Brucenkhamen

Does belief in superstitions (like "lucky" strings) have anything to do with Buddhism?

If we are talking about the core of the Buddha's teachings then no, I'm sure he Buddha discouraged that kind of thing.

If we are talking about how Buddism is practiced in Thailand today then sadly yes.

Is a big part of being happy,not to be concerned with status or how others think of us?

What would buddhism have to say about status anxiety,competetiveness,winning,& pride?

I think you are right, not being concerned about status or how others think of us goes a long way towards giving you happiness. If you are concerned about these things it leads to unhappiness if you don't have them or anxiety over losing them if you do.

Buddhism turns this condition on it's head.

It talks about the eight worldy winds; Praise and Blame, Gain and Loss, Fame and Shame, Happiness and Despair. These are really two sides of the same coin and the winds can blow either way any time.

You can't control your situation and expect to always get the side of it that you like, it's always changing. So Buddhism teaches you to not cling to one side and reject the other rather to observe what you experience objectively and learn from it.

How can a string bring good luck?

It's a marketing ploy used by string manufacturers.

good idea except she doesn't have hot and cold running water in her apt....she just has running water (cold in morning and tepid in the afternoon)

She can scold you with tepid water? That's definately a skill.

Dear BM's.

Looking for your advice on meditation.

I've been practicing on and off for some years now.

My technique is the culmination of my direct experience, teachers and a variety of literature.

I practice with my eyes gently closed.

One of my early teachers explained that the body assumes a relaxed state when one is in deep meditation.

When in this state ones eye lids naturally adopt a position which is slightly opened with eyes no longer focusing, even though they were closed at the beginning.

Most of my practice has been alone.

I sought out and tried a Buddhist Group, sometime ago, in order to accelerate my experience.

Their Japanese Master teaches open eye meditation and I was told my practice was incorrect.

Is my technique wrong, or is it optional?

It's optional, most teachers encourage you to meditate with your eyes closed or slightly opened as you say. Some encourage you to meditate with your eyes open if sleepiness is a problem.

I've never heard of anyone say that eyes open is the only way and you're doing it wrong if you close them, but if that's the way they teach it then when you're practicing with them you do it their way.

the gf has scolded me on more than one occasion while we were in the shower 

Position yourself between her and the hot tap.

The major conflict in your situation is with the prayers. Every prayer contains within it the seed of desire, at its essence. Desire really is at odds with the 4 noble truths of the Buddha.

Every time you sit down on the meditation cushion there is the seed of desire, or any time you do anything really. It's part of the human condition, if it wasn't there you'd be pretty close to enlightenment I'd think.

Over time I think wannascuba will find his buddhist practice will deepen his prayer lif, especially if he finds it is too desire centric.

The dualism of there being a pray-er and a pray-ee is more problematic I'd think, but again that can change over time as your practice deepens.

I got a colored one from my gf's monk.  She asked me which hand I used to wipe my a** .  And she told the monk and he put it on the other hand.  I was told not to clean my private parts with the hand the string is on.

What if you are ambidexterous as far as ass wiping and private parts cleaning is concerned?

Your analogy is some what flawed.

Performing dentistry, or harvesting rice don't involve buthering of live animals.

Butchering animals is quite a violent act.

Live pigs for example are slung upside down on conveyor belts with their necks exposed and can hear and smell the butchery occurring to their fellow pigs prior to their turn.

I do believe butchers who perform such acts become desensitised to slaughter. Desensitisation is contrary to the practice of contemplation which is all about increasing our awareness.

If one feels comfortable for others to perform butchery on their behalf, then perhaps they might be descensitised to this act or lack actual experience of such acts.

Maybe performing one's own butchery, at least once, could be a prerequisite, before progressing to having others slaughter for us. This would allow everyone to make informed decisions.

I know I would think twice if I had to kill.

I agree with you. I'm perfectly comfortable asking someone else to perform dentisty or grow rice on my behalf, I'm not so comfortable asking someone to butcher animals on my behalf, I'd be even less comfortable if I had to do it myself.

Can you find a way for the religions to mesh? I could not. Buddhism does not buy into the concept of Deism.

Buddhism neither buys into Deism nor denies it.

One can practice the Buddhist techniques of mental cultivation without it being necessary to buy into any beliefs on life the universe and everything, so you can still rely on your religion for that if you want to.

There will probably be small clashes at times, nothing open mindedness and integrity can't solve.

Hello,

I just starting reading my first book regarding Buddhism and find that the precepts seem to fit my way of thinking and lifestyle. My dilemma is that I was raised (Baptized) at birth as a Catholic. Is it Ok to retain my Catholic faith and practice the precepts of Budhism. As I understand, you can pratice Budhism to the best of your ability at not be a Budhist. I somewhat feel like I am at a cross-roads. My Mother is Catholic, and she really believes that her prayers protect me, and I belive it also and that my prayers help my loved ones.

Basically, is it OK for me to practice both religions. Please pardon my ignorance, as I have just started learning / reading about Buddhism. Any advice or personal expierences will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Scuba

Yes it's perfectly ok, I know a lot of people who do. Anything you have difficulty accepting with either approach just put it aside. Some Catholics may not see it that way though so I'd be careful what you tell people.

Anyone here know Ajahn Brahm of the Buddhist Society of Western Australia, outside of Perth? I have really been listening to him a lot lately and am finding his talks very helpful and enjoyable. BSWA

He's very popular outside of his home town, links to his website get posted here often, ha has a big following in Singapore also.

I've rarely seen dairy products at Thai Buddhist retreats.

What do meals generally consist of at Thai Buddhist retreats?

Dairy products don't figure much in the Thai diet anyway, so hardly surprising you don't get them in retreats.

At Suan Mokh and Wat Kow Tahm it's vegetarian, brown rice, vege and tofu curries and stir fry. At Wat Ram Poeng you eat what the Thai's eat so salty fish, white rice etc. At Wat pah Nanachat there is a big variety to choose from. That's if things haven't changed in the 10years since I've been to these places.

If someone can't survive 10 days without dairy products they are a rare person indeed.

If you drop your defensiveness for a second, you might see the point I'm trying to make.

Namely, the effects of belief (whatever it is - good luck amulet, social status, wealth) are real. That is, the belief alters the perception of the believing person, and influences them. Whether or not the belief can be justified is irrelevant, and as far as the OP is concerned is of secondary consideration.

In fact, justification is not even a prerequisite for belief, it only serves to strengthen it. As you say, nothing is certain, although collective belief certainly helps.

Do amulets have magical powers? If the wearer believes they have, and if this belief alters his or her perception, and therefore the way he or she responds and reacts to the environment, however subtle, then yes, one could say amulets have power of some sort.

Magical? don't know about that. The native American Indians in their naivety probably believed Christopher Columbus was a magician.

I guess the point I am trying to make is that it doesn't matter if someones faith gives an amulet power or not, I don't have trouble believing faith can do that, but either way the end result is counter productive in terms of Buddhist practice.

definitely Taxi driver B.

if he exists.

I made him up.

Imagine two Thai Taxi drivers.

Taxi driver A is a Thai animist Taxi driver, he has and amulet hanging around his rear vision mirror (heck he's probably got 10). He believes that the amulet will bring him good luck and no matter what he does, no matter what risks he takes, the amulet will prevent him from having an accident.

Taxi driver B is a good Buddhist Taxi driver. He realises that the safety of the passengers is his responsibility, he realises that he must be alert and do his best to ensure that he drives safely at all times. He ensures the car complies with all safety standards. He knows if he causes an accident he'll only have himself to blame.

Which taxi would you prefer to ride in?

Many people in the grown up world have worked hard to build up elaborate mental constructions of security, safety and pride in their lives. These mental constructions more or less rest on the ownership of their material possessions - car, house, money in the bank.

That is, the external objects in their lives give them a sense of security etc, and if the external objects were to suddenly vanish so would their feelings of security. Doesn't the whole concept of money rest on collective faith?

I don't see too much difference between the wearer of a gold necklace and the wearer of an amulet, except for a vast difference in collective belief.

For example, the lady wearing a gold necklace might believe it makes her more attractive, so she might act more attractive, see herself as more attractive, other people around her participating in and reinforcing this collective belief. The amulet owner similarly believes he is now going to be lucky, and becomes more receptive to opportunities than he would otherwise be.

The wearer of a gold necklace has a pretty good reason to believe that if she takes it down to the gold shop she'll be given the market price.

The owner of a house has a pretty good reason to believe that if he lists it for sale he'll get the market price.

The owner of a car has pretty good reason to believe that if he starts the car it will get him from A to B without breaking down.

Of course nothing is certain.

So you're telling me the person who believes an amulet will give him good luck has just as much justification to believe that as what the people believe in the examples above? You've really made grasping at straws into a fine art.

This paragraph reminds me of the power of positive thinking. If someone has a belief in the magic of amulets for luck, and primes their mind so to speak using an amulet, their mind will be more receptive to anything good popping up, and through that receptivity will be in a better position to seize any "lucky" opportunity.

So perhaps it is not the amulets themselves that have the magic power, but the belief of "I am lucky" which brings about a small change in perception, not to attract luck, but to be more receptive to it. (similar what you mentioned in the first paragraph about psychological security).

True, the possession of any external object can potentially change a person's attitude if it triggers faith in them. It also follows that if one day they accidently drop their amulet down a drain they will be plunged into the depths of despair.

Better to grow up I say.

My take on amulets is this: For those who understand the Buddha's teaching, psychological security comes from mental cultivation, i.e. it has an internal source. For those who don't, it comes from external sources such as amulets. Regardless of whether an amulet really has power or not, the belief that it has confers a degree of psychological security.

The belief that an amulet works is generally based on non-rational information. For example, we all have good luck and bad luck every day, some days are luckier than others. If we get an amulet and it's followed immediately by some (normal) good luck, we make a connection between the amulet and the luck. Because we want it to be true, we tend to ignore any bad luck that follows. Similarly, all the people who have amulets could be displayed as a standard distribution curve (bell curve) - most have both good and bad luck, but a few have a lot of bad luck and a few have a lot of good luck. But it's only the good-luck group we hear about and remember, so we get the impression there is overwhelming evidence that they work. Same with the Erawan Shrine. Zillions of people go there and don't get what they asked for but inevitably a few supplicants win the lottery or whatever and those are the ones we hear about.

Another aspect of this is that people seem to think that just because millions of others believe in the power of amulets (or anything else), it must be true! There is a scene in the movie of Carl Sagan's book Contact where the Christian guy is talking about God and says to Ellie (an atheist scientist), "So you think that 90% of humanity is under some sort of mass delusion?" She doesn't answer but for any serious Buddhist this a poignant scene in the movie.

In the past, when asked for an amulet, some forest monks would teach villagers to meditate and insist that the amulet would only "work" if they kept the five precepts and meditated. The idea was that if the villagers did this they would get some psychological security from mental cultivation even though the amulet had no magical power.

Well said!

Can't help you there, sorry.

Have you heard about the "guu mun tong" amulets?

They are apparently made from a small, dried up human foetus, and worn around the neck. The owner must take care of it every day, feeding or something, and it apparently bestows superhuman powers of protection to the wearer. However if they fail to feed it, the powers of the guu mun tong thing will turn upon its owner. That's what they believe anyway.

I can sell one to you for a good price if your interested.

No thanks, I have enough trouble remembering to feed my goldfish.

But the real question of this topic is "do amulets have magical powers?"

I've got about 20 of them Thai people have given me over the years, I don't really want them but I don't feel right about thowing them away. If you ever find evidence they are magic I'll sell them to you for a good price

Oops, I forgot Klingons use Warbirds not Starships... my bad.

The relic of the Buddhas tooth in India is said to have miraculous powers, for example when a King ordered the relic to be destroyed and just before doing so suddenly decided to convert to Buddhism. And the "rain making power" of the Buddhas tooth relic in Sri lanka is another example.

I'm not familiar with these stories, they are obviously after the Buddhas lifetime (unless the Buddhas dentist swiped some of his teeth) so I would question their reliability. Also considering the many thousands of claimed Buddha relics around the world why do we have droughts today, surely their rainmaking ability should be well known.

Anyhow. Lets assume for the moment that magic powers through high levels of Samadhi are possible (plenty of scriptural references).

Whats to say the "magic monk" can't project his Samadhi powers into the inanimate object, charging it somehow through the powers of his intent, (like positively charging a battery) ? Can't see why not. I don't think it is an unreasonable jump.

The first question I'd ask is why would they want to? the second question is if they could do this is why don't they use these powers for something useful? the third question is where do you draw the line? (maybe they can beam themselves up to the Klingon starships orbiting the earths atmosphere too), the last question is why do you care? how is it going to help you to gain freedom from suffering in this lifetime?

Sure, I realise the amulets don't develop the powers in and of themselves (although there seems to be a belief that the older the amulet, the stronger its powers get). I assumed they have to be charged through the intent of the "magic monk". That is, the monk projects his magical intent into the amulet (and containing it within there somehow) in the same way he might use his powers of samadhi to effect/influence anything else in the world. I'm only speculating here.

Well I think you've got a good handle on the Thai belief around this. Just because something is believed by a group of people doesn't make it true. Some people believe in Santa Claus, but they'd be wrong, and when they grow up they'll realise that.

I'm still waiting for an anecdote demonstrating the magical powers of an inanimate object.

I'm also waiting for a scriptual reference where the Buddha encourages belief in amulets as it's not in the spirit of his core teaching.

Even if there was the possibility of inanimate objects weilding magical powers I don't see how reliance on them can do anything but encourage spiritual immaturity.

That's not the way I see it. I eat meat, but here in Thailand I've stopped eating pork. I stopped eating pork because in my estimation the life of a pig here is suffering from beginning to end. I don't have an anti meat argument, but I don't want to contribute to the needless suffering of other sentient beings.

I'm not sure chickens have it any better. Good on you for following your concience.