@Victorious I am not sure what "almost the opposite of all you said" is? if you list them out, probably I can learn from you, I am quite open for a honest discussion. Listing them out may be time consuming and an effort in your part, but it can certainly help me, and probably help others....
He who has gone for refuge in the Buddha, his Teaching and his Order, penetrates with transcendental wisdom the Four Noble Truths - suffering,the cause of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the Noble Eightfold Path leading to the cessation of suffering.This indeed is the safe refuge, this is the refuge supreme. Having gone to such a refuge, one is released from all suffering -- Dhammapada 190-192
This states how to to become a buddhist according to ancient text (those who do not believe in ancient text, ooops!)
@Victorious If we start quoting ancient text, then this forum will soon fill up. One point to understand is, the English words "may" not give the exact "pali" transcription thus some statements may open for debate. If one really want to dive into ancient text, then its a scholarly matter. Its is not a good practice to quote something from somewhere, which can arouse more debate and may not do justice to the original text in its pristine context. So unless we read pali, its better not to google for quotes somebody else have translated.
0
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited July 2014
(I think most of the translating from Pali to English has been done by Buddhist monks of the lineage to which the Pali texts belongs, making it as reliable as anything and not requiring lay Buddhists to actually know Pali to understand the teachings. The entirety of the teachings constitutes a coherent whole that fits together. A good source I've found is http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/.)
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
What I mean is, don't discuss things if you can't discuss them.
Apparently you entered into private dialogue with another member, which did not go well.
This was as a consequence of you deciding to discuss something you were not at liberty to discuss.
This is yet another example of considering the wisdom and pertinence of 'Speech'.
I'm not here to tell you what you should or shouldn't say - up to a point.
I'm here to police the behaviour of members and the suitable content of threads and posts on this forum.
Your View, Intention, Speech and Action (The first four 'spokes of the wheel') are for you to moderate, and apply Skilfully.
I am afraid you (and few others) failing to see my point. Why you cringe on one sentence, and there are enough comments from me on the same subject spread in threads, which is quite enough to understand my view. I have also made an explanation elsewhere what I mean on the very word of "crazy". If somebody is blindly cling into Buddhism, then the statement can hurt, I do understand and I do apologize for any pain, but it was never my intention.
As a born Buddhist, it hurts me when I see people use Buddha statue as a garden lantern or a book pedestal, but it never hurts my intellectual understanding of Buddhism, as I don't get easily upset upon the surface value.
If something I have said hurt anybody in this forum, I do apologize and it was never my intention. But I do stress the fact that please understand my view in its entirety.
Okay if you are so inquisitive, then you let us know your background, and then I will express my background on the forum
Personally, I don't see why you should apologize. I don't think anybody is hurt or offended by your comments.
Problem is, if several people have failed to see your point, then you probably did not express your point right.
You can make any comment you want, but back it up with solid evidence. Saying that "meditation can make you crazy" is rather like a missed shot in the dark.
As a converted Buddhist who takes her studies very seriously, I am not hurt by Buddha statues in gardens or as book pedestals, rather more when I come across people who misrepresent Buddhism with clumsy comments.
But okay, we're all learning. I do that all too often too. Nice to know some more experienced people on the site point out our mistakes.
As to my background, read through my comments. It's all there. The nice and the ugly.
Most of us have shared our background numerous times in other threads on this board, including the thread to introduce yourself. Buddhism has changed as it has worked, and continues to work, it's way through the western world. Cultural traditions and other differences will come into play but it doesn't make converts less devout. Sometimes quite the opposite, as there have been many articles that covered how eastern Buddhists don't really even practice, they just label themselves Buddhists because they are born into it, like many of us westerns labeled ourselves Christians because it was what we were born into (until we found another path, that is). So it can work both ways.
I find it curious that you are keeping your background secret while at the same time using it to make points. What reason is there to keep it quiet? You are obviously willing to share it, in exchange for the same information about everyone else (even though that information is posted in many threads).
@dharmamom said:
Saying that "meditation can make you crazy" is rather like a missed shot in the dark
Meditation without a proper direction is indeed a missed shot in the dark. If Nirvana is the aim, then I am skeptic on the fact that one can do meditation from start to finish achieving the goal all by himself without a teacher. Of course unless its the next Buddha himself. Once we get the guidance, then we can continue on our own, at our own terms. This is based on the Theravadic view, so may not valid for other types of views. Meditation (without proper guidance) can lead to physiological problems and physiological instability (without knowing what to do with the various stages of encounters), which is a known fact, but again this is only my view, and I do not claim my view is the universal truth.
Word Crazy is relative. A mental person may think the doctors are Crazy, and sometimes we see some scientists and scholars are crazy in their day to day life. Crazy is for going against the norms, but again one can argue on the norms, it can be one way or the other.
Arguments won't take us anywhere but constructive criticism lead discussion do. On the other hand, self liberation (nirvana, enlightenment or something else) is a personal matter so do meditation. Different people do different things obtain different results. Unless we open our mind, we never appreciate another person's point of view. We all are mundane and we all do these mistakes alike. At-least I do.
If anybody thinks meditation can be done by reading a book, or just by himself and its easy to achieve the goals, then that's okay. "Nananttha Kaya, Nanattha Sangha" Different people, different signals (meaning different people perceive things differently). Other wise this world will become black & white.
Thanks for all the comments and criticism. May all your objectives come to light in the quest for getting out of the wheel of Dukkha and attained, obtain or come in terms with Nirvana...
Here we go again: another dramatic exit after curtain call...
The world's a stage...
2
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited July 2014
@kavee said:
If Nirvana is the aim, then I am skeptic on the fact that one can do meditation from start to finish achieving the goal all by himself without a teacher. Of course unless its the next Buddha himself. Once we get the guidance, then we can continue on our own, at our own terms. This is based on the Theravadic view, so may not valid for other types of views.
Actually the Theravada view includes "private buddhas" who awaken (realize Nirvana) without guidance. Eckhart Tolle would be my example of someone who came to enlightenment without Buddhism or a teacher (though whether you recognize him as such is your choice), and it doesn't seem as if he was doing "meditation" at all. The truth is there for all to experience, or else it wouldn't be the truth. The traditional understanding of private buddhas is that they don't teach or establish a dharma, but Eckhart seems to have established his own teaching on "presence", so maybe the term private buddha isn't the correct one. Still...
The Buddha just realized how things were and taught us how to see for ourselves. The Path and teachings are inspired tools to help end our suffering. Buddhism greatly increases the odds (especially if you have a realized teacher)... but it's not a strict necessity. It's still possible, as it was for Siddhartha Gautama, to realize these truths without being a Buddhist or instructed by one. Our confidence in the Buddha shouldn't make us think only Buddhists can become enlightened, or only Buddhists of a certain form of Buddhism, or only Buddhists who have a teacher, or only Buddhists who meditate in a certain way -- that's actually pulling us away from the truth that ignorance (of reality) is the only thing standing between humans and enlightenment.
@hermitwin said:
dear lobster, is there a method to your madness?
where does the fine line between genius and insanity lie?
There is no method. He is neither a genius or insane. Merely cleverness contrived. To impress. To score. Harmless. Occaisonally brilliant. Mostly.......
@hermitwin said:
dear lobster, is there a method to your madness?
:screwy:
There is a method.
It changes according to circumstances and needs. Not mine incidentally. The consequences are for people to think the manifestation is motivated by genius, insanity or some other apparition . . .
The method does not make me a Buddhist . . . the results make of you what you allow . . .
Part of the method is Nashr, or the scatter methodology used in Sufism. This uses 'impacts' in a variety of ways. It has levels of meaning, as is the nature of Arabic including: to expand, spread, display/scatter, propagate/to become green after rain, to spread (as in foliage)/to recall to life the dead.
Unlike the very linear, literal and mind based Buddhist dharma method, it is independent of form.
So for example, here is some good advice from a scatter cushion that even a lowly crustacean could understand . . . :wave: .
@hermitwin said:
dear lobster, is there a method to your madness?
where does the fine line between genius and insanity lie?
You don't ask the court jester the secrets to his tricks.
He's just our @lobster and we love him that way. .. ..
1
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited July 2014
@hermitwin said:
dear lobster, is there a method to your madness?
where does the fine line between genius and insanity lie?
>
@hermitwin, the line is not fine; it is perfect in its width and visible.
In all his rants, ramblings and methodical madness (or mad methodology) I have never had to take any strong hand in his behaviour or forum ettiquette.
And if ever I have sent him a PM for whatever reason, he has always at least, had the courtesy to reply.
This can be found partly in zen stories or this story from the above link . . .
I was once standing at a corner of the huge market street called the Bhindi Bazaar in Bombay, when a bus stopped and a troop of determined Western seekers-after-truth descended and clustered around an old man who was squatting on the side of the road. They photographed him and chattered excitedly. One of the visitors tried to start a conversation with him, but he only stared back, so she remarked to the guide, "What a sweet old man; he must be a real live saint. Is he a saint?"
The Indian, who had a sense of humor as well as an interest in not wanting to tell a lie and a need to please his clients, said, "Madam, saint he may be, but to us he is the neighborhood rapist."
She immediately replied, "Oh, yes, I've heard of that; it involves their religion. I guess he must be a Tantrist!"
HamsakagoosewhispererPolishing the 'just so'Veteran
@Lobster has scattered me when I suffered gravity and too much density, for which I have learned to relax and smile instead. It does not all have to come together. Let the pieces fly
Comments
That is a transparent excuse to argue @kavee. Interesting behavior from such a new member. Yeah, OK!!! WE SEEE YOUUUUUUU!!!! There
. This is a great place, have a seat, we'll keep noticing you, we promise.
It would be nice if we could always do that, but sadly it isn't always possible.
There is plenty of information to be gained in meditation centers. Many of the meditation instructors I know caution against trying to learn meditation without guidance because of psychological problems that could arise if the wrong path is taken.. Personally, I've never come across anyone who had become psychotic as a result of unguided practice. I have encountered people with some pretty strange ideas, coming from unguided practice. I suspect this was due, in part, to outstanding and unresolved mental health issues, but that's all the more reason for guidance.
Is it a complement or asking me to shut the freeking mouth
Sigh... everyone take their cushions and go to different corners please.
You don't have to take refuge in the ceremonial sense, although many have found it helpfull on the path.
What's important is actually taking refuge. If you do that, you're a Buddhist.
You don't have to do the ceremony with your teacher. Seeing as your teacher has connections to both the Kagyu and Nyingma lineages there are probably representative sanghas near you where you could participate. The night I took refuge vows, at a kagyu center, there were a number of people I knew from the local Shambhala center taking their vows, too.
It was fun. I had been sitting cross-legged and when the time came for hair-cutting, I was called first. My legs had both gone numb and I had to beg off untill I got feeling back. I little embarrassing, but all good.
I guess I should explain a bit more. If you read again, what I wrote was "Unless you do not know what you are doing, it can make you go crazy" (it means meditation). Then I went into noting one such indication is that they think have become enlightened. The word "crazy" is used loosely to mention "not normal", but never intended in the meaning of a "psycho". There are certain stages of meditation where we encounter visions and experience finding utopia. These are traps people eventually falls, and a teacher should be there to help us getting out of the situation. I have seen people think they have attained Nirvana, or lesser terms Dhyana, and act as superior to everybody else, and eventually finding their own cults. Meditation was there even before Buddha and there are many ways to do meditation. However, according to Theravada Buddhism, only one way is preached by Buddah, which is wippassana meditation, which intern leads to Nirvana.
Hope this is enough to clear the unpleasantness aroused by misinterpreting my comment.
Don't take this personally, but there are many teachers (Mahayana) who say the exact same thing about Shamatha - the kind of meditation the Buddha taught, blah, blah.
I think most people don't care if it was Shamatha, Vipassana, both, or if the Buddha just hired @lobster to deal with all that.
My teacher says that shamata leads to subtler levels of consciousness from which you can have vipashyana. But the vipashyana is how you actually uproot your wrong views.
Settlement is the literal meaning of Samatha (pali word), and in the context its the settlement or calmness of the mind. Samatha meditaiton is the basic mindfulness. There are many way to calm the mind, thus many meditation techniques existed, even before Buddha's time. The most common in Buddhism is Anapansathi (mindfulness of breathing) which is (according to ancient text) endorsed by Buddha. Samatha Meditation does calms the mind but it does not take you to the goal of Nirvana. For that, you need Vidharshana. This is what ancient text says.
1) Samatha Meditation - Existed before Buddha, and commonly practiced by Brahmans in India. This can lead to mind conditioning and various Dhayana states and also can give some extraordinary capabilities.
2) Vidarshana Meditation - Discovered by Buddha as the only path to Nirvana (according to ancient text). There are various methods to it, which is out of the discussion.
If Nirvana is the goal, then must start from Samatha, even Buddha did that in his pre-enlightenment period (according to ancient text). Then next progression is on Vidharshana, if the ultimate goal is Nirvana. Else they can settle and experience the benefits of Samatha alone. Any authentic Vidharshana center will prepare the students from Samatha. There no shortcuts.
The mushroom meditation practice centers with various self titled teachers can say and do anything. That's one good thing about Buddhism, there is nobody to control, so you are safe from crusaders or head choppers.
Well, the same Mahayana teachers say that Shamatha is a "complete practice' and all that's needed to achieve enlightenment. They take a more liberal view, not excluding other practices from the goal.
Proponents of various techniques such as Metta, Tonglen, Mahamudra and Dzogchen also promote their practice the same.
I suspect they're all right.
Samatha Meditation can exists alone, but it wont take one to Nirvana.
Vidarshana cannot exist alone, but start with Samatha. Once we get experienced, Samatha stage can be quickly attained and progress into the Vidharshana. As with anything else, practice make things perfect and this flow will become second nature.
What if I said that the Dalai Lama teaches Shamatha as a complete practice?
I just frown a bit when people say things as if they're certain, like a car mechanic saying "you'll never fix that unless you've gone to mechanic school". Things are rarely so black and white. People can figure things out, or else no one would have figured anything out.
Nothing stops you saying that though
Kia Ora,
How does a person qualify to be identified as a Buddhist?
. :wave: .. "Roll up, roll up, get your I'm a genuine Buddhist T shirts here...Only twenty bucks or ten quid...
First 10 customers get a free "I'm a real Dharma Queen" badge.... .
..
Limited stock so get in quick don't miss out...
Metta Shoshin.
..
Hope it will go with my T-Shirt . . .
We don't need to see a birth certificate to know a bit more about your background, @kavee.
I cringe when I hear people throw preposterous comments like your "meditation can make you crazy" and then pretend to back their opinion with due credentials.
Without getting into particulars, what exactly are your Buddhist background and culture?
@Skeeterkb: Hope all these comments inspire you to continue delving into Buddhism.
Sorry you don't have a group or teacher nearby because that helps a lot.
But there is so much reading material and youtubes available that should guide your steps until something comes up.
I am afraid you (and few others) failing to see my point. Why you cringe on one sentence, and there are enough comments from me on the same subject spread in threads, which is quite enough to understand my view. I have also made an explanation elsewhere what I mean on the very word of "crazy". If somebody is blindly cling into Buddhism, then the statement can hurt, I do understand and I do apologize for any pain, but it was never my intention.
As a born Buddhist, it hurts me when I see people use Buddha statue as a garden lantern or a book pedestal, but it never hurts my intellectual understanding of Buddhism, as I don't get easily upset upon the surface value.
If something I have said hurt anybody in this forum, I do apologize and it was never my intention. But I do stress the fact that please understand my view in its entirety.
Okay if you are so inquisitive, then you let us know your background, and then I will express my background on the forum
A good example of how broad the sense of being able to call oneself Buddhist is is to see how different views different people have that call themselves Buddhist.
@kavee I am not going to come down on you since so many have already. But for the sake of illustrating my point...
I too come from a Buddhist country (Sri Lanka) and I believe almost the opposite of all you said.
One must question first to get answers and critically examine what is being said to be able to judge by own experience. Kalama suttam.
Following the differents suttas describing meditation and practise. I see no problem to meditate without a teacher. But it is far more difficult.
And I have not even considered the issue of a buddha for garden gnome nor how adequate or not it is to call a bar buddha bar.
Still I would not contest your claim to be Buddhist!
In this broad allowing sense there are no real limits to quarter in a Buddhist in. This is also in accordance with the Dhamma.
The only thing I usually say is that I will respect anybodies right to call themselves Buddhist if they so please as long as they respect my right not to see them as Buddhists if I so please.
EDIT: That did not really answer original question... But being a Buddhist is maybe best defined by the following. I do not remember which sutta.
To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to purify one's mind—this is the teaching of the Buddhas
/Victor
Meditation Practice should not be considered as a Fitness or Zumba class. It is perhaps (just perhaps) not an ideal DIY weekend project which can be self taught from a book. There can be self-taught and self-titled teachers out there whom students should be aware of, since it may be (just may be) not the Buddhism nor nirvana they are after. These commodity variety are good for anything else but attaining Nirvana.
Too late. It is already available as a DVD . . .
meditate to the right, shimmy to the left . . . Z U M B A!
I recently met a person from Switzerland, came here on a holiday. The way I was introduced to him (by a third person) probably aroused his curiosity, and he shook my hand saying I am a Buddhist too (very enthusiastically). Religion or Philosophy was never my intention of the meeting, but I said "Okay good, well what made you a Buddhist". The answer was, he was practicing meditation for 11 years. So he claimed he was a Buddhist because he was practicing "meditation" for so many years. I myself didn't come close to that many years. To make the long story short, he goes to a weekly meditation practice for that many years, under a teacher who happen to be an enlightened one (at least from his perspective). He was energetic and full of positive attitude, and probably some reminiscence of his practice. He was sure that he can become enlightened if he keep practicing for another 5 years or so (and his teacher has graded and graduated him eventually).
What can I say, good for him.
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world
This is from Dhammapada, a well known phrase. It surely is a teaching of buddha but if one does not ready to accept ancient text (as I have seen few times in the forum), then it will be an issue
@Victorious I am not sure what "almost the opposite of all you said" is? if you list them out, probably I can learn from you, I am quite open for a honest discussion. Listing them out may be time consuming and an effort in your part, but it can certainly help me, and probably help others....
He who has gone for refuge in the Buddha, his Teaching and his Order, penetrates with transcendental wisdom the Four Noble Truths - suffering,the cause of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the Noble Eightfold Path leading to the cessation of suffering.This indeed is the safe refuge, this is the refuge supreme. Having gone to such a refuge, one is released from all suffering -- Dhammapada 190-192
This states how to to become a buddhist according to ancient text (those who do not believe in ancient text, ooops!)
@Victorious If we start quoting ancient text, then this forum will soon fill up. One point to understand is, the English words "may" not give the exact "pali" transcription thus some statements may open for debate. If one really want to dive into ancient text, then its a scholarly matter. Its is not a good practice to quote something from somewhere, which can arouse more debate and may not do justice to the original text in its pristine context. So unless we read pali, its better not to google for quotes somebody else have translated.
(I think most of the translating from Pali to English has been done by Buddhist monks of the lineage to which the Pali texts belongs, making it as reliable as anything and not requiring lay Buddhists to actually know Pali to understand the teachings. The entirety of the teachings constitutes a coherent whole that fits together. A good source I've found is http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/.)
What I mean is, don't discuss things if you can't discuss them.
Apparently you entered into private dialogue with another member, which did not go well.
This was as a consequence of you deciding to discuss something you were not at liberty to discuss.
This is yet another example of considering the wisdom and pertinence of 'Speech'.
I'm not here to tell you what you should or shouldn't say - up to a point.
I'm here to police the behaviour of members and the suitable content of threads and posts on this forum.
Your View, Intention, Speech and Action (The first four 'spokes of the wheel') are for you to moderate, and apply Skilfully.
@kavee
Lets not if its all the same to you. That was not the topic here.
I have no problem with your path. We will get there both eventually I guess?
Cheers
I am afraid you (and few others) failing to see my point. Why you cringe on one sentence, and there are enough comments from me on the same subject spread in threads, which is quite enough to understand my view. I have also made an explanation elsewhere what I mean on the very word of "crazy". If somebody is blindly cling into Buddhism, then the statement can hurt, I do understand and I do apologize for any pain, but it was never my intention.
As a born Buddhist, it hurts me when I see people use Buddha statue as a garden lantern or a book pedestal, but it never hurts my intellectual understanding of Buddhism, as I don't get easily upset upon the surface value.
If something I have said hurt anybody in this forum, I do apologize and it was never my intention. But I do stress the fact that please understand my view in its entirety.
Personally, I don't see why you should apologize. I don't think anybody is hurt or offended by your comments.
Problem is, if several people have failed to see your point, then you probably did not express your point right.
You can make any comment you want, but back it up with solid evidence. Saying that "meditation can make you crazy" is rather like a missed shot in the dark.
As a converted Buddhist who takes her studies very seriously, I am not hurt by Buddha statues in gardens or as book pedestals, rather more when I come across people who misrepresent Buddhism with clumsy comments.
But okay, we're all learning. I do that all too often too. Nice to know some more experienced people on the site point out our mistakes.
As to my background, read through my comments. It's all there. The nice and the ugly.
Cant we have a friendly hugs button? I mean some comments really deserve that.
.
Most of us have shared our background numerous times in other threads on this board, including the thread to introduce yourself. Buddhism has changed as it has worked, and continues to work, it's way through the western world. Cultural traditions and other differences will come into play but it doesn't make converts less devout. Sometimes quite the opposite, as there have been many articles that covered how eastern Buddhists don't really even practice, they just label themselves Buddhists because they are born into it, like many of us westerns labeled ourselves Christians because it was what we were born into (until we found another path, that is). So it can work both ways.
I find it curious that you are keeping your background secret while at the same time using it to make points. What reason is there to keep it quiet? You are obviously willing to share it, in exchange for the same information about everyone else (even though that information is posted in many threads).
Meditation without a proper direction is indeed a missed shot in the dark. If Nirvana is the aim, then I am skeptic on the fact that one can do meditation from start to finish achieving the goal all by himself without a teacher. Of course unless its the next Buddha himself. Once we get the guidance, then we can continue on our own, at our own terms. This is based on the Theravadic view, so may not valid for other types of views. Meditation (without proper guidance) can lead to physiological problems and physiological instability (without knowing what to do with the various stages of encounters), which is a known fact, but again this is only my view, and I do not claim my view is the universal truth.
Word Crazy is relative. A mental person may think the doctors are Crazy, and sometimes we see some scientists and scholars are crazy in their day to day life. Crazy is for going against the norms, but again one can argue on the norms, it can be one way or the other.
Arguments won't take us anywhere but constructive criticism lead discussion do. On the other hand, self liberation (nirvana, enlightenment or something else) is a personal matter so do meditation. Different people do different things obtain different results. Unless we open our mind, we never appreciate another person's point of view. We all are mundane and we all do these mistakes alike. At-least I do.
If anybody thinks meditation can be done by reading a book, or just by himself and its easy to achieve the goals, then that's okay. "Nananttha Kaya, Nanattha Sangha" Different people, different signals (meaning different people perceive things differently). Other wise this world will become black & white.
Thanks for all the comments and criticism. May all your objectives come to light in the quest for getting out of the wheel of Dukkha and attained, obtain or come in terms with Nirvana...
May triple gem bless all
Here we go again: another dramatic exit after curtain call...
The world's a stage...
Actually the Theravada view includes "private buddhas" who awaken (realize Nirvana) without guidance. Eckhart Tolle would be my example of someone who came to enlightenment without Buddhism or a teacher (though whether you recognize him as such is your choice), and it doesn't seem as if he was doing "meditation" at all. The truth is there for all to experience, or else it wouldn't be the truth. The traditional understanding of private buddhas is that they don't teach or establish a dharma, but Eckhart seems to have established his own teaching on "presence", so maybe the term private buddha isn't the correct one. Still...
The Buddha just realized how things were and taught us how to see for ourselves. The Path and teachings are inspired tools to help end our suffering. Buddhism greatly increases the odds (especially if you have a realized teacher)... but it's not a strict necessity. It's still possible, as it was for Siddhartha Gautama, to realize these truths without being a Buddhist or instructed by one. Our confidence in the Buddha shouldn't make us think only Buddhists can become enlightened, or only Buddhists of a certain form of Buddhism, or only Buddhists who have a teacher, or only Buddhists who meditate in a certain way -- that's actually pulling us away from the truth that ignorance (of reality) is the only thing standing between humans and enlightenment.
Different views on Buddhahood including the fantastical
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhahood
What he may have looked like
http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2010/12/30/the-buddha-was-bald/
To the OP (original poster) . . . so many Buddhists, so many possibilities?
dear lobster, is there a method to your madness?
where does the fine line between genius and insanity lie?
There is no method. He is neither a genius or insane. Merely cleverness contrived. To impress. To score. Harmless. Occaisonally brilliant. Mostly.......
:screwy:
There is a method.
It changes according to circumstances and needs. Not mine incidentally. The consequences are for people to think the manifestation is motivated by genius, insanity or some other apparition . . .
The method does not make me a Buddhist . . . the results make of you what you allow . . .
and now back to the opinions . . . :wave: .
Why would a lobster know about methods...?
Part of the method is Nashr, or the scatter methodology used in Sufism. This uses 'impacts' in a variety of ways. It has levels of meaning, as is the nature of Arabic including: to expand, spread, display/scatter, propagate/to become green after rain, to spread (as in foliage)/to recall to life the dead.
Unlike the very linear, literal and mind based Buddhist dharma method, it is independent of form.
So for example, here is some good advice from a scatter cushion that even a lowly crustacean could understand . . . :wave: .
You don't ask the court jester the secrets to his tricks.
..
He's just our @lobster and we love him that way. ..
>
@hermitwin, the line is not fine; it is perfect in its width and visible.
In all his rants, ramblings and methodical madness (or mad methodology) I have never had to take any strong hand in his behaviour or forum ettiquette.
And if ever I have sent him a PM for whatever reason, he has always at least, had the courtesy to reply.
Thanks guys . . .
I iz too stupid to keep secrets. Here is the jester methodology:
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/sufi/sufi-jok.html
This can be found partly in zen stories or this story from the above link . . .
I was once standing at a corner of the huge market street called the Bhindi Bazaar in Bombay, when a bus stopped and a troop of determined Western seekers-after-truth descended and clustered around an old man who was squatting on the side of the road. They photographed him and chattered excitedly. One of the visitors tried to start a conversation with him, but he only stared back, so she remarked to the guide, "What a sweet old man; he must be a real live saint. Is he a saint?"
The Indian, who had a sense of humor as well as an interest in not wanting to tell a lie and a need to please his clients, said, "Madam, saint he may be, but to us he is the neighborhood rapist."
She immediately replied, "Oh, yes, I've heard of that; it involves their religion. I guess he must be a Tantrist!"
^^^ Good reading on that link.....
Yes...I love him too! .. :wave: .... ..
....
@Lobster has scattered me when I suffered gravity and too much density, for which I have learned to relax and smile instead. It does not all have to come together. Let the pieces fly
There is a good deal of Buddhist eating on this @lobster mixed in with a pleasant helping of Tao and Common Sense.
Thanks for the many treats!
/Victor
To be a Buddhist you don't even have to be a Buddhist . . . apparently . . .
http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Buddhism/2002/02/God-And-Zen.aspx