Broken off from here
chrispy1 wrote:...just to add another level of whatever to do this discussion, Buddhism sees no difference between thinking and doing - if you are capable of thinking something, you've already committed the first step in doing the action; the actual action itself is more or less secondary. Thinking "I'm going to hurt that person" is still a "violent" act.
Anyone here knowledgeable about Buddhism (specifically Tibetian, but I'll discuss anything...). I am fairly well read (my copy of the Dhammapada is very well-read), and I took an Eastern Philosophy class in Uni. So, thoughts?
I'm Buddhist in a Tibetan tradition. Sorry to come to this thread so late. It's 3:30 AM here so I will not read the rest of thread and just respond. I hope I will not repeat somebody.
This topic is about karma aka cause and effect. (karma literally translated means action)
More than half of Buddhist teaching is on this topic, so I will only write what is considered important in my school/tradition.
Please also distinguish it from Hindi concept of karma as fate or some mysterious power.
There are generally 3 things that are taught about karma: How do we create it, how does it (?)affect us, and how to get rid of it.
There are four conditions that need to be met in order for karma to be the strongest:
- We must know the situation
- We must wish to do something
- We must do it or have it done
- We must be happy from it
If they are not all met, the effect is not as strong. Since karma is basically habit on how we perceive our surrounding created by our previous actions words and thoughts, also a wish to do something has impact on it. That's also why all Mahayana is so full of wishing everybody eternal happiness. It has effect on our mind. And our mind is what Buddhism is all about.Better explained here.edit
Belial wrote:I don't think buddhist philosophy is, in theory, terribly concerned with punishment or enforcement.
It isn't. Buddhism is for people that want to change, and has pretty solid reasoning behind why. If you are not sure you can handle your situations you can take some vows or go to monastery to become monk. Generally it's not thing that Buddhism should handle. There's state / law enforcement / local social rules for that.
@DavidinChiangMai: Very well explained.
@Bondolon: Totally incomprehensible to me. Is that some Zen text?
unjovial wrote:... in answer to a question about whether the search for true love would hinder the journey of spiritual enlightenment...
You totally don't need to be monk to be Buddhist. None of Kagyu lineage of enlightened masters was until it came to Tibet. Monks are just more visible because they dress funny and ran the government in Tibet.
unjovial wrote:I'd be interested to know whether Buddhist "law" (or whatever holy creeds are referred to in Buddhism) actually promotes and encourages idol worship or if it is admonished, yet pursued anyway, as in some christian religions.
Buddha dismissed blind faith as insufficient way to knowing the world. Buddhist actually don't worship Buddha (the historical person), but try to attain the state. Buddha means 'awakened one'. It's a state of mind anyone can attain. Just when we spell it with capital B, we usually mean the first person to reach it in our historical epoch.
I just skimmed my (very, very well-read) copy of the Dhammapada (the main Buddhist "Bible").
The complete teaching of Buddha is usually bound in 108 books, with 256 books of commentaries of direct students. Buddhist don't try to cram answer to life, universe and everything into one small book. Also you don't need to read it all in same way you don't need whole apothecary just to cure fever. Buddha gave 48000 teaching for (all possible) 48000 confused states of mind.
I don't know how big excerpt of Buddha's teaching is in Dhammapada, but I guess some parts are specific to Theravada Buddhist traditions. Nothing wrong with that, just don't push it as 'general' Buddhist Bible.
Buddha taught many different kind of students. When you read any Buddhist teaching, you always need to know to whom it was given.
Gazette wrote:I used to follow Buddhism
May I ask why you stopped? Just PM me if you want.
I understand that Gelugpa (Dalailama's school) works in a monastic way, that drives most young people away, but that's not all there is to Buddhism.
The soul is the part of a person that lives on after their body dies. If you believe in reincarnation, then by definition, you believe in souls.
Seeing one as separate from others is a mind habit that *forces* us to reincarnate. You can watch the video on page I mentioned.
Angua wrote:I was in was NKT (New Kadampa Tradition)
They are *very* traditional, at least those I know.
existential_elevator wrote:I'm thinking more of the Pure Land, where certain kinds of idol-worship tend to be encouraged
I don't know how Japanese explain those things, but there's really not much worshiping done in the Phowa practice we have (that gets you to pure land - which is again a state of mind). Maybe you should say something like 'opening to', 'identifying with' or 'realizing you have the same nature as' instead of worshiping.Phew. I hope I answered all there was.Okay another edit.
... You get attached to an idol, and you believe your salvation is outside of you in some prayer
There is some famous saying about the Moon and finger pointing to the Moon, isn't there? I Recently heard a 2h+ long lecture by some Dzogchen teacher specifically on this topic. If you don't want to look where the finger is pointing to, just because you are used from faith-based religions that the finger is all that there is, it's not really problem of Buddhism.