Christian point of view on idols
-
At the same time Jesus claims himself to be both God and man.Originally posted by SilentWitness:Jesus message is to believe in God only. if christians pray to jesus, that defeat the purpose of JEsus's message
Perhaps, you wanna go EH to clarify their teachings?
p.s. you certainly sound like a Jehovah Witness -
Gd posts... welcome to this forum.Originally posted by meL_: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.
.
.
Are you the guy from Leo's forum? -
[quote]Originally posted by yamizi:
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]
It's also not neccessary a monk/nun means that they r not well-versed. So? Got the picture? Again, don't go on n on on issues that you think u 've "got" someone's tail. Oh, u know monks that hv got boyfds or girlfd? Wow. Of cos, unlike u I'm not interested. BTW, such ppl r not monks. Can't u see?
[quote]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?[quote]
Again, u seems to still believe that u hv the Buddha's "standard". Who's boasting who's ego here?
It's so difficult to bow our head meh? U bow to ur teachers or principle in primary school? No? your parents? No? Again, thinking we lugi, or losing a arm or leg over everything we do is very sml heart. Be "da zhang fu", then maybe u also can be a Ven Master one day. Then I bow to u. But of cos u r not interested.
[quote]To know a monk/nun works or not just speak to them more often. See what they are doing then you will notice.[quote]
Hah? for wat? To notice if their hv any "tails" for me to sport or not then, Aha! Gotcha? That's not in my agenda.
[quote]But of course if you want to be on the 'safe side', you can bow all you want.
wat safe side? I respect, I bow. I respect wrongly, so be it. Thus I don't go around n "teach" everyone not to bow or respect anyone. Up to them. I keep quiet.
[quote]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?
same ans fr above. don't repeat.
{quote]Hoho.
And if you have read carefully, I merely [b]bring up issues, I didn't criticise. If you can't tell the difference, then that's too bad.[/b]
your "bring up" is very not"bring up", leh. Can smell some gun powder. But of cos if u insist so, then i apologise. Ho ho
. -
Originally posted by cycle:
Well I thought you like monk so much maybe you like those that have boyfriends and whom womanize as well. It's good that you know that they are not monks. But apparently not so for the people who went to them. They see them machiam buddhas like that. Haha.
[quote]Originally posted by yamizi:
[b]
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]
It's also not neccessary a monk/nun means that they r not well-versed. So? Got the picture? Again, don't go on n on on issues that you think u 've "got" someone's tail. Oh, u know monks that hv got boyfds or girlfd? Wow. Of cos, unlike u I'm not interested. BTW, such ppl r not monks. Can't u see?
[quote]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?[quote]
Again, u seems to still believe that u hv the Buddha's "standard". Who's boasting who's ego here? It's so difficult to bow our head meh? U bow to ur teachers or principle in primary school? No? your parents? No? Again, thinking we lugi, or losing a arm or leg over everything we do is very sml heart. Be "da zhang fu", then maybe u also can be a Ven Master one day. Then I bow to u. But of cos u r not interested.
[quote]To know a monk/nun works or not just speak to them more often. See what they are doing then you will notice.[quote]
Hah? for wat? To notice if their hv any "tails" for me to sport or not then, Aha! Gotcha? That's not in my agenda.
[quote]But of course if you want to be on the 'safe side', you can bow all you want.
wat safe side? I respect, I bow. I respect wrongly, so be it. Thus I don't go around n "teach" everyone not to bow or respect anyone. Up to them. I keep quiet.
[quote]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?
same ans fr above. don't repeat.
{quote]Hoho.
And if you have read carefully, I merely [b]bring up issues, I didn't criticise. If you can't tell the difference, then that's too bad.[/b]
your "bring up" is very not"bring up", leh. Can smell some gun powder. But of cos if u insist so, then i apologise. Ho ho
.[/b]
And don't try to misrepresent me, I never say I am 'Buddha standard'. My point is that to respect a monk or literally anyone, need not go to kowtow, bowing kind of thing. Maybe you see bowing as something free to give. I think different people behave differently. I don't anyhow bow to someone unless I clearly know that he/she deserves my bowing.
And I don't go around 'teaching' people not to bow or respect. My point is just that being more vigilent.
Smell gun powder? Trying to sow discord further again?
Your apology also doesn't sound 'sincere' lo but never mind. =) -
My friend went to a convent kindergarden and was driven out of class for asking why there was the practise of thanking god before a meal, and before he went home the teacher said to the class, "when you go home don't pray to those wooden statues"
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
ah, i get this every time. u want to disagree is up to u. but i rather want to agree. how come? u compare the mentality of disagreeing and the mentality of agreeing. which is better?
My personal understanding in harmony is to agree to disagree,
that's why the meaning of Hua Yen's 4 Unobstructed state of mind is unclear.
I. Non-obstruction in realm of phenomenon;
II. Non-obstruction in realm of noumenon;
III. Non-obstruction in both realm of phenomenon and noumenon;
IV. Total Non-obstruction in ALL realms of phenomena.
in the Total Non-obstruction in ALL realms of phenomena, there's really nothing to say about right or wrong? like the monk, who keep saying "You are right" , "You are right", "You are right" to His three arguing disciples. to the monk himself, it doesn't matter much. He's in total Non-obstruction and ease. hence it's misleading.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. [/
u might read my post earlier to justdoit77 on what to say and what not to say when among fellow buddhists and among other religions. yes i know got conventional different. hence the different between respecting and praising. respect does not mean u need to praise.
differences is just the surface-aspect of phenomena. sameness is in the inner-aspect of phenomena. both are non-dual.
i've come across ideas of Taoism, Christianity and Islamic that are out of conventional thinking that people commonly have. there are those that can really penetrate into the "mystic" part of their religion. but rare though.
moreover MCK is taking from the realm of Total Non-obstruction. unless we can catch up with that kind of standard, it's difficult to understand.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.
my advice is concentrate on ur LS, rather than listening and accepting other people's gossiping/bad mouth. if really see no good, we reflect ownself see we got do what they did or not. if don't have, give urself encouragement and keep it up. don't have to join the pack in spreading. speculation will do Buddhism no good. ya.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.
then u really don't understand what's the real meaning of 'hinayana', only don't know and feeling of inferior, then blame it on history. 'hinayana' idea came up in many mahayana sutras itself, including LS. it does not need to mean the Southern buddhism. even within people who thinks they are studing mahayana also have hinayana minded people. who or what are they?
they are those that rely on the 'outside' be it word, person or ordinary consciousness, than on 'inside' definitive meaning.
they are those that cannot see or apply Dharma in worldly dharma or in the saying seeking horns on rabbit's head. they think that bodily action is more important than inner intention. all and all ...
u don't have to look at the texts, look around fellow buddhists, and the proof is there already.
btw, should visit esangha, international buddhism forum. it's been
Concluded that Mahayana and Hinayana are attitudes of mind or levels of consciousness, not sects or schools of Buddhism.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).
try extending that good will of thought to "bogus monk" too, then u really understand the meaning in LS. if one really can see 'icchantika' doesn't exist, then one should also be able to see that such idea of "bogus monk" or 'negativity' don't exist. [LS: Devadata also can attain Buddhahood .]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.
correct. that's for people with strong theorical background. people with weak theorical background, might need something more concreate and practical. that's when skillful Sakyamuni Buddha is able to cater for these people who are dull-minded and prefer to escape the suffering of samsara.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.
it's the original Sanskrit meaning. not solely PL. anyway there's nothing bias about the concept. Sakyamuni is Amitabha. Amitabha is Sakyamuni. what's there to argue?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.
then u are also rejecting LS itself.
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.
btw above information is going to be out dated speculation in the international sangha. rely on the inner wisdom and virtue then on speculation.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).
nobody say it makes. respect doesn't mean praise his external (good or bad) behavior.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.
break through the surface-aspect. will do good than harm.
ps: i also thank you for the mind-training.
/\ -
When did this incident occurred? There are some recent measures introduced by the relevant authorities to discourage just this kind of practices that will undermine the religious harmony of our society. You may wish to bring this matter up to the attention of MOE.Originally posted by seow:My friend went to a convent kindergarden and was driven out of class for asking why there was the practise of thanking god before a meal, and before he went home the teacher said to the class, "when you go home don't pray to those wooden statues" -
Ah, finally, some fresh smelling baby talc powder... " never mind" is the best words you used in our exchanges so far. I bow to you, sincerely. ^ - ^Originally posted by yamizi:[quote][b]Well I thought you like monk so much maybe you like those that have boyfriends and whom womanize as well. It's good that you know that they are not monks. But apparently not so for the people who went to them. They see them machiam buddhas like that. Haha.
So fortunately I replied ur post, man. Or else u think ( n maybe go n tell other ppl or write in other forums or blogs) that I like "monks" who keep bogfrds girlfrds! Close shave.
I didn't know it was a booby trap; cos u r the one that said 'monks that wonmanize n hv boyfrds'. If u know they r not monks, then u shouldn't post such statement. This is serious.
As for other ppl, they will learn one day, I don't know. No need to keep harping on such cases n forsake to see the goodness of the other sanga group. ok?
[quotr]And don't try to misrepresent me, I never say I am 'Buddha standard'. My point is that to respect a monk or literally anyone, need not go to kowtow, bowing kind of thing. Maybe you see bowing as something free to give. I think different people behave differently. I don't anyhow bow to someone unless I clearly know that he/she deserves my bowing.
Then say it like this earlier. Anyway, even now, u keep repeating ur stance of using ur ( ok, not Buddha standard)"high standard" to evaluate the Triple Gem.
[quote]And I don't go around 'teaching' people not to bow or respect. My point is just that being more vigilent.
Then say like this earlier. Well, pls read back most of ur past postings in this forum. Don't ask me to dig out as evidence for u,pls.
[quote]Smell gun powder? Trying to sow discord further again?
Wowo... who is trying to sow discord again n again? I thought I was trying to clear a discord. So, now u can feel how it is to be caught up in a discord? Pls read back ur past postings in this forum. I'm sounding more n more like you... a broken record that keeps going n going repeating the same old song. Everyone reading this, pls use me as an example not to follow in your Buddhadharma practice. Really.
[quote] Your apology also doesn't sound 'sincere' lo but never mind. =) -
the smashing of idols?
i think he is trying to be prophet Abraham -
[quote]Originally posted by yamizi:
I can introduce to you some monk who womanize and keep boyfriend. Are you interested?
Sorry sorry... come here again... I just want to show u( since it is in the same thread, easy to dig) that this is call 'sowing discord again'.
Don't try this tactic anymore, or I hv to borrow the rubber hammer fr my neighbour's toddler to hit ur hand. -
whats jehovah Witness? Jesus claims himself to be both God n man? err...then who is God 's son?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:At the same time Jesus claims himself to be both God and man.
Perhaps, you wanna go EH to clarify their teachings?
p.s. you certainly sound like a Jehovah Witness -
You should ask in Eternal Hope: http://christians.sgforums.comOriginally posted by SilentWitness:whats jehovah Witness? Jesus claims himself to be both God n man? err...then who is God 's son?
As for Jehovah Witness, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus#Jehovah.27s_Witnesses,
"Jehovah's Witnesses believe Jesus to be God's (or Jehovah's) son, rather than being God himself. Jehovah's Witnesses believe he was the same divine created being as Michael the Archangel,[89] [90] and that God made him a perfect human by transferring his life to the womb of Mary.[91] During the time Jesus was on earth he was simply a man, not a god-man.[92] They also believe that he is "the word" of John 1:1. This is understood to mean that he is God's spokesman, likely the one speaking in God's name to Adam, and to the Israelites in the wilderness.[93] In line with this, they point out that the Bible presents him as the only way humans can approach God. They include words like 'in Jesus name' in every prayer.[94]They view the term "Son of God" as an indication of Jesus' importance to the creator and his status as God's "only-begotten (unique) Son,"[95] the "firstborn of all creation,"[96] the one "of whom, and through whom, and to whom, are all things."[97] They believe that Jesus died on a single-piece torture stake, not a cross.[98] They believe that he is currently ruling in heaven as king of God's heavenly Kingdom, and will soon extend his rule to earth for a reign of peace. [99] They also believe he is now immortal[100] and can never die again.[101]"
-----------------------
In Singapore, Jehovah Witness is banned because they do not allow their members to participate in National Service. -
This friend of mine has just completed his o levels last year.Originally posted by Beyond Religion:When did this incident occurred? There are some recent measures introduced by the relevant authorities to discourage just this kind of practices that will undermine the religious harmony of our society. You may wish to bring this matter up to the attention of MOE.
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
Better to see one fault in oneself,
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.
Than a thousand faults in others.
- Dhammapada
/\ -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
The supreme practices of Samantabhadra I vow that when my life approaches its end, all obstructions will be swept away; I will see Amitabha Buddha, And be born in his land of Ultimate Bliss and Peace. When reborn in the western land, I will perfect and completely fulfill, without exception, these great vows, To delight and benefit all beings. The assembly of Amitabha Buddha is completely pure; When from a matchless lotus I am reborn, I will behold the BuddhaÂ’s Measureless light as he appears before me To bestow a prediction of Buddhahood. --Avatamsaka (Hua yen) Sutra
Hua Yen sutra's
Bodhisattva Samantabhadra
fyi, the First PL Patriarch of Dharma realms(fa jie) is Samantabhadra (since He's the first to mentioned it in Fa jie(mind-ground) of Avatamsaka Sutra).
/\ -
Idols can be just some stone.
Idols can be symbolic of something.
Well
if you take it as nothing, it becomes nothing.
if you take it for something, it becomes something.
It all boils down to how you see it. -
Originally posted by Isis:
indeed.
It all boils down to how you see it.
shared with you one well-known story between the famous Chinese scholar Su Dongpo and his good friend Zen Buddhist Master Foyin.
One day, Su Dongpo and Zen Master foyin was meditating in the monastery. When they finished, Su asked Foyin, "what do you see in front of you?"
"An enlightened Buddha!" Fo Yin smiled, "and what do you see?"
"A pile of bull shit!" Su Dong Po was making fun of Fo Yin. Su and Foyin often debated on Buddhism and philosophy and Foyin always defeated Su. Su thought this time he won!
Su Dong Po went home with a light heart. At the door, he met his little sister. She asked why her brother looked so happy.
"Because I won this time."
"How?" his little sister asked.
Upon hearing the story, Su's sister commented,
"My dear brother, you lost again."
"What?" he protested.
"Foyin has reached the state of a Buddha's mind. That is why he saw you as a Buddha. On the other hand, you had nothing but bull shit in your heart. As a result, you saw everything else as shit"
as u can see, Master Foyin see Su Dongpo as Buddha. if one have reached the state of a Buddha's mind, u see everyone including 'jesus' as Buddha.
/\ -
This is rather off-topic but I wish to express my personal views on those who had mentioned about Master Chin Kung in this topic.
Official records: There is a scripture, I forgot its name in English or Pali; I think it is called Di4 zhang4 shi2 lun2 jing1. It is mentioned that regardless of whether a venerable is one who has observed perfectly all precepts or has broken all or has not sworn to observe any at all in the first place, we should refrain from expressing doubts about a venerable in a public arena. One should reflect any personal concerns about a venerable's character or knowledge in private with that particular venerable and most importantly, in a respectful manner and tone.
Personal views: I too have some doubts of my own when watching some of Master Chin Kung's vcds. But I have no doubt at all that he is indeed a learned master of Buddhism, and one who is working tirelessly to educate the public on traditional values like filial piety, mutual respect and compassion for all. I can only say that I am a person with average mental, emotional and spiritual intelligence, and therefore I cannot understand and thus accept some of the high-level Buddhist concepts that is explained by him in those audio-visual materials. It is my problem, not Master Chin Kung's.
I hope as mark of respect to a venerable, or any venerable, which is a live symbol of the Sangha Gem, it's best that we avoid using abbreviations or short forms to address the name of a Master.