Christian point of view on idols
-
That probably shows MCK's ignorance to what christianity is about or simply that he has other agendas by leading his own believers into bowing at non-buddhist figure.Originally posted by sinweiy:MCK mentioned before, if you are good enough of a Buddhist, u'll go into the church, and bow to jesus (statue) like as if you bow to Buddha.
like what they did in Australia, when the Amitabha Society is located near them. no big deal. it's the inside that count.
Some of the neighbors even came to ask, why are they so happy in appearance. MCK said if you want to know, come and listen to our Dharma talks on Saturdays, while u go to church on Sundays.
/\
I had watch one MCK vcd which is quite hilarious. Some people were asking whether or not can one read other buddhist sutras, MCK quickly rejected the idea and said just focus in reciting amitabha's name is enough.
Some other people then asked about where is the heaven as described in bible and quran, MCK quick to say that they are also in the western pureland and MCK encouraged buddhists to read bible, quran, etc
It's good to Guang3 Xue2 Duo1 Wen2 (to acquire a variety of knowledge), but to put down the idea of studying other sutras while promoting to read non-buddhist texts seems to have suggest MCK's personal agenda. -
How non-buddhists view on idols really differs greatly.Originally posted by Spnw07:A Christian friend of mine wrote in his latest blog post about how he decided to use a hammer to destroy all idols and related stuff in his house and discard them.
He mentioned that he believed in the 'sovereignty of God' and 'Word of God commanded that all idols be destroyed lest it causes others to stray from Him'.
Now I know more about why Christians are so opposed to anything that they consider as idols or idol-worshipping.
Without the above verses from the Bible, I would not have known more about the Christian view on other religions which have certain statues for worship. It so happens that Buddhism is viewed in the same way, that's all.
It is not their fault entirely for having believed the way they did. Once they believed in their innate logic of a Creator God, it becomes natural that they should submit to and obey unquestionably the commandments laid down by their God.
But considering it from both a Buddhist and a humanistic point of view, such views are a little regrettable. For idols do not lead people astray. Thoughts and actions do. This applies to all humans, with or without religious beliefs.
For example, viewing pornography is very unhealthy cos it causes you to view women as mere sexual toys to satisfy your curiosity and lust for adventurous sex and you end up being a slave to your own sexual obsession.
Is the camera in the wrong? Is the television in the wrong? They are but tools and symbols of our thoughts to transmit ideas.
You can destroy all things you view as idols in the world, just like what the Red Guards did during the Cultural Revolution, but still your efforts will not help fellow humans to realise that their own ignorance and anger are the only things that need to be disciplined.
You want to destroy things, sure. Destroy your own greed, anger and ignorance.
I remember one of Buddha's verses which mentioned that it is not a sin to 'kill' greed, anger and ignorance, for they are the thieves that rob us of the means to realise our Buddha nature.
I hope that one day, we will all realise our own Buddha nature and regain the ability to accept and contemplate all things with perfect wisdom.
Amituofo!
If everyone were to have more compassion and wisdom, the world would have already be a peaceful place to live in already. -
Originally posted by yamizi:
Pardon my ignorance but who/ what is MCK?
That probably shows MCK's ignorance to what christianity is about or simply that he has other agendas by leading his own believers into bowing at non-buddhist figure.
I had watch one MCK vcd which is quite hilarious. Some people were asking whether or not can one read other buddhist sutras, MCK quickly rejected the idea and said just focus in reciting amitabha's name is enough.
Some other people then asked about where is the heaven as described in bible and quran, MCK quick to say that they are also in the western pureland and MCK [b]encouraged buddhists to read bible, quran, etc
It's good to Guang3 Xue2 Duo1 Wen2 (to acquire a variety of knowledge), but to put down the idea of studying other sutras while promoting to read non-buddhist texts seems to have suggest MCK's personal agenda.[/b] -
Master Chin KongOriginally posted by Beyond Religion:Pardon my ignorance but who/ what is MCK? -
Originally posted by yamizi:
i also don't know what is your agenda by Quickly putting words of slander to an old tripitaka master. and i wonder how and where you learn ur Buddhism from. so disrespectful and conventional/outside grasping.
...snip...
u may ask "may i clarify why he do this or why he do that", when u do not understand, i think there are more explaination to it, rather than jumping quickly into conclusion.
only watch One MCK vcd and judge His 50 over years of understanding/insights. sad.
/\ -
Originally posted by Beyond Religion:
http://sg.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A3xsVSKShntH__YA9hoj4gt.?p=Master+Chin+kung&fr=yfp-t-web&ei=UTF-8
Pardon my ignorance but who/ what is MCK?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chin_Kung
/\ -
From many sources had I learnt and that is not the only vcd that I had watched.Originally posted by sinweiy:i also don't know what is your agenda by Quickly putting words of slander to an old tripitaka master. and i wonder how and where you learn ur Buddhism from. so disrespectful and conventional/outside grasping.
u may ask "may i clarify why he do this or why he do that", when u do not understand, i think there are more explaination to it, rather than jumping quickly into conclusion.
only watch One MCK vcd and judge His 50 over years of understanding/insights. sad.
/\
The why became unimportant when the actions are obviously misleading.
In fact if he is really a well-learned tipitaka monk, then he should know that he cannot be ordained in the first place. As in one of the vcd, he declared that he is sexually impotent and that is one of the condition that doesn't allow a layman to be ordained.
You think I'm conventional? Well that's you and I fully respect what you think. But I think you're conventional too, because as you were saying that I should have asked 'why do I think so', you have failed to do it yourself. This is common among buddhist who think they are right.
I think MCK is weird. His early writings are good, but as time gone by, something definitely had gone wrong somewhere. This is how I think.
We are buddhists, not monkists, we should not simply see some bald man wearing a grey robe and quickly throw respect for no good reason.
Respect the virtue and wisdom, not just the robe.
If MCK sincerely believes all religions from the same root (from another vcd) then he should probably try to tell non-buddhists than to confuse the already-confused buddhists.
Oh ya, to me, you're not true to your words. If you say I slander (which I assume you think I have mistaken), shouldn't you think it's time to live up to your sign-off message?
Hoho.
Talking about irony. And you call that 50 years of insight.
Remember, follow Buddha, not monk.
P/S: I didn't bother to reply the icchantika thread is because the impression I had about you is that you are insisting that LS is the cure as theorectical aspect, which to me, it's both theoritical and applicable. As for Pureland Sect, well, I think they are easier to attract people to believe in as people suffers in this Saha world and often yearn for an external paradise. While in Lotus Sutra, Sakyamuni Buddha revealed that this Saha world is the pureland, and this is what made me truly respect Buddha. And this is besides the academic and scholar point of view that all Mahayana Sutras are not preached by Buddha Himself. But LS's spirit is the spirit to live the here and now, even the yearning of after/future lives, one is to be coming back here for one's own cultivation and practice the bodhisattva path. Not running to somewhere else. But of course, few people would understand, lesser would believe in, and much lesser would people vow to undertake the Lotus Sutra. -
hi Yamizi
I think your statement are quite misleading for the beginners, pls at least have some respect to the triple gems. -
Not too sure what you meant by "bow to jesus (statue) like as if you bow to Buddha"Originally posted by sinweiy:MCK mentioned before, if you are good enough of a Buddhist, u'll go into the church, and bow to jesus (statue) like as if you bow to Buddha.
like what they did in Australia, when the Amitabha Society is located near them. no big deal. it's the inside that count.
Some of the neighbors even came to ask, why are they so happy in appearance. MCK said if you want to know, come and listen to our Dharma talks on Saturdays, while u go to church on Sundays.
/\
When I go to church, I also pay respect to the Jesus statue or the pastor there as long as they don't slander buddhism.
But my level of respect to buddha is definitely different from to Jesus. -
Misleading?Originally posted by justdoit77:hi Yamizi
I think your statement are quite misleading for the beginners, pls at least have some respect to the triple gems.
That quote of respecting the virtue and not the robe is found in the Dhammapada itself. In fact PKS had once printed this small pocket-size Dhammapada, very nicely done, not sure do they still print it nowadays.
For me, I always encourage beginners to start off with reading scriptures then discuss with fellow buddhists, laymen and ordained.
Scriptures are open and abroad, meant for anyone to read. -
Jesus was not an xtian.
xtianity is a holybusine$$
The holybusinessz defer God-Heaven
for the sake of sales.
Thats why jc turned the tables over.
dont faint.
"Heaven is at hand" -- jc
THIS is Heaven.
"eyes that see" ... ordinary functional senses.
Thats all the monkey with the brain that got too big
need do ... just Look
AND
if You are not afraid ... She will appear ... why ?
She is Love
She doesnt want to hurt You
anymore than You have already been hurt.
She is also Beauty ... stay with that if She gets too
overwhelming otherwise.
:-)
The Surround is God.
i like the music Channel part of the Surround.
:-)
"eyes that see" ... ordinary functional senses ...
i always type "SEE"
refering to THAT.
.
. -
NOW from my Surround
"
Crystal Ilumination Crown Centre
"
makes my hair stand up 
-
copied from another topic
"
Rely not on the words of the teaching, but on the
spirit of the words. <--------------------------LOOK ! ! ! !
Rely not on theory, but on experience.Do ......
"
i like to say the SEEing is the Soul.
BUT
as soon as You try to turn
the SEEING
into words
You have turned it into a lie.
jc said we are satan ... THAT ONLY MEANS LIAR ! ! ! !
It is hard to get at the Soul of the words sometimes.
It depends on how simple the speaker is.
.
. -
there is nothing to practice ... that stuff is for sale.
Look at this phrase: "spiritual seeing"
The word spiritual
turns SEEing into seeing( movement of knowledge )
Do You SEE now how we block Her
for the sake of the non-existant misery-self.
WE are One.
Dont petition Her ... you have heard this before.
Let Her Surprise You ... IT will appear as magik.
The christ or whatever You want to call IT
is a state of being ... SEEing with ordinary
functional senses.
The Rapture is a mass Awakening.
We need THAT now.
Our high technological state, nationalism, sexism, etc,
will kill us if we dont wake up.
The brain got "too big"
i am sure we can Rapture.
The gifts( Grace ) from Her are for the brain
that got too big.
.....comPassion,
automatic Forgiveness( they didnt SEE what they were doing -- jc )
Jesus is not the only great SAGE.
.
. -
i need to post on topic ...
anything You put between You and the Surround, God,
is an idol.
that stuff is for sale.
ON MAGICK: i noticed here ...
69 local users. 118 network users.
26 logged in, 10 hidden, and
92 guests.
i SEE number magick all the time
the 26-29-11 is from an old street address of mine.
69 looks like yin-yang to me.
i really think She is saying to me ... I( She ) AM
and sometimes ... you hit the nail on the head.
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
that i'll have to check. but even so, u even say below that one "Respect the virtue and wisdom, not just the robe. "
From many sources had I learnt and that is not the only vcd that I had watched.
The why became unimportant when the actions are obviously misleading.
In fact if he is really a well-learned tipitaka monk, then he should know that he cannot be ordained in the first place. As in one of the vcd, he declared that he is sexually impotent and that is one of the condition that doesn't allow a layman to be ordained.
all and all, Buddha taught to (1) to rely on the Dharma and not upon persons; (2) to rely on the meaning of the teaching and not upon the words; (3) to rely on wisdom and not upon discriminative thinking; and (4) to rely on sutras that are complete and final and not upon those that are not complete and final.You think I'm conventional? Well that's you and I fully respect what you think. But I think you're conventional too, because as you were saying that I should have asked 'why do I think so', you have failed to do it yourself. This is common among buddhist who think they are right.
more like narrow minded and hinayana-listic minded. i didn't have to asked 'why u think so', as i'm not the first to fire a negative remark.I think MCK is weird. His early writings are good, but as time gone by, something definitely had gone wrong somewhere. This is how I think.
on the contrary, if one's is still stuck in hinayana-thinking, you wouldn't catch up with His mahayana and Hua yen thinking. Hua yen thinking can be misleading to ordinary buddhists, i agree.We are buddhists, not monkists, we should not simply see some bald man wearing a grey robe and quickly throw respect for no good reason.
agreed.
Respect the virtue and wisdom, not just the robe.If MCK sincerely believes all religions from the same root (from another vcd) then he should probably try to tell non-buddhists than to confuse the already-confused buddhists.
sorry, He did.Oh ya, to me, you're not true to your words. If you say I slander (which I assume you think I have mistaken), shouldn't you think it's time to live up to your sign-off message?
i did look over my mind for a while. thing is, i never say negative things about ur school.Hoho.
actually, it's (1) to rely on the Dharma and not upon persons; (2) to rely on the meaning of the teaching and not upon the words; (3) to rely on wisdom and not upon discriminative thinking; and (4) to rely on sutras that are complete and final and not upon those that are not complete and final. --Buddha
Talking about irony. And you call that 50 years of insight.
Remember, follow Buddha, not monk.
This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Even if a monk, taking hold of my outer cloak, were to follow right behind me, placing his feet in my footsteps, yet if he were to be greedy for sensual pleasures, strong in his passions, malevolent in mind, corrupt in his resolves, his mindfulness muddled, unalert, uncentered, his mind scattered, & his faculties uncontrolled, then he would be far from me, and I from him. Why is that? Because he does not see the Dhamma. Not seeing the Dhamma, he does not see me.
"But even if a monk were to live one hundred leagues away, yet if he were to have no greed for sensual objects, were not strong in his passions, not malevolent in mind, uncorrupt in his resolves, his mindfulness established, alert, centered, his mind at singleness, & his faculties well-restrained, then he would be near to me, and I to him. Why is that? Because he sees the Dhamma. Seeing the Dhamma, he sees me."
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=300620P/S: I didn't bother to reply the icchantika thread is because the impression I had about you is that you are insisting that LS is the cure as theorectical aspect, which to me, it's both theoritical and applicable.
nay. i never say LS is Only theorectical aspect nor Only applicable nor both. i simple discussing the applicable part.
u ever try giving a copy of LS to icchantika before? applicable? or they just think it's nonsense and throw it away?As for Pureland Sect, well, I think they are easier to attract people to believe in as people suffers in this Saha world and often yearn for an external paradise.
if these people are attracted to western PL so to enjoy themselves, then they wouldn't be reborn there. Period. They need Bodhicitta. Go there to learn how to be a Real bodhisattva and come back to saha/samsara to really help deliver sentient beings. learn to swim before jumping into the water to save ppl per se.While in Lotus Sutra, Sakyamuni Buddha revealed that this Saha world is the pureland, and this is what made me truly respect Buddha.
in LS, when Buddha use his thumb to press on the ground to display His saha Pureland for His disciple, the appearance is EXACTLY the same as Amitabha's PL. u need to know "Amituo" mean Infinity. Amituofo would mean Wu Liang Zhu Fo (Infinity Buddhas). Amituofo is in fact a common name for ALL Buddhas. Buddha and Buddha's PL is the same.And this is besides the academic and scholar point of view that all Mahayana Sutras are not preached by Buddha Himself. But LS's spirit is the spirit to live the here and now, even the yearning of after/future lives, one is to be coming back here for one's own cultivation and practice the bodhisattva path. Not running to somewhere else.
it's perfectly okay when we are simply following the Buddha's advice to go to western PL when He's not here in person. that is still obedient to Buddha.
anyway, it's people's affinity. no big deal. u want to stay fine, go also fine.But of course, few people would understand, lesser would believe in, and much lesser would people vow to undertake the Lotus Sutra.
i'm fond of Lotus sutra too btw.
just to quote a few relation to PL:
In Lotus sutra, Chapter 23 : The Former Deeds of Medicine King Bodhisattva, we actually also have Medicine King Bodhisattva encourage people to recite Buddha's name and be reborn in Western PL.
"If, after the passing of the Thus Come One, in the last five hundred years, there is a woman who, hearing this Sutra, can cultivate according to its teachings, at the end of her present life she will go straight to the blissful world of the Buddha Amitayus, where he is surrounded by great Bodhisattvas."
(Lotus Sutra Ch. 23)
It's also the Secret essence of Lotus sutra, saying even if a person who is confuse or having wandering thoughts were to recite a word of 'Namo Buddha' within any temple or monastery, they had already attained Buddhahood in the Grand ceremony of Lotus sutra. (Chapter 23 : The Former Deeds of Medicine King Bodhisattva)
all and all, there are still many misunderstanding only to be sorted out.
/\ -
Originally posted by justdoit77:
yes, when you are surrounded by so many religion, and u still say ur religion is the best, people will only think u are arrogant.
Not too sure what you meant by "bow to jesus (statue) like as if you bow to Buddha"
When I go to church, I also pay respect to the Jesus statue or the pastor there as long as they don't slander buddhism.
But my level of respect to buddha is definitely different from to Jesus.
however, u do can say Buddhism is best when you are talking to fellow buddhists, while without saying negative remarks on other religions.
when u talk to them, you say we are EQUAL. Everybody happy.
regard the why. it's in Hua Yen sutra's
Ten Practices and Vows of the Bodhisattva Samantabhadra
First, Pay homage and respect to all Buddha(fo).
Second, Praise the Tathagata (ru lai).
what are the different between Buddha(fo) and Tathagata (ru lai)? it mean we pay respect to Everyone (yes everyone including the bad person and Icchantika) because they have Buddhanature from within, and oneday they will become a future Buddha. right?
yet we cannot Praise their apparent/outer behavior. we only can Praise the Tathagata/Inner aspect of Buddha. so there's difference between respecting and praising. ya.
/\ -
Some people were asking whether or not can one read other buddhist sutras, MCK rejected the idea and said just focus in reciting amitabha's name is enough.
the reason is because in mahayana schools, there are a group of schools that emphasis on true emptiness(like Ch'an, Tien-tai, Yogacara ) and while some emphasis on Brilliant existence (eg Hua Yen, Pureland). and some emphasis on both emptiness and existence(eg vajrayana).
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=293707
so if people are not careful, they can easily be lead astray or confusion, due to the opposite idea of emptiness (zhen kong) and existence (miao you).
"just focus in reciting amitabha's name " would mean lou shi nian fo(honest reciting). but nobody can really do honest reciting or dig one spot looking for water or look within. they like to look outside, like to dig around in many places, not knowing the treasure is always with you. if u think got time, ok fine. but if no time, better return and focus in the current mind. it's all that matters.Some other people then asked about where is the heaven as described in bible and quran, MCK quick to say that they are also in the western pureland and MCK [b]encouraged buddhists to read bible, quran, etc
that's only because, MCK is talking with an Ultimate Hua Yen thinking. conventionally, He don't want fellow buddhists to go around slandering other religions, in good will and to promote peace and harmony.
/\ -
sinweiy,
Really such thinking that all religion is the same is prevalent in the buddhist community. I would much be interested to see that MCK try to influence that to other religion and see where it goes.
My personal understanding in harmony is to agree to disagree, not to simply mix up all and say that is harmony. To the best of my knowledge, the different religions in the world out there today are really different. There might be similarities (ie. Jainism, Buddhism Taoism; Christianity, Islam, Judaism), but they are never exactly the same. So I do not see the point in trying to include other people's religions into one's own belief system. That would be demanding and show real disrespectful to them.
As much as I do not believe in christianity, I don't see the need in trying to include their idea of heaven into the buddhist cosmology. Because the definition may be very different.
As much as you claim you didn't put in negative remarks, I don't think I had too. I was just merely sharing what I know and the facts that were presented.
The word 'hinayana' itself is a degratory term in the buddhist history where the revolutionary mahayana buddhists used to put those who didn't agree with such a revolution of mahayana idea into an inferior positions.
And to think you're not putting negative remarks.
Anyone who really understood LS would not label anyone as 'icchantika'. This is because such idea doesn't exist in the first place. It is only a matter of capacity that he/she would be receptive to the Dhamma. Such person does his/her best to put forth the Dhamma to 'icchantika' (not necessary preaching the LS).
I am not against anyone who wished to go PL, just that I think the spirit of Sakyamuni is more inspiring and real. When Sakyamuni Buddha showed that this saha world is pureland using His thumb, at least to my interpretation, He was telling us that we are ALREADY in pureland and should seek practice and cultivation in the here and now rather than hoping to go elsewhere.
And that to say Amitabha is the common name of all buddhas, I beg to differ, as this might be just a prejudice teachings from the pureland schools. Comparing this, in the LS itself, it states that all buddhas are just manifestations of Sakyamuni Himself.
But to see from academic point view, these two ideas would have meant to have developed in a latter time line of the buddhist history. However I would much appreciate the latter idea because simply Sakyamuni was the one who lived on earth before.
I see that to introduce Amitabha to a modern, thinking person, it is of no difference of introduce any deities (both from buddhist tradtion or otherwise), as Amitabha had not appeared before and not proven.
Amitabha is only proven by faith.
Having Buddhahood within doesn't make a person a Buddha and therefore I don't think that is the real way of interpreting the first two vows of Samantabhadra Bodhisattva (my fav bodhisattva btw).
There are other ways that a buddhist can advise other buddhists not to slander other religions, not necessary by trying to throw all religions into a blender and assume that they are the same. -
[quote]Originally posted by yamizi:
I think MCK is weird. His early writings are good, but as time gone by, something definitely had gone wrong somewhere. This is how I think.
We are buddhists, not monkists, we should not simply see some bald man wearing a grey robe and quickly throw respect for no good reason.
Respect the virtue and wisdom, not just the robe.
Oh ya, to me, you're not true to your words. If you say I slander (which I assume you think I have mistaken), shouldn't you think it's time to live up to your sign-off message?
Hoho.
Talking about irony. And you call that 50 years of insight.
Remember, follow Buddha, not monk.
[quote]
Err, sorry to chuck in... but I must admit my practise is super lousy cos I can't stop myself from not airing my views. By right, if we see others giving speeches which we think( we may be wrong, don't forget) are of wrong views, deviant thoughts, or harmful speculations intentionally or not, we should not be pulled inside and become as such becos by doing so we r also cultivting the same hatred and ignorance or maybe jealousy as well.
But I cannot, leh.
So this is what I feel. Yamzi, u always advises ppl not to be Monkists ie don't blindly bow, respect, listen to men in robes for no good reason, I presumed that it refers to the monks regardless whether they are internationally, historically distinguished or well recognized or not, am i not right?
So, just curious, did u ever bow or respect to any Venerables before in your life? Or u blindly never bow to any?
U took refuge under two gems instead of Triple Gems?
Noboby teaches or guide u ( listening to tapes or Watching dvd of dharma talks included)? U just read the suttas n wise up by yourself? Wow.
U also suggested reading the suttas or scriptures by ourselves is much better then listening to monks( teachings)? No wonder u have such big agenda against Monkists.
Like me, u can't even take the 5 precepts properly, so u think we can anyhow doubt the Sanga who keep more then hundred of precepts? Of cos we don't go to those cases where the sanga break the precepts or those fake monks, or monks that we don't even know at all. These r not for us to discuss. We r not in such position. We r not happy with certain venerables, we keep away from them. No need to show how much we know or how much better we r by critising or even ridicule them. I believe they don't even care at all, but we ourselves r destroying our virtue and wisdom develpement. That's a pity.
Oh, and talking abt virtue and wisdom, U said "repesct only virtue and wisdom, not the robes." Which maybe explains why it seems to me u never give regards to Monks. U mean once we see a monk coming, we doubt, must evalute him first to see up to standard or not, don't waste our bows. So, my question is: How much do we know or understand about virtue and wisdom? How do u know that who has virtue and wisdom or not? Our standard is ultimate? U mean we ( or U) are Buddha already?
Reading n studying the suttas by ourselves is in fact quite dangerous for us laymen, becos unlike the sanga ( real ones, hah) we hv no proper discipline, no proper practice, hv not renounced the worldly life n enjoyments; thus we can't possibly have the wisdom to understand the sutras to the fullest. We may develope wrong understanding or worse develope wrongs views n wrong thoughts ( xie2 zhi1 xie2 jian4). San zhang shi er bu, not one Harry Potter series. I think we should be careful.
Tsk. I also must be careful. -
Oh, remember, follow the Triple Gems, not our ego.
-
jesus is the son of God, why do christian pray to him instead of god, isnt that making jesus like an idol, when jesus himself wants ppl to pray to god?
-
This is because Jesus said, I and the Father are One.Originally posted by SilentWitness:jesus is the son of God, why do christian pray to him instead of god, isnt that making jesus like an idol, when jesus himself wants ppl to pray to god?
There are few Christians mystics in the world that take this as a deeply mystical statement, the rest of the Christians made this into a belief system. -
Jesus message is to believe in God only. if christians pray to jesus, that defeat the purpose of JEsus's messageOriginally posted by An Eternal Now:This is because Jesus said, I and the Father are One.
There are few Christians mystics in the world that take this as a deeply mystical statement, the rest of the Christians made this into a belief system. -
Originally posted by cycle:
It's not necessary a monk/nun means that they are well-versed. I can introduce to you some monk who womanize and keep boyfriend. Are you interested?
[quote]Originally posted by yamizi:
[b]
I think MCK is weird. His early writings are good, but as time gone by, something definitely had gone wrong somewhere. This is how I think.
We are buddhists, not monkists, we should not simply see some bald man wearing a grey robe and quickly throw respect for no good reason.
Respect the virtue and wisdom, not just the robe.
Oh ya, to me, you're not true to your words. If you say I slander (which I assume you think I have mistaken), shouldn't you think it's time to live up to your sign-off message?
Hoho.
Talking about irony. And you call that 50 years of insight.
Remember, follow Buddha, not monk.
[quote]
Err, sorry to chuck in... but I must admit my practise is super lousy cos I can't stop myself from not airing my views. By right, if we see others giving speeches which we think( we may be wrong, don't forget) are of wrong views, deviant thoughts, or harmful speculations intentionally or not, we should not be pulled inside and become as such becos by doing so we r also cultivting the same hatred and ignorance or maybe jealousy as well.
But I cannot, leh.
So this is what I feel. Yamzi, u always advises ppl not to be Monkists ie don't blindly bow, respect, listen to men in robes for no good reason, I presumed that it refers to the monks regardless whether they are internationally, historically distinguished or well recognized or not, am i not right?
So, just curious, did u ever bow or respect to any Venerables before in your life? Or u blindly never bow to any?
U took refuge under two gems instead of Triple Gems?
Noboby teaches or guide u ( listening to tapes or Watching dvd of dharma talks included)? U just read the suttas n wise up by yourself? Wow.
U also suggested reading the suttas or scriptures by ourselves is much better then listening to monks( teachings)? No wonder u have such big agenda against Monkists.
Like me, u can't even take the 5 precepts properly, so u think we can anyhow doubt the Sanga who keep more then hundred of precepts? Of cos we don't go to those cases where the sanga break the precepts or those fake monks, or monks that we don't even know at all. These r not for us to discuss. We r not in such position. We r not happy with certain venerables, we keep away from them. No need to show how much we know or how much better we r by critising or even ridicule them. I believe they don't even care at all, but we ourselves r destroying our virtue and wisdom develpement. That's a pity.
Oh, and talking abt virtue and wisdom, U said "repesct only virtue and wisdom, not the robes." Which maybe explains why it seems to me u never give regards to Monks. U mean once we see a monk coming, we doubt, must evalute him first to see up to standard or not, don't waste our bows. So, my question is: How much do we know or understand about virtue and wisdom? How do u know that who has virtue and wisdom or not? Our standard is ultimate? U mean we ( or U) are Buddha already?
Reading n studying the suttas by ourselves is in fact quite dangerous for us laymen, becos unlike the sanga ( real ones, hah) we hv no proper discipline, no proper practice, hv not renounced the worldly life n enjoyments; thus we can't possibly have the wisdom to understand the sutras to the fullest. We may develope wrong understanding or worse develope wrongs views n wrong thoughts ( xie2 zhi1 xie2 jian4). San zhang shi er bu, not one Harry Potter series. I think we should be careful.
Tsk. I also must be careful.
[/b]
I pay and bow to monk when I know and trust that he has certain qualities and knowledge about the Dhamma. I don't see a monk just to bow, what if that is a bogus monk? Might end up boasting his ego you know? When I see a monk I just address him as normal venerable so-and-so and gasshos. Need to bow meh?
To know a monk/nun works or not just speak to them more often. See what they are doing then you will notice.
But of course if you want to be on the 'safe side', you can bow all you want.
I think your reasoning of the keep precept part has nothing to do with doubting sangha. It is a different issue. And you sure sangha really keep all precepts?
Hoho.
And if you have read carefully, I merely bring up issues, I didn't criticise. If you can't tell the difference, then that's too bad.
I apologise that I had diverted from this thread.
And sinweiy, thank you for the sharing so far =)