Suthep_Steve
-
Posts
138 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Suthep_Steve
-
-
Toyota Supra
Look here for prices in Thailand but they look very expensive much cheaper else where
-
Hi my name is Steve, and I'm a Buddhist.
Sounds like an AA meeting.
I'm currently working on the gradual reduction of desire through an extensive practise of laziness and distraction.
I wanted to become a Buddhist monk in the Tibetan tradition but the girlfriend wouldn't let me.
Marry a Thai Buddhist and that excuse will evaporate ...Tried that one but the girlfriend was having none of that as well
Come to think of it, can't monks in most Tibetan Buddhist (Gelugpa excepted) marry?
I would say some but not most. The Gelugs ( the root of my tradition ) and the Kagyus have celebate monks. That accounts for a majority I would say. The Sakyas I'm not sure about and the Nyingmas certainly have some married monks although they may have the celebate kind as well.
-
Hi my name is Steve, and I'm a Buddhist.
Sounds like an AA meeting.
I'm currently working on the gradual reduction of desire through an extensive practise of laziness and distraction.
I wanted to become a Buddhist monk in the Tibetan tradition but the girlfriend wouldn't let me.
Marry a Thai Buddhist and that excuse will evaporate ...Tried that one but the girlfriend was having none of that as well
-
Hi my name is Steve, and I'm a Buddhist.
Sounds like an AA meeting.
I'm currently working on the gradual reduction of desire through an extensive practise of laziness and distraction.
I wanted to become a Buddhist monk in the Tibetan tradition but the girlfriend wouldn't let me.
-
An aeon (kalpa): The Buddhist text speak of three kinds of aeons- an interim aeon, an incalculable aeon, and a great aeon.
An interim aeon (antarakalpa) is a period of time required for the life-span of human beings to rise from ten years to the maximum of many thousands of years, and then fall back to ten years. Twenty such interim aeons equal one incalculable aeon (asankheyyakalpa), and four incalculable aeons constitute one great aeon (mahakalpa).
The length of a great aeon is said by the Buddha to be longer than the time it would take for a man to wear away a mountain of solid granite one yojana (about 7 miles) high and wide by stroking it once every hundred years with a silk cloth (S.15:5/ii,181-82). hill
from "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma by Bhikkhu Bodhi, chapter 5"
From a Vajrayana point of view during a kalpa, the world comes into being, exists and is destroyed. Then it all starts again. The scriptures talk of a fire at the end of the aeon after which not even a single atom is left.
Come madness and vexation I embrace you.
-
Regarding Tibet and "outside powers" you are plain wrong.
If you read up Tibetan history you will see that Tibet and its feudal states were the most part of the last millenum considered part of China. That hasn't changed until today - the UN does not recognise Tibet as an independent nation, and no independent nation in the world does so. The "interference" of China depended mainly on rising or falling power of the different Dynasties. The claims of the exile government are rather dubious as they base their main argument on Tibet's status before the Mongol invasion. That was a while ago.
Fact though is that Tibet never could be defined a nation in the modern sense.
Below is the Tibetan government in exiles argument for the legality of a Tibetan state.
http://www.tibet.com/WhitePaper/white1.html
Basically I believe that if the Chinese had not invaded in 1949 that Tibet would have had to change radically as most Asian countries have, may be it would have changed in the way India has. India has not enjoyed leader ship by an Indian for much of the last millennium as well. However India is generally considered to be a legal nation state by most people. The main thing is the Indians had some form of self determination while the Tibetans have had none.
Anyway I'm going to sign off from this discussion now because I feel it's academic. Tibet will remain a part of China for the foreseeable future maybe for a very long time. The Chinese invasion has had some good effects, one is that Tibetan Buddhism has been made available to the rest of the world but for the ethnic Tibetans it has been a disaster. I'm fairly sure that in a free and fair ballot the majority of ethnic Tibetans would vote to kick the Chinese out. However like the Catholics in Northern Ireland they are not in a majority in Tibet anymore.
Also please don't mistake me as a strong supporter of the Tibetan government in exile. When I visit Tibetan communities both inside and outside of Tibet I have to keep very quiet about my affiliations as I belong to a group that has criticised The Dalai Lama and the government in exile.
The only reason I joined this discussion was because I found your comments about the benefits of the Chinese presence in Tibet distasteful. However on that point we will have to disagree.
-
Well, if you read Alexandra David Neel's books you get also a rather unfavourable picture of Tibet's Buddhist clergy long before the Chinese invasion. Look at Ladakh - no government opression whatsever, though a more than alarming deterioration in all religious/cultural matters.
No Tibet was no Utopia but at least it was a Tibetian culture not imposed by outside powers be it Chinese, American or British.
Maybe they would have come to a more harmonious way of living on there own but what exists in Tibet now is not a good way to live. A strong police state with an imposed informer culture, total control of the higher education establishments (namely large monastries) and a program of ethnic dillusion by mass government sponsored imigration by Han Chinese. To name but a few..
Most clergy tend to degenerate over time you only have to look at the Catholic Church to see that but you will find in both Tibetian Buddhism and Catholism good Monks and Nuns.
Could Ladakh have gone into decline due to the ending of the importance of the silk road?
-
Tibet is only judged by Buddhism, and a completely misunderstood Buddhism.
Would you care to enlighten us with the correct view then?
Can you point out one indigenous culture in the region that has not experienced severe cultural deterioration, and/or brutal wars?Bhutan perhaps?
-
Excellent book, but very depressing. The real message of the book is that the Chinese see Buddhism as a rival ideology to communism in Tibet, so it has to be erased except for a few model monasteries to bring in the tourists and show the world that religious freedom is permitted. What has happened in Tibet is pretty close to ethnic cleansing.
Actually, not really.
If you travel through Tibet you will see active monastries in almost every village. If you spend enough time there you can be sure that you will be invited to take part in all sort of large religious festivals that are celebrated openly.
Please don't fall into the propaganda trap of both sides. Both sides have their points, and both made grave mistakes. On the "free Tibet" side i would suggest looking into the Mustang Army issue and CIA involvement starting from the end of WW2.
A good book to read is: "Orphans of the cold war"
Written by a former CIA operative it does explain a lot about the lesser known facts of Tibet's recent history.
That wasn't my impression when I spent time there in 2001. There is a thin veneer of religous tolerance but it doesn't take much to see through it.
For example if you arrive at Ganden monastry outside the normal hours you can hear the news being blarred out over load speakers in Mandarain making it hard to do morning prayers or study.
You can also easily spot the plain clothes police on the roof of the Jokhang temple watching out for any one who might start a protest and the "fire engines" with water cannon waiting in the square below.
The monasteries are controlled and the numbers of monks stricktly controlled. I met several guys who wanted to ordain but couldn't find a monastery to take them.
-
In defence of the FWBO.
I lived for a number of years in Birmingham, UK which is or was then a large centre of FWBO activity. Sangharachita lived there (and may still) while I was there as did a large percentage of the "Inner circle" members of the FWBO. I never had the chance to see Sangharachita but I did meet one of his closest disciples who was as it happens is a fully ordained Buddhist monk with vows of chastity etc.
I was most impressed by him and on the rare occasions I visited there main centre in Moseley Birmingham I was always impressed by the spirituality and sincerity of the people involved. The FWBO is by no means main stream but I believe they have a sincere aproach and I would not try and stop anyone from going to one of there meetings. Buddhism is new in the West and Buddhism has always adapted to any new country that it has entered.
There have been reports of sexual improtiety amoung order members and about Sangharachita. I believe that the FWBO has put it's house in order over these. These reverlations largely came from the Guardian newspaper in the UK. Coming from a female reporter who is a devout Catholic and took it on herself to have a pot shot at a number of Buddhist groups in the UK at the time. The organisation which I follow most closely was also attacked.
If you are looking for dirt you can always find it especially when you google for it. Devadata saw faults in the Lord Buddha and tried to convince others of his point of view. If you are interested in the FWBO I adivice you to approach it with an open mind and give yourself a year or two to talk with them, practise with them and study along there lines before coming to any kind of commitment but that would be my advice for any worthy relgious organisation.
-
If we can do Palace tomorrow night then I think I can safely say we are up
Well it was a draw but that's nothing to be ashamed of away at Palace. I think you can safely say that Reading are on there way. They seem to have too much class and strength in depth to stumble that badly.
The Blades still not far enough clear of Leeds. Well at least it was Wednesday that Leeds beat this weekend.
I was just looking at the Blades run in. We have Leeds fairly late on, Palace last match of the season as well. Not to mention Reading on Valentines Day. Wonder who is going to get massacred?
-
First, I would like to know what is your definition of the mind. Is it located in the brain? Or can it exist without any material support? If it is located only in the brain (or another "hardware") then it needs the space dimensions to exist, which were created, as well as time, at the BB. Hence, according to this perspective, the universe does not need the presence of the mind to exist, while the opposite is true. On the other hand, if the mind can exist outside space-time, then logical thinking (or philosophy) cannot be used, such as causality and so, because we get the infinity problem again.
Once again we need to define the mind to talk about what we define as "reality" and "dreams". If we use the first definition of the mind, then "reality" is the mind or brain interpretation of the signals received from our senses (vision, hearing,...) from the outside world, while the dreaming state is when these senses are not used. For example, virtual reality is not dreaming as you need to connect your senses to specific signals controlled by a computer. On the other hand, I don't believe we can define dreaming if the mind is outside the space-time.
Therefore I think the mind can not exist outside the space-time universe and if there is a creator it should be outside the space-time.
1, Define the mind:
The nature of the mind is clarity and it's function is to perceive objects.
2, Is the mind located within the brain
No. Why because if the mind is largely within space time (cause and effect must apply). Therefore even at the time of death there remains a cause (previous moment of mind) which will give rise to an effect (first moment of the next life or intermediate state.) Argument works for existance of mind before birth as well.
Lets say and this is a guess because I'm not even signing up to the big bang just yet. That an Enlightened mind exists/dwels outside space time. Therefore an enlightened mind is not subject to cause and effect as long as it exists outside space time. If however the enlightened mind wishes to act within space time then it must obey some if not all of the laws of space time.
An unelightened mind exists/dwels mostly within space time and therefore is almost totally at the mercy of the laws of space time. Just as the dreamer is bound by the laws of the dream universe.
So then does space time create the mind or does the mind create space time. Both are flawed as you point out. If space time creates mind and space time is logical then we should be able by using logic to find space time on logical investigation. You have so far ignored this and I'm of the opinion it can't be done so let say an externally existant space time is out.
Next option mind creates space time. Mind exists inherently from it's own side and as a by product of it's existance creates space time. If that's the case then we should be able to find the mind upon investigation but we can't.
Therefore we need a third option. Buddha presents one in the Perfection of Wisdom sutras as explained by Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti. Namely the view of dependent relationship. An unenlightened mind and the space time that it perceives are mutually dependent. One can't exist without the other. You can't have a mind with out an object and you can't have an object without a mind. Both arise simultaneously and within space time obey cause and effect. But neither creates the other they both lack inherant independent existance like the objects in a dream.
Outside space time there is no self, no other, no time, no space, no cause and effect, no rebirth, no mind.
Inside space time is meerly an illusion where we wrongly grasp on to the existance of a self, other, time, space, cause and effect, rebirth, mind etc. All of space time arises because we grasp on to a sence of self as oposed to other, having done this we feel that self is seperate and unrelated to other and from making this mistake the whole of space time and all it's sufferings appears.
None of the above is supposed to be representative of any particular school or organisation it's just my ideas whilst standing on the shoulders of giants.
-
Therefore if there is a creator it should be outside the domain of the "created" space and time, and the question above implies implicitly the notion of time.
That breaks the law of cause and effect. Cause and effect are always related. The creator must ultimately be the same as the effect.
The causality law exists only within space-time. Therefore the initial cause must be before space-time itself is created, and the effect appears at the Big Bang.
Ok before the BB we have a state of nothing, no time, no space, nothing, void. What do we have after the big bang? Do time and space exist out there waiting to be discovered, separate from the mind? If so upon philosophical investigation we should be able to find such an existent universe.
In a dream we have dream space time and it follows physical laws that we can test and debate within the dream. A dream has reality has history and geography but it does not exist separate from the mind. Can we prove that our waking state is any different?
Therefore if there is no universe outside the mind then there is no creator outside the mind.
-
If I have *defined* green as being a certain wavelength of light, then only things which emit that wavelength would be green- by definition. It's a tautology, but then definitions often are.
I am not saying that in common experience that definition is the or even a real definition of green (to improve this definition would probably involve a range of wavelengths, a certain set of tolerances for mixing with other wavelengths, allowances for the conditions of lighting/no lighting, and the medical/empirical nature of human sight). However, I was trying to keep things relatively simple and clear, as far as the power and the limitations of pragmatism.
To be clear, I noted in my message that truth defined by pragmatism *is* quite limited, and I am not proposing it is of universal application. However, in its limited way, it is very powerful.
Other kinds of truths apply more effectively to other types of situations- your mileage may vary. Acknowledging this is at the core of postmodern thinking. It seemed to me that in the case of the self, postmodern psychology shakes hands very well indeed with Buddhism.
"Steven"
As I said before I'm in an annoying mood today but I don't mean anything personally.
That aside what I'm saying is that you can't define green at all. You can't define the boundaries, is this brown or is it green well it depends on what we agree to call it but there is nothing green that you can define as existing from it's own side. It's all just convention. If you look at different languages and cultures not only they have different names for colours they have different ideas about colours. For example a lot of cultures have no concept of orange. They just lump it in with red.
I'm going to leave it at that and just say I disagree with your ideas about self. Right I'm off to kick the dog or I would if the dog existed.
-
Therefore if there is a creator it should be outside the domain of the "created" space and time, and the question above implies implicitly the notion of time.
That breaks the law of cause and effect. Cause and effect are always related. The creator must ultimately be the same as the effect.
Struth I'm in an annoying mood today.
-
If I define "green" as being predominantly a certain wavelength of light, then something is green if I can detect that wavelength coming from it (with my eyes, for example).
What is green? The thing or the certain wavelength of light. If it is the thing and presumably the thing is not a certain wavelength of light then you can't say that green is a certain wavelength of light as you have just found something else that is green.
If the wavelength of light is green but say healthy grass is not a certain wavelength of light that defeats you orginal idea about truth being "Pragmatically speaking, the truth is what works."
So what is Green?
-
i can understand what you're saying about buddhism creating a purpose in life (if you don't believe in a deity)... i can see exactly how what you and others have described as buddhism can provide this. i can see also that you might believe in evolution as a buddhist (because you may not believe there is a diety who put it all here). that to me would make sense also. where it stops making sense to me at the moment is where the notion of rebirth fits in (if this is about reincarnation which i've assumed it is). i'm not sure how reincarnation fits with what else i've read in your posts and others on this thread.
First you need to understand Ultimate truth. By this I mean removing everything from our perceived reality that is not a mental construct as explained by Camerata. This process has a tendency to lead you into the extreme of Nilhism. Although many modern teachers say that to begin with Nilhism is not a bad first step on the path.
Once you have done that you can start to understand Conventional Truths like rebirth. By the way if you are having problems with Rebirth you should take a look at Karma. In my tradition that is when you have fully understood, when you can understand how Ultimate Truth and Karma are mutually compatible.
By the way Camerata your explanation of Ultimate Truth seemed to have a strong Hindu flavour. Are you a Pantheist by any chance?
-
Similarly, imagine if the Buddha were to return today, what would he make of our marked piety as expressed in the spinning of prayer wheels, circumambulation, prostrations, recitation of texts, chanting of mantras, and performing rituals?
I read in one of John Blofeld's books that Buddhists circumambulate in a clockwise direction because the Buddha's original disciples showed their respect by standing with their right shoulder towards him. Anyone got any more info on this? Is that the reason a monk's right shoulder is bare?
I don't know about that but I seem to recall a story about the Buddha finding the only virtue left on Devadatta's consciousness being the fact that in a previous life as a crow he had flown round a stupa in a clockwise direction. The idea being that he could still achieve enlightenment due to the power of that previous action. I think I heard the story in a teaching although I may have read it.
-
ThaiPauly, are really sure you want to win the Championship? You know that all teams who do are cursed to be instantly thrown down into the lower realms. Just take a look at Sunderland.....
As a Blade I think Warnock is deliberately letting you get away so we can follow in Wigans footsteps.
However if it backfires and Leeds catch us. Well that just doesn't bare thinking about.
-
An interesting article. I hope Tenzil Wangyal la doesn't get in too much trouble over it. Criticising Tibetan Buddhism can get you in a lot of trouble in the Tibetan community. As I know from personal experience.
The problem with what he says is how you decide what is Buddhist and what is not. It is very easy to say that this Sutra doesn't bare the same style as that one but as we say "Appearances are deceptive and your own opinions are unreliable." Should we reject the Tantras because they were revealed in mystical ways? Do we still have the capacity to extract the Dharma from the original sutras? When we look at the Sangha and Tulkus and see faults do those faults exist from there own side or do they tell us more about the state of our own minds?
Should we believe everything that our teachers tell us unconditionally? Of course not but if we have swallowed poison how long do we take to check the doctor's credentials and the theory behind his cure?
Personally I feel you have to be very sceptical for a long time and you have to get empirical feedback from the path or paths you are following but in the end you have to come to a position of trust and faith in one particular path at some point otherwise you are relying on yourself alone and there is no Nirvana in that direction.
-
Many people think that it is historically incorrect to apply the term "hinayana" to Theraveda Buddhism. Any information or opinions on this?
I don't know about historically but IMHO in terms of doctrine Hinayana and Theraveda are distinct. For Mahayanists the Hinayana is that part of the sutras that deal with gaining a fortunate rebirth and personal liberation from Nirvana. We consider loving kindness, compassion etc. to be part of the Mahayana. The Theravada is rich in these.
However please don't imply that I am in anyway belittling the Hinayana. It is the bed rock upon which the Mahayana is built. How can you have compassion for others if you don't understand your own suffering? If you don't have a realization of Renunciation it is impossible to become a Bodhisattva.
The Theravadians use sutras that Mahayanists consider to be part of the Mahayana. I can't remeber which ones off hand but if you want to check some are listed in Meaningful to Behold by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (Chapter 9) and probably in other comentaries to Shantidevas Guide to the Boddhisattvas Way of Life.
-
Lot of us in and around CM at the moment. Anyone interested in a cup of tea and a chat?
This is a bad week for me, Steve, I'm swamped with work and travelling in and out of CM frequently. Maybe later on?
That would be nice
-
Lot of us in and around CM at the moment. Anyone interested in a cup of tea and a chat?
-
We in the Vajrayana don't feel that this is one of those issues but personally I feel as Dr Booze reminded me this is the only place where you find a technical explanation of what passes from life to life and how that does not contradict the doctrine of No self.
Steve I know Vajrayana has some very involved theories of reincarnation, but are any of these referenced in the Mahayana Sanskrit texts? My impression is that most of the lore on reincarnation, in Tibetan Buddhism, comes from pre-Buddhist Bon-po. Not that that is relevant inside the Tibetan school, but as an academic issue (and our discussion is, or has become, after all, academic) it's interesting.
Specifically what passes from life to life I think is only really fully explained in the Tantras, the vast majority of which are Indian in origin and all come from Buddha (from a Vajrayana point of view albeit in quite esoteric ways).
With the Bon-po influence I guess you are referring to the Tibetan book of the dead. This isn’t really part of my school so I can’t really comment although I have read it. I don't know its exact lineage or its original author.
With regard to reincarnation within the Mahayana texts I guess the closest would be in the explanations of the 12 dependent related links. Which are mentioned in many sutras maybe even Hinayana ones as well. Such as the Heart Sutra and the other Perfection of Wisdom Sutras. As far as I am aware the sutras don't talk about gross, subtle and very subtle levels of mind. This is what I was thinking about when I wrote that.
Referencing things back to the Sutras is a very hard question for a Tibetan Buddhist to answer as we mainly study commentaries to Buddha’s works written by enlightened masters. In my tradition we spend the first 5 to 10 years studying:
Commentaries on Je Tsongkhapas Lamrim Chenmo, which its self is a commentary to glorious Atishas Lamp for the path to Enlightenment.
The Heart Sutra.
Shantidevas Guide to the Bodhisattvas way of life.
A commentary to Dignagas works on Understanding the Mind.
Bodhisattva Checkawas training the mind in 8 points (Transforming adverse conditions into the path or in Tibetan Lojong)
The main emphasis in Tibetan Buddhism is finding a teacher who is part of an enlightened lineage i.e. an unbroken series of enlightened teaches who can be traced back to Buddha Shakyamuni and therefore everything they teach should be likewise traceable back to Buddha.
Complete understanding of all Buddha’s 84000 teachings via the Sutras is thought be beyond ordinary beings in degenerate times so we study condensed commentaries. Which we believe are the works of enlightened students of Buddha.
Introduce yourself
in Buddhism
Posted
Well you can be a Lama with out being a monk (not just the four legged kind either
). One of the most important Gelug lineage Gurus or Lamas was Dromtonpa. He was a lay man who never ordained but was the main teacher after the founder of the Gelug / Kadampa Tradition (Venerable Atisha) passed away.
As for going over to the Nyingmas they are far too bells and smells for me.