Curious - Any Christian-turned-Buddhist converts here?
-
Some people may have already replied you... but I haven't got time to finish reading all their posts.Originally posted by shade343:I tend to think Nirvarna as a state of enlightenment rather than a plcae itself. But to say acheiving Nirvarna is much higher than the heaven itself might be a bit wrong. Gautama Bhuddha who acheived the highest level of Enlightenment is not a God. He probably can only reach up to the stage where he does not need to undergo rebirth anymore. The Gods are in heaven (celestial world) are different. Some of them are of a higher rank than Bhuddha even though they did not undergo Nirvarna...
Indeed the Buddha is not a God. However, the Buddha is the teacher of gods and men. He has perfected wisdom and compassion (methods) and is able to help himself and others to attain Nirvana - a state of Enlightenment that is beyond the pain of dualism.
What is dualism? It is the fixated concepts of good/bad, high/low; it is fixation, rigidity, grasping, attachment.
"Heaven is good/desirable and hell is bad/scary." These are dualistic notions, which the Buddha has seen their nature as impermanent, dissatisfactory and painful. Whether one is born in heaven, hell or any other realm, one's existence ensures that one will experience the dukkha of birth, old age, sickness, death and so forth.
Gods are not of higher rank than the Buddha and cannot be, for Gods, like us, are tied by the ignorance of dualism. They are still happy about existence, about getting what they want, and scared about death, angry/unhappy when they don't get what they want. They are swayed by changing conditions and hence are not free. [P/S: Look at how the Christian God describes himself to be a Jealous God; and the stories of how local Chinese deities get angry over their devotees...]
The Buddha, on the other hand, is beyond dualism, beyond birth and death, beyond the 6 realms of rebirth, beyond happiness/sadness, beyond good/bad. Thus, attaining Buddhahood is the ultimate liberation and is beyond comparison. -
why i say power is not to be compare with compassion and wisdom/enlightenment.
there's this significant that Buddha show in a way it's trying to tell us.
Buddha as we all know was a prince and a king to be, in other word He had Power. but He gave up His power to seek the end of suffering for sentient beings. He become low down and go through hardship. hence power (representing Almighty power) is useless for the ending of suffering and True happiness.
/\ -
Yes, I agree with you. Enlightenment cannot be granted, True Happiness is for you to realise!Originally posted by sinweiy:why i say power is not to be compare with compassion and wisdom/enlightenment.
there's this significant that Buddha show in a way it's trying to tell us.
Buddha as we all know was a prince and a king to be, in other word He had Power. but He gave up His power to seek the end of suffering for sentient beings. He become low down and go through hardship. hence power (representing Almighty power) is useless for the ending of suffering and True happiness.
/\
-
moreover, Buddha also have some spiritual power to perform miracles. but the power cannot overpower karma of beings or cause and effect.
No Flowery Display Of Miracles
To the Buddha, miracles are but manifestations of phenomena not understood by the common people. They are not seen as demonstrations of Enlightenment or Wisdom, as supernatural powers can be mastered by anybody. The supernatural is seen as natural phenomena not understood by the unenlightened. The ability to perform miracles is seen as a by-product of spiritual development - of minor importance and relevance to the real goal of spiritual development itself. Though the Buddha had full mastery of psychic powers, He used them only out of Compassion and skillful means to teach others. He never used His powers to win followers through blind faith and dependency on miracles. He taught that the highest miracle is the "conversion" of an ignorant person to a wise one.
/\ -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
Agreed. That is why there is a rule that monks cannot perform public display of miracles! If the message goes out, then everyone will be coming to the monastery not for the dharma, but just to see monks do their tricks!
moreover, Buddha also have some spiritual power to perform miracles. but the power cannot overpower karma of beings or cause and effect.
No Flowery Display Of Miracles
To the Buddha, miracles are but manifestations of phenomena not understood by the common people. They are not seen as demonstrations of Enlightenment or Wisdom, as supernatural powers can be mastered by anybody. The supernatural is seen as natural phenomena not understood by the unenlightened. The ability to perform miracles is seen as a by-product of spiritual development - of minor importance and relevance to the real goal of spiritual development itself. Though the Buddha had full mastery of psychic powers, He used them only out of Compassion and skillful means to teach others. He never used His powers to win followers through blind faith and dependency on miracles. [b]He taught that the highest miracle is the "conversion" of an ignorant person to a wise one.
/\
[/b] -
I used to wonder why some people are so fortunate to lead a prosperous life while some others have to suffer as handicapped/disabled people. I can't seem to find the answer in Christianity (is it stated in the bible?) but Buddhism's explanation of karma, cause and effect, explains this very clearly.
I am sure our Creator, if there is one, didn't create so many individuals with different lives, just for variety and to entertain Himself/Herself. It doesn't make sense why He/She lets some enjoy life while the others must suffer. -
i agreed.Originally posted by surfbabe:I used to wonder why some people are so fortunate to lead a prosperous life while some others have to suffer as handicapped/disabled people. I can't seem to find the answer in Christianity (is it stated in the bible?) but Buddhism's explanation of karma, cause and effect, explains this very clearly.
I am sure our Creator, if there is one, didn't create so many individuals with different lives, just for variety and to entertain Himself/Herself. It doesn't make sense why He/She lets some enjoy life while the others must suffer.
though, there's a saying, 3 people walking, there bound to have 2 teacher. why? the one that's good, you learn from him/her; while the one that's bad, you also can learn not to follow him/her. so bad can also have it usage.
ruo neng chuan jing ru tong ru lai.
(if you can transform the external world/phenomena, you are like Buddha/Thus Come One)
we also need to make use of the situations now and try not to blame anybody. they suffer enough already. That's what Buddha's compassion is all about.
/\ -
I consider myself as a "freethinker", I grew up in a christian family, but never could accept things like there is no rebirth and that the animals don't have a soul and so on. I always knew or felt (don't know why and where from, like if it always has been in me) that every living being has a soul and that we are here to learn and get more perfect and that our previous life influences our next life.
I always felt attracted to buddhism, since my childhood.
After many conversations with the buddhists they have told me that my thinking is close to buddhism. -
i know this is quite unusual but my beliefs are sort of a Buddhism-Satanism infusion, in that I accept the teachings and logics of Buddhism that one should do kind deeds, karma, and reincarniation, and that I also accept the basic premise of Satanism that if one puts oneself foremost, then u would do to others what u want them to do to u, because it is in your best interests to. hence u would be nice to people because u wish for the same treatment in return. In addition, since karma is something that exists for me, and since i wish to put myself foremost, i would live accordingly such that my kindness and compassion towards others will in return, bring me good karma.
im also curious. In the 11 commandments of Satanism, there are some commandments which are very similiar to Buddhist teachings, a few examples being:
Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
Do not harm little children.
Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.
Now i understand they r of course not exactly the same as Buddhist ethos. For eg, buddhism does not advocate killing animals even for food etc. but i am curious, why are they so similiar? It is this reason which has made me throw away my previous notions that Satanism is about devil worship and evil and take a 2nd look. Im not advocating that everyone should be a Satanist of course. I don't consider myself a Satanist either. I've just adopted some of their logic and premises and infused it with my beliefs. -
Originally posted by HENG@:
don't know but i check the other rules. Below two is a no no to Buddhism.
i know this is quite unusual but my beliefs are sort of a Buddhism-Satanism infusion, in that I accept the teachings and logics of Buddhism that one should do kind deeds, karma, and reincarniation, and that I also accept the basic premise of Satanism that if one puts oneself foremost, then u would do to others what u want them to do to u, because it is in your best interests to. hence u would be nice to people because u wish for the same treatment in return. In addition, since karma is something that exists for me, and since i wish to put myself foremost, i would live accordingly such that my kindness and compassion towards others will in return, bring me good karma.
im also curious. In the 11 commandments of Satanism, there are some commandments which are very similiar to Buddhist teachings, a few examples being:
Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
Do not harm little children.
Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.
Now i understand they r of course not exactly the same as Buddhist ethos. For eg, buddhism does not advocate killing animals even for food etc. but i am curious, [b]why are they so similiar? It is this reason which has made me throw away my previous notions that Satanism is about devil worship and evil and take a 2nd look. Im not advocating that everyone should be a Satanist of course. I don't consider myself a Satanist either. I've just adopted some of their logic and premises and infused it with my beliefs.[/b]
IV If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.
XI When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
http://web.satanism101.com/
/\ -
Originally posted by sinweiy:don't know but i check the other rules. Below two is a no no to Buddhism.
IV If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.
XI When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
http://web.satanism101.com/
/\
-
I don't know Satanism as I've not studied Satanist philosophies.Originally posted by HENG@:i know this is quite unusual but my beliefs are sort of a Buddhism-Satanism infusion, in that I accept the teachings and logics of Buddhism that one should do kind deeds, karma, and reincarniation, and that I also accept the basic premise of Satanism that if one puts oneself foremost, then u would do to others what u want them to do to u, because it is in your best interests to. hence u would be nice to people because u wish for the same treatment in return. In addition, since karma is something that exists for me, and since i wish to put myself foremost, i would live accordingly such that my kindness and compassion towards others will in return, bring me good karma.
im also curious. In the 11 commandments of Satanism, there are some commandments which are very similiar to Buddhist teachings, a few examples being:
Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
Do not harm little children.
Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.
Now i understand they r of course not exactly the same as Buddhist ethos. For eg, buddhism does not advocate killing animals even for food etc. but i am curious, why are they so similiar? It is this reason which has made me throw away my previous notions that Satanism is about devil worship and evil and take a 2nd look. Im not advocating that everyone should be a Satanist of course. I don't consider myself a Satanist either. I've just adopted some of their logic and premises and infused it with my beliefs.
But I feel somehow that Satanism is preaching a teaching of self-benefit. Everything put Self as most important.
In Buddhism, we don't follow this understanding. Self is only an illusion. We are not self centered but we are compassionate. This phrase is something I love to use:
"A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. The true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive. (Albert Einstein, 1954)"
Perhaps the topic on 'Cease your False Self and your True Self lives' should be an interesting read.
Buddhism believes that only by realising No-self, the Buddha Nature will manifest. That is enlightenment, that is the path to end sufferings. That is the main difference. -
Yes, that is very good. I believe you will become a Buddhist and I'll congratulate you before hand! Many Buddhists converted to Buddhism because they agreed with Buddhism teachings.Originally posted by thinkdifferent:I consider myself as a "freethinker", I grew up in a christian family, but never could accept things like there is no rebirth and that the animals don't have a soul and so on. I always knew or felt (don't know why and where from, like if it always has been in me) that every living being has a soul and that we are here to learn and get more perfect and that our previous life influences our next life.
I always felt attracted to buddhism, since my childhood.
After many conversations with the buddhists they have told me that my thinking is close to buddhism.
You should read more on Buddhism... and decide for yourself.
When you have decided to walk the Buddhist path to Enlightenment, be sure to take refuge under the Three Treasures and find a Buddhist spiritual teacher who can guide you well. -
but i am wondering, thru putting self 1st, won't u treat others kindly because u would treat others as they want them to treat u? thru kindness towards others, u indirectly benefit, and that is a circle because when u benefit u're putting self 1st? the whole thing is a circle. in being thoughtful towards others u sow good karma, and good karma benefits u ultimately.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:I don't know Satanism as I've not studied Satanist philosophies.
But I feel somehow that Satanism is preaching a teaching of self-benefit. Everything put Self as most important.
In Buddhism, we don't follow this understanding. Self is only an illusion. We are not self centered but we are compassionate. This phrase is something I love to use:
"A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. The true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive. (Albert Einstein, 1954)"
Perhaps the topic on 'Cease your False Self and your True Self lives' should be an interesting read.
Buddhism believes that only by realising No-self, the Buddha Nature will manifest. That is enlightenment, that is the path to end sufferings. That is the main difference.
anyways i dun think i will attain enlightenment any time soon in this life, so my next aim is to do as much good as possible, and in that i am also benefitting myself. -
i also feel it's more for self. if look at all the rules. it's trying to act cool only, even for those trying to be good. yeah people will fall for cool-ism. might as well change to 'Coolism' better.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:I don't know Satanism as I've not studied Satanist philosophies.
But I feel somehow that Satanism is preaching a teaching of self-benefit. Everything put Self as most important..
/\ -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
i dun think its trying to act cool. just because people adhere to a different way of looking at things doesn't mean they're trying to act cool. I believe buddhism also encourages everyone to be more open-minded towards the ideals of others.
i also feel it's more for self. if look at all the rules. it's trying to [b]act cool only, even for those trying to be good. yeah people will fall for cool-ism. might as well change to 'Coolism' better.
/\
[/b] this sort of petty labelling is unnecessary. -
sorry, you are right that i shouldn't label.Originally posted by HENG@:i dun think its trying to act cool. just because people adhere to a different way of looking at things doesn't mean they're trying to act cool. I believe buddhism also encourages everyone to be more open-minded towards the ideals of others. this sort of petty labelling is unnecessary.
but my labelling is not because they have a different way of looking at things.
ie 'Adhere to a different way of looking at things' is not cool to me.
why i got this coolism idea is u know when we watch most movies, offen the bad guys have this. good guys also act cool too, but good guys one do not dare to do very cruel things to people.
Think about the idea of 'coolism'. There's a bit of heroism, calm(?), care-yet-not-care atitude, cannot lost atitude in it. u think it's complement or insult? Even our Zen Buddhism also have this coolism factor in them. however i have not thought it through yet.
peace,
/\ -
emr, huh?Originally posted by sinweiy:sorry, you are right that i shouldn't label.
but my labelling is not because they have a different way of looking at things.
ie 'Adhere to a different way of looking at things' is not cool to me.
why i got this coolism idea is u know when we watch most movies, offen the bad guys have this. good guys also act cool too, but good guys one do not dare to do very cruel things to people.
Think about the idea of 'coolism'. There's a bit of heroism, calm(?), care-yet-not-care atitude in it. u think it's complement or insult? Even our Zen Buddhism also have this coolism factor in them. however i have not thought it through yet.
peace,
/\
-
huh? x2Originally posted by laurence82:emr, huh? 
(ps: i re-edited)
/\ -
Yes, to attain Enlightenment we must practise Dao De.Originally posted by HENG@:but i am wondering, thru putting self 1st, won't u treat others kindly because u would treat others as they want them to treat u? thru kindness towards others, u indirectly benefit, and that is a circle because when u benefit u're putting self 1st? the whole thing is a circle. in being thoughtful towards others u sow good karma, and good karma benefits u ultimately.
anyways i dun think i will attain enlightenment any time soon in this life, so my next aim is to do as much good as possible, and in that i am also benefitting myself.Originally posted by sinweiy:How to define Dao De? Even scholars had difficult time defining it.
Come across a wonderful analogy by MKY.
'Dao' is a skill. Knowing how to swim is 'Dao'.
'De' or virtue is seeing a person drowning in the water, and you are willing to jump into the water and save him/her.
Dao is associated with 'self'. While De is associated with others. Self and others combine into One.
/\
We do not focus on benefitting Self. Satanist philosophies however focuses on self-benefit.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Hi, Master Shen Kai too recognise that scholars can hardly define the term Dao De, so he gave a very simple explanation (he even wishes that the explanation can be implemented in Moral Educations in schools):
Li Ji (benefitting oneself) is Dao
Li Ren (beniffiting others) is De
Li Ji Li Ren wei zhi Dao De.
So Dao De is basically benefitting oneself and others, not harming oneself and others, when combined together it is "Dao De".
If we can make be mindful that our daily Mind, Speech, Actions are like that - then naturally we will be Righteous persons. -
It is very possible to attain realisation in this life if you practise well. Although you cannot attain Buddhahood, at least you will start on the Bodhisattva path as a 1st Bhumi Bodhisattva after realising Buddha Nature. There are actually quite a lot of people that I know who are quite enlightened now.
Doing good things is one matter. But doing virtuous deeds with a wrong mindset results in very very little virtue - it is like a Seed planted on bad grounds/infertile soil (ground = mind) and will not bear much fruits (blessings), only very little. That is also not merits. If you do a good deed out of self-benefit as grounds, attached to self, then no matter how great a thing you did it also cannot be considered as true Merits. Accumulating merits is another matter. Merits can only be accumulated when there is Non Arising (Gong) and Non-cessation (De). This kind of merits is vast & boundless!
http://www.jenchen.org.sg/vol6no4e.htm
4. Is there any merit in giving?
During the time when the Patriarch Bodhidharma was in China, the Emperor Liang Wu-Ti paid him a visit and asked, "Venerable One, I have built many monasteries for the well being of the Sangha and I have also performed many virtuous deeds. What merits have I accumulated?"
Without any expression in his face, the Patriarch Bodhidharma replied, "No merits."
How could it be that after having done so much, Emperor Liang Wu-Ti had not accumulated any merit?
In Buddhism, merits refer to the non-arising and non-cessation of the mind. Therefore, when we are doing good deeds such as giving, we can only say that there are blessings associated with such deeds, but not merits. When a person who truly understands the Buddha-dharma gives without attaching to the notion of giving, he certainly does not expect other people to thank him. The Diamond Sutra states that if the magnanimity of a giver is as vast as the space, in future the reward of his blessings will be just as vast.
I remember when we were building the Manjusri Hall; a person contributed a certain sum of money. Two years later, this person visited the Manjusri Hall and went around searching for where his name might be inscribed. I explained to him that many people had contributed financially, materials and other efforts to the building. Since nobody had requested for his or her names to be inscribed, it would be awkward to inscribe just his name. He didn't understand and instead became slanderous. Somebody even remarked that he might be better off giving to those temples where deities are worshipped as they will inscribe his name in the temples. These were temples of superstitious beliefs. He really did so and was no longer interested in learning and practising Buddhism. He no longer seeks to unfold his wisdom. This person was so attached to his act of giving and had unwittingly ended his wisdom life. It is such a pity that he chose to believe in superstition rather than be an authentic practitioner of Buddhism.From: Sutra of Hui-Neng
------------------------------------------
Chapter III. Questions and Answers
One day Prefect Wei entertained the Patriarch and asked him to preach to a big gathering. At the end of the feast, Prefect Wei asked him to mount the pulpit (to which the Patriarch consented). After bowing twice reverently, in company with other officials, scholars, and commoners, Prefect Wei said, "I have heard what Your Holiness preached. It is really so deep that it is beyond our mind and speech, and I have certain doubts which I hope you will clear up for me." "If you have any doubts," replied the Patriarch, "please ask, and I will explain."
"What you preach are the fundamental principles taught by Bodhidharma, are they not?" "Yes," replied the Patriarch. "I was told," said Prefect Wei, "that at Bodhidharma's first interview with Emperor Wu of Liang he was asked what merits the Emperor would get for the work of his life in building temples, allowing new monks to be ordained (royal consent was necessary at that time), giving alms and entertaining the Order; and his reply was that these would bring no merits ar all. Now, I cannot understand why he gave such an answer. Will you please explain."
"These would bring no merits," replied the Patriarch. "Don't doubt the words of the Sage. Emperor Wu's mind was under an erroneous impression, and he did not know the orthodox teaching. Such deeds as building temples, allowing new monks to be ordained, giving alms and entertaining the Order will bring you only felicities, which should not be taken for merits. Merits are to be found within the Dharmakaya, and they have nothing to do with practices for attaining felicities."
The Patriarch went on, "Realization of the Essence of Mind is Gong (good deserts), and equality is De (good quality). When our mental activity works without any impediment, so that we are in a position to know constantly the true state and the mysterious functioning of our own mind, we are said to have acquired Gong De (merits). Within, to keep the mind in a humble mood is Gong; and without, to behave oneself according to propriety is De. That all things are the manifestation of the Essence of Mind is Gong, and that the quintessence of mind is free from idle thoughts is De. Not to go astray from the Essence of Mind is , and not to pollute the mind in using it is De. If you seek for merits within the Dharmakaya, and do what I have just said, what you acquire will be real merits. He who works for merits does not slight others; and on all occasions he treats everybody with respect. He who is in the habit of looking down upon others has not got rid of the erroneous idea of a self, which indicates his lack of Gong. Because of his egotism and his habitual contempt for all others, he knows not the real Essence of Mind; and this shows his lack of De. Learned Audience, when our mental activity works without interruption, then it is Gong; and when our mind functions in a straightforward manner, then it is De. To train our own mind is Gong, and to train our own body is De. Learned Audience, merits should be sought within the Essence of Mind and they cannot be acquired by almsgiving, entertaining the monks, etc. We should therefore distinguish between felicities and merits. There is nothing wrong in what our Patriarch said. It is Emperor Wu himself who did not know the true way." -
but thats in the movies. in the movies the bad guys always dies in the end. isn't there some lesson to that as well? the reason im taking a look at their logic is simply that, in today's secular world, there is so much suffering, and u wonder if more people actually adopted the premise that if they treated others the way they wanted to be treated, maybe the world would be a better place. If soldiers weren't all so blindly loyal to their governments and thought more about 'self' maybe people would be more reluctant to wage war. in this case im not looking at adopting their logic as a means toward enlightnement, but as a means towards making the world less painful to live in for everyoneOriginally posted by sinweiy:sorry, you are right that i shouldn't label.
but my labelling is not because they have a different way of looking at things.
ie 'Adhere to a different way of looking at things' is not cool to me.
why i got this coolism idea is u know when we watch most movies, offen the bad guys have this. good guys also act cool too, but good guys one do not dare to do very cruel things to people.
Think about the idea of 'coolism'. There's a bit of heroism, calm(?), care-yet-not-care atitude, cannot lost atitude in it. u think it's complement or insult? Even our Zen Buddhism also have this coolism factor in them. however i have not thought it through yet.
peace,
/\ -
BTW for those that watch the 7pm fishball show,what and where was that temple that Dadi prayed...its quite big and magnificant...
-
Of course, as depicted in Kalama Sutta, Buddha disadvise any kind of faith that is blind. But it also does not mean we should be overly self-conscious in any way... Follow the model of 'Dao De'.Originally posted by HENG@:but thats in the movies. in the movies the bad guys always dies in the end. isn't there some lesson to that as well? the reason im taking a look at their logic is simply that, in today's secular world, there is so much suffering, and u wonder if more people actually adopted the premise that if they treated others the way they wanted to be treated, maybe the world would be a better place. If soldiers weren't all so blindly loyal to their governments and thought more about 'self' maybe people would be more reluctant to wage war. in this case im not looking at adopting their logic as a means toward enlightnement, but as a means towards making the world less painful to live in for everyone
Anyway loyal to country is a good virtue. In Buddhism there are 4 kindness we need to repay, one of them is the 'Country's Kindness'.
4 Kindness:
1) Country's kindness
2) Parents' kindness
3) Teachers' & Seniors' kindness
4) Triple Gems' kindness
Of course, it doesn't mean if you had the choice we should blindly follow a dictatorial system, or go to war with another country with aggressive intentions like the Nazis. However Singapore is not such a country and our NS is for defence and not aggression, therefore it is a good way to repay our country's kindness. -
mad mad mad
??