Gohonzon

I should like to add this quote by the philosopher Schopenhauer:

'If I am to take the results of my philosophy as the standard of truth,I should be obliged to concede to Buddhism the preeminence over the rest.'

Arthur Schopenhauer,Parerga and Paralipomena:Short Philosophical Essays,vol 2.

In the phrase "perfect endowment," endowment refers to the mutual possession of the Ten Worlds, while perfect means that, since there is mutual possession of the Ten Worlds, then any one world contains all the other worlds, indicating that this is "perfect."

Each of the Ten Worlds manifests its own Buddhahood.

Nicheren

Depending on how long you intend to stay,I usually bring cash with me and deposit it asap in my Thai bank account.But if you want to open a Thai account,this may take a week or so before you get an ATM card.Visa Electrons are popular in Thailand now and cost about 300bt.However,the beauty of it is that when your money runs low, then you can withdraw a large amount on your own credit card and deposit the money straight into your Thai account-thus avoiding paying bank commission every time that you need a bit of cash.Also,of course, it's a safer option than even hotel strong boxes,imo.

Few are those who see with their own eyes and feel with their own hearts.Albert Einstein

I believe the death penalty is justified where the enormity of a crime removes the perpertator's right to live.

On the question of the death penalty.I can only reply from a Buddhist perspective and not enter into the more mundane issues concerning whether if it deters,or otherwise,others from committing similar crimes that may carry the mandatory death penalty,etc.

As I mentioned, a head monk- who serves those on death row in Bang Kwang prison-justified the death penalty on the basis of intent and the good of society as a whole.For instance,he claimed that the death penalty for those convicted of drug pushing justified the death penalty, because that by putting the convicted dealer to death would save many other lives of young people who may die through the use of drugs that he supplied.

His argument was fundementally flawed in many ways (given also that we're talking Thailand here.) At the most base level: I thought that's what prison was for,that is,to protect society from those who may otherwise be a danger to the community in some way!

Buddhism does not adhere to the eye for an eye,revenge philosophy of some other religions.In fact a serial murderer,who also set out to take Buddha Shayamuni's life-Angulimala-later became a Buddhist saint who also attained enlightenment.

Buddhism is also a religion of change that focuses on the ability of anyone to change their karma.That is,that anyone can tap into their own inherent Buddha nature at any time.Further,anyone can also attain Buddhahood during the life-time in which they exist.

To take a life denies someone the opportunity to change and is,therefore,goes against initiating the law of cause and effect that creates value.It has been said that five minutes meditation,or chanting a specific mantra (nam-myho-renge-kyo,as in my own practice) can eradicate much accumulated bad karma and effect good causes to the benefit of self,the environment and all those that inhabit it.

It 's a sad reflection on some parts of Thai Theravada Buddhism, that have become so part of the ruling secular powers, as to be indistiguishable from it in its justification of that which differs from the compassionate and enlightened teachings of the Buddha himself.

PS

why was the word h.ell censored

Interesting reply,Bina.Glad to see that you as a senior poster haven't managed to completely work out these quote and colour trickeries either

However,there are -I think- think levels of bad karma that result from actions.Killing ones parent/or parents or a member of the ordained sangha creating very bad consequences.Whereas mercy killing would,I speculate,be an act that does not incur he same karmic retribution.Often it is the intentions of the act that determine it's eventual outcome-but I don't want to go too far down this road and end up (as some leading monks do) justifying the death penalty by the same logic.

Yes,it is the first priority of Buddhists to respect life-irrespective.On the other hand an act of genuine mercy surely wouldn't would not carry the same karmic burden as an act of malicious murder out of anger,revenge or hatred?

In a way it's very difficult to imagine someone dwelling in the world of ######- and as a consequence taking their own life-suffering more as a result of their action.But as someone pointed out earlier,the same karma that caused the act of suicide will still have to be worked out in future lives.

However,how do we view the taking of ones own life as an act of sacrifice against a greater evil? lt was during the Vietnam war that the whole world viewed the spectacle of a Buddhist monk setting himself alight in Hanoi (I think) as a protest agaist both the war and American aggressionThis was an altruistic act of great compassion.Perhaps misguided-but I choose not to judge.It would be near impossible to judge such an act-in terms of karmic retribution-as being the same as an act committed out of internalised anger I think.

Nevertheless,there are many grey areas in Buddhism-vegetarianism being one such similar grey area-as are suicide and mercy killing.

In dharma.

Hello Nick.

in a way it's a little difficult to engage discussion with you .In the nicest possible way-you're some thing of an eclectic wild card.We as Buddhists usually follow particular schools of Buddhist practice,that have traceable lineages back to Buddha Shakyamuni.The teachings that we accept as our guides to practice,training and enlightenment are found in the trasmitted Sutras of the Buddha.For instance,I as a Mahayana Buddhist ,would say that the Three Fold Lotus Sutra is the Buddha's highest teaching and ,therefore, we employ and venerate this Sutra as our vehicle to the other shore.

So what you trying convey,or convince us of,really is up against the highest,oldest,the most respected and effactive teachings of the undisputed enlightened one-Buddha Shakyamuni.

If you wish to procure followers,or whatever,then that's entirely up to you.But you may find that a little more difficult a challenge when trying to convince commited Dharma practicioners of your own state of consciousness.More worthy,I feel, would be the meritorious comittment to the time honoured footsteps of the Buddha and adherence to the teachings of a particular school of Buddhist thought.

May you be happy.May you be free from suffering.

As this is such a vast area, and requires a great deal of applied study (apart from the basic teaching adherd to by all Buddhist schools,the Four Noble Truths for example.) I'd recommend this website for definitions and discussion on Buddhist philososophy-and much,much more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_phil...s_philosophy.3F

Having read your conclusion once more-but less tired-I notice a couple of things.Fistly,on the question of faith.This is a question that I have wrestled with ocassionally,i.e. are faith and Buddhism compatable? If we are talking of the kind of blind faith that puts its trust in the unknown-then the answer has to be that there is no place forthat kind of faith in Buddhism.However, if we define faith in the context of faith,study and practice then we have realisable and seen benefits of faith.As Nichiren Daishonin writes:

"Faith gives rise to practice and study, and practice and study serve to deepen one's faith. In the "Shoho Jisso Sho" (The True Entity of Life)... Exert yourself in the two ways of practice and study. Without practice and study, there can be no Buddhism Both practice and study arise from faith."

So according to Nichiren Daishonin ,faith is the most important part of the tripartite essentials of Buddhist adherence as it serves as a motor for the other two parts,practice and study.

I think that I have read in earlier writings of Buddha Shakyamuni that faith is no longer applicable after reaching realization.Although the Buddha himself used what is called 'expedient means' in delivering his discourses (this just means that he geared what he said to meet the needs and level of understanding of the audience that he was addressing) I think that it's probably right?

That is,that when a practicioner realizes the benefits of his/her practice then perhaps faith-in ones practice- is no longer a necessary factor.

This is however,semantics.For myself faith in both the Lotus Sutra and practice lead me to deeper study,study-practice,practice-faith,etc.As are most-if not-all things in Buddhism they are interconnected and interrelated.

My last,and more trivial observation ,concerns your observations about the laid backness of Buddhist monks that you've encountered in Thailand.As you seem to equate this with Theravada Budhism then I feel that I should comment.

It seems to me that you may be confusing 'mai phen rai' here with the Theravada tradition.I have met Thravaian monks-including Thai- here in Britain that are less layed back and smiling than those in Thailand.This has nothing to do with their own Dhammic developement,but more to do with the norms ,culture and climate of the country in which they practice.I'm not suggesting that when a certain amount of realization-or enlightenment- about the nature of life has been aquired that one could not easily wear a liberated broad grin indeed

But in the main what you have encountered in Thailand-as pleasing as it is- is more of a cultural norm than any indication of another aspect of the supra-mundane.

In Dharma.

It does seem that you have reached some realization and grasp of the truth.Particularly that enlightenment is not to be found in some mystic realm (nb.as opposed to the mystic law) but in everyday life.But enlightenment ,in Buddhist terms,also entails that an enlightened person would be liberated from the suffering inherent within life.

Don't quote me.This is a c&p from another site.

' I was a travel agent in the UK and can highly recommend WorldHoppers, they're an independent travel agency with about 60 flight operators.  

It might be worth giving them a try, because they will book flights through consolidators (that's a company that has prebooked seats from an airline in advance and then sell the seats off cheaply.) A lot of the multiple agencies like Lunn Poly and Going Places won't touch these consolidators, because they have their own in company one (more commission.)

Anyways, not saying they've definitely got seats but it might be worth a try.

Tel:01903 216216, ask to speak to some guy called Mike Frank, he's bit of an anorak (planespotter) but if there's any cheap flights to be had, he's your man.'

More questions than answers then.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????-

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????

????????????????????????????????? ? ???????? ????????????????????????????????????????????

????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????? ? ????????????????????

????????????????? ??????????????????? ?????????????????? ? ??? ????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????

That's all that comes up on my screen. Same thing as with Eva Air e-mails.

The subject of suicide is indeed a difficult one to answer.But what we can learn from it is the power that the three Buddhist poisons can hold over our lives: greed,ill will and delusion.

A person who takes their own life are,sadly, in possesion of a great delusion.The delusion that by taking their own life it will end their own particular suffering.From a Buddhist point of view all beings-unless abiding in a peaceful nirvanic state-are subject to rebirth in saha,or the samsaric world-that of suffering.Life-and all in life-is by definition subject to impermenance,and that in turn will create suffering.It is only by using those conditions towards enightenment, as they arise, that we may attain Buddhahood in this life.By turning ,and changing,our bad karma into something positive can we overcome suffering.We can in effect change poison into medicine.

We are extremely fortunate in having this opportunity to learn and understand what the Buddha taught,and to put into practice that which has the power to liberate us-and all humanity- from suffering.

May all beings be free from suffering and be happy.

Sorry but I haven't sussed how to put quotes into those little windows at the top of the page yet.

'Though they may not understand the principles of Buddhism and may not know that they are suffering from delusion, if only they have faith, then without a doubt they will be able to free themselves simultaneously from the illnesses of the three categories of illusion -illusions of thought and desire, illusions innumerable as particles of dust and sand, and illusions about the true nature of existence.'

Interestingly enough I saw a programme on the Beeb where a Thai man had,had his penis severed and tied to a helium balloon,and let go, by his wife.It was never found again.True story.The outcome of all this is that he ordained as a monk-presumably without the missing part.

It seems to me that asking whether Thai people meditate is a little like asking whether many people go to church in '.Christian countries'. The answer is of course that only a minority do.Most Thai people pay the Buddha homage in order to achieve gain or 'chok dee' (good luck).Or to make merit in some other way-but not in order to achieve enlightenment.The Buddha is seen as something external to be venerated and prayed to,rather than being someone that we can all aspire to.That is,that we all have the potential for Buddhahood in this lifetime.Whether this is due to incorrect teaching,or understanding of what the Buddha taught-or just the convenience of adopting consumer Buddhism is another question.

Thanks Paleface.

As you say ,the disabled monk that you mention was probably ordained beforehand.It's not so much an issue to me as it was previously,and I'm now commited to another practice.However,I would still be interested if anyone could justify this quite bewildering form of discrimination in this modern age.That is,when the practicalities of being disabled are less severe than in times gone by.Best wishes.

About three years ago I had a road accident in Cambodia resulting in having to have my leg amputated.I was at that time considering entering a Wat with the possibility of ordination.From hospital in Cambodia I wrote to Phra Peter Pannapadipo (Phra Farang) asking whether being an amputee would in anyway disadvantage me in taking the yellow robe.It was quite hurtful to be informed that having a limb missing discluded me from the possibilityof ordination.Being informed that one must be whole in body (and mind) to become a monk in Thailand.I can find nothing in the Sutras to validify this,but only this-as Phra Peter informs me-it was layed down by the 1st Patriach.I have shared this experience with many other Buddhist (including a monk in Burma/Myamar) and all dispute-usually in horror-this apparent lack of compassion.Although I have now returned to another (Mahayana) practice,I still ponder as to why my disability should be discriminated against (?) in Thai Theravada Buddhism.Anyone?