Brucenkhamen

Good post there. This is also one of my questions. Why is sex such a bad thing in Buddhism? For me, it's a gift from God. The relationship I have with my wife is spiritually edifying, she helps me (and I her) on our spiritual paths, why shouldn't it be?

It's not a bad thing in Buddhism, I don't know where you got this idea, I don't see it in the article above. It's bad for monks because monks choose the celibate life, that's what being a monk is, if they didn't want to be celibate they shouldn't have ordained.

For a Buddhist practitioner it's important to fully understand desire, sex is one of our strongest desires, you understand desire by not giving into it, by seeing it objectively and realising you have a choice. Sometimes the not giving in part takes a lot of effort.

For monks though gaining enlightenment is not an easy thing, one must be in top form and totally focussed. Just like an athelete might abstain from sex during training so a monk does to focus his energy, that's the theory anyway.

Huh, isn't Jesus the guy who turned water into wine.

Who were the distressed people he was helping there? Alcoholics?

Wedding guests one assumes.

What would the Buddha have done? I think he would have pointed out that nothing is certain, things don't always go to plan, so instead of relying on me to bail you out all the time learn to deal with disappointment and serve your guests Coca Cola.

I'm afraid I must give in to temptation.

No, no, no, no, no! This is exactly what I mean. People who judge Christianity from their own limited experience! The statement that Jesus is God is typical! Not all Christians believe this, I certainly don't! Nowhere in the bible is this true!

So you are saying that if I flip through my Bible there is nowhere Jesus claims to be the Son of God, and no reference to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being God? Now I can only assume you must be objecting to him being referred to as God rather than the Son of God but I think that's just splitting hairs.

Also the statement that "The key factor in Christianity is not good acts" So totally untrue and incorrect, if your faith does not manifest itself in good works, your faith is dead. James 2 vv 20-26.

What comes first the faith and conversion experience or the good acts?

I do good acts sometimes, what differentiates me from a Christian that does good acts? I would suggest it's the faith and conversion experience and so this could be described as the key factor, nobody is suggesting Christians shouldn't engage in good acts though.

Christianity is 100% about personal responsibility! Not placing in all in the hands of your God.

I don't know what brand of Christianity you practice but in my extensive experience I've never come across any type of Christianity where this is the case.

Anyway if it were then you wouldn't need God now would you.

And this statement "Buddhism retains its power completely disassociated from history or any personage." What? Do you not believe that Buddha was a real historic character? Think things through before posting!!!.

It's irrelavent whether I believe that the Buddha lived was an historical fact or not. The Buddhist scriptures could have been written my a troop of intoxicated Baboons and it would make no difference. Buddhism is about me applying the practices and techniques here and now and seeing the results.

By contrast if Jesus the Son of God never came to the earth 2000 years ago and preached and died on the Cross for my sins then what's the point in me believing that Jesus the Son of God came to the earth and preached and died on the Cross for my sins? I might be inspired to good works but surely I could do that anyway.

And also, I ask, have you or any of the other posters with no idea about Christianity, actually read the bible with an open mind un-polluted by any orthodox prejudices?

Mods - can we reiterate that to denigrate Christianity is totally off-topic?

This particular thread is about conversion to Buddhism. We can't really talk about conversion to Buddhism without discussing what we converted from. Some of us may have converted from no religion but a lot of us have Christian influences in our past.

I for one spent 8 years deeply involved in a Pentacostal church in my younger days and I'm getting tired of being told I know nothing about Christianity.

Now your particular school may be different but here we are talking about what we have experienced as being common Christian belief and I think CuriousGeorge's post is on the money.

Yes I agree we digress into this topic a tad too much but it's no use crying to the mods, if what you read here offends you then don't read it, most of us are not being disrespectful just critical at times.

I don't know of any sources to point you to. Wat Pah Nanachaat might be a good place to contact as their branch monasteries in the West have established an order of Bhikkunis.

When did this noteworthy event take place? If they did they are pioneering unorthodox practice outside the Vinaya.

In the past I understand they did have 10 precept upasika like the dasa sil mata of sri lanka, but never bhikkuni.

I think officially they take thev 10 precepts but unofficially they practive the full 300 and something Bhikkuni precepts.

Thanks for the lively debate and my very best wishes for creating best from all experiences

Karma for me is a mystical and profound teacher !!

Thank you also for your input.

Kamma is certainly a teacher, I agree. I just don't think it's mystical or particularly profound as it's what we experience every day in the ordinariness of life.

I have to confess although I am not a follower of the Buddhist dharma. I have studied a little, but your ideas seem very limited about the nature of Buddha. How can you begin to concieve that Buddha was an ordinary man without considering the magnitude of the universal creation.

Creation is indeed magnitudinous as you say, but this is not the topic of this forum or thread. The Buddhas teaching is also magnitudinous because of the fact that ordinary people can become what the Buddha was. Now you can turn that to the other side of the coin as in your last paragraph and say we are already Buddhas and don't realise it but in the end that's just a different way of seeing the same thing.

He is ordinary providing you understand fully the ultimate achievement of a sentient sole. Like it or not in the final phases of this amazing achievement they get mastery of the universe including time. They have no boundaries at all in any shape or form. Any boundaries, any discriminatations, misunderstandings, or anything that is not perfectly balanced will prevent them from the ultimate. The body is just a cloak, all experiences and feelings are illusions to assist on the path.

It sounds like you must be pretty close to enlightenment yourself to know all that, BTW it's soul not sole.

I'm fully aware that my knowledge of life the universe and everything is very limited, but rather than muddy the waters with high sounding concepts and speculation about things beyond my understanding I'd rather stick with the things relevant to where I am on the Buddhas path. Hopefully I can explain what little I know in such a way that is useful to the readers on this forum.

Karma as far as Buddha is concerned including short sightedness and everything else conceivable within the framework of cause and effect is described perfectly by Buddha. How can Buddha’s teachings not be perfect? Surely it is the fault of the sentient being with the contracted and limited awareness that is at fault, not the teaching.

You'll have chapter and verse where the Buddha describes it perfectly at your fingertips then ready to quote?

Mind you I agree the Buddhas teaching as he gave it 2500 years ago would have been perfect and if you are alluding to the fact that when written down by sentient beings the message will have become distorted or embellished then we are in agreement.

This is one of the reasons why each of us need to walk the path of discovery ourselves rather than rely on the words of others no matter how spiritual they may sound.

There / was is nothing physical or meta physical that is not Buddha. If you dig into the philosophy and contemplate enough you will realise that you are and have always been a perfected Buddha but your limited awareness severely restricts your ability to realise this truth.

I must admit I like the Mahayana concept that we are already Buddhas and just need to realise it but as mentionmed earlier I just think it's the other side of the same coin that teaches Buddhahood is something we need to obtain. I think both are true but at the end of the day I'll never really know for sure until I get there.

[quote name='ani'

I've always been a bit confused about Luang Por Sodh. Is he part of the big Dhammakaya movement that has the huge Chedi north of Bangkok, and should probably be considered a cult, or is he quite seperate?

The website suggests they're one and the same.

If that's the case I'd steer well clear.

taking what I said in context, about influencing the future, I meant that the best laid plans and all that...the future is unknowable simply because you are not the only influence on that future - other peoples plans (and natural occuarances etc) make it unknowable - sure we can plan for it, we can save and hope the bank doesn't go tits up and loose all our money nor the currency devalued nor eaten up by inflation/taxes etc and thus can assume we will be comfortable in the future, it just a plan - our influence is mostly imagined (sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't - sometimes you win a roulette sometimes you don't, if you can tell me you can therefore influence the balls landing position, I know people that would be interested )[/font]

We are in total agreement here. As long as someone doesn't go to the other extreme and think that because there are so many variables that can affect my future it doesn't matter what I do, this seems to be the prevalining Thai attitude I think.

I'd like to ring in on this ... I'm a professional musician, and I've found that playing music can be the best meditation I've ever done. It has everything to do with knowing yourself, and know what you can do, what you can't do, and gradually erasing what you can't do. ...

Again IMHO, there are things learned mastering something that you just can't get as a jack-of-all trades. At very least, it is its own path. To be able to perform at a high level requires a high level of achievement along buddhist lines.

A very good point.

What you describe would be called in Buddhist terms as Samadhi. A strong positive step in training the heart and mind, though not the ultimate goal of Buddhism.

Is the affect of the intensity of your experience permanant or does it dissipate when you are no longer are practicing? Does it change you from the inside out or does it create a cocoon where the negativities or distractions don't bother you?

The next step is to use that Samadhi to develop the wisdom leading to permanant freedom.

I envy you that you have something that has helped you develop Samadhi because I think it will give you a good boost to your practice.

Big question but as you want proof then I would have to encourage you to plunge into the heavy waters of esoteric world. By far the most illuminating study I have made which covers absolutely everything conceivable and inconceivable is the Pratyabhijna-hrdayam by the Kashmiri sage Kshemaraja.

Sorry, I'm too busy trying to practice the Buddhas parth to awakening, I don't think I can afforc the luxury of sideshows.

Proof is all around you all the time but you don't see it. It is not for other people to prove to you.

It's very easy to make high sounding sweeping statements on life the universe and everything without backing them up because they are so high sounding they don't seem to need backing up. Of course anyone who doesn't agree is just "unable to see it".

All I ask is you to provide just one anecdote where you put your faith in an amulet, got a good result from it, and how you determined it was the amulet that did it.

If you can't do that I'd prefer you desist from high sounding sweeping statements on life the universe and everything and limit the discussion to the Buddhas teachings.

Therefore once a "thought" has been attached to an amulet or any other artefact (crystals are an excellent source of retaining magnetic fields) there is no reason according to quantum physicists why it wouldnt retain that energy over years or miles.

Quantum Physicists use this to describe the overwhelming prrof that placebos are mostly MORE effective than chemical drugs in the medical world. Once a belief (which is a strong thought) has manifested either mentally or verbally then the motions have been set for the body to respond to what is expected of it.

Fascinating!

So you are saying that the power of an amulet is the power of positive thinking, that this positive thinking has an affect on the atomic level on the object. Because you believe it will bring you good luck then it will, it's the placebo affect. Is that correct?

It sounds plausable. What concerns me is that it encourages spiritual immaturity, a reliance on an inanimate object to secure your good fortune is something most intelligent people grow out of when they are children.

How does it contribute to gaining freedom from greed, hatred, and delusion? How does it contribute to gaining freedom from suffering and liberation for yourself and others?

Do you know of a reference in the Pali Canon where the Buddha encouraged sucvh belief in an inaminate object?

hi ,i am a university student and i am now working on my seminar paper within the stratification topic.my plan is to deal with the structure of the sangha and i am very much intersted in the status of nuns in thailand and the fact that they cannot become bikkhuni.i am finding out more and more information about it ,and i would be happy if anyone can direct me to good information sources....

a question that i have is,as a practicing buddhist is there any problem with me dealing with this subject ? by things i have heard it is quite sensitive ,but as a woman and as a buddhist i am facinated with it.

thankyou

metta to you all

I don't know of any sources to point you to. Wat Pah Nanachaat might be a good place to contact as their branch monasteries in the West have established an order of Bhikkunis.

This topic might be sensitive to Thai people but not to others. Most westerners are keen to see Bhikkiunis have the same status as monks. In Burma and Sri Lankha the equivilent of the Mae Chee are more respected than in Thailand.

wat luang phor sodh at rajburi province is holding damakhaya meditaion workshops conducted by phra bart , an inspiring (and very funny ) american monk. thay have courses starting at the start and middle of the month but you can contact them and arrange a stay for a few days.

http://en.dhammakaya.org/index.php

good luck!

I've always been a bit confused about Luang Por Sodh. Is he part of the big Dhammakaya movement that has the huge Chedi north of Bangkok, and should probably be considered a cult, or is he quite seperate?

I am sure I have read and heard that Buddha, and previous Buddhas had full mastery of the the universe and were adept in all manner of yogic powers including creating new worlds. Now he was a sentient being lets not forget. Surely this is a God also.

Surely not, he was a man just like you and me.

This is the whole point of Buddhism, that the ultimate is achievable by ordinary men and women.

Now if you are saying that he became equal or higher than those that were considered gods at the time I don't have a problem with the idea, I think the scriptures support that.

I disagree with these points

You can not change your past

Please explain how I could change my past. I have several mistakes I'd like to reverse... in fact I'd be willing to offer you money.

I disagree with these points

You can do little to influence the future

Here I agree with you, everything you do now is influencing your future.

Spiritual healing, Reiki for instance in the more advanced practices deals with this alot. Various levels of consciouness also gross and subtle parts of the body are constantly undergoing healing. It is often important for the conscious / subconscious to undrestand the real reason they inherited a condition. I am not going into this in any detail. Some people will benefit from knowing the karmic cause and some don't need to know or will not benefit. The most important thing to undertand is that there is no one to blame - all past, current and future conditions are yours and yours alone.

I don't have a problem with the ideas put across here, they sound quite reasonable, what I'm not seeing is any proof. Without proof one wouldn't want to hold onto such a blind belief too tightly. Keeping an open mind is a good thing in Buddhist practice, to me that means there is no need to believe or disbelieve in such things.

If you want to fully understand Karma, it is very clearly defined within Buddhism.

On the contrary, there are several different interpretations in Theravadin circles, let alone other schools of Buddhism, one need only read this forum to get quite different views on the topic.

So I don't think it's well defined in Buddhism (I refer to the kamma across multiple lives idea here). The main reason for that in my opinion is the teachings the Buddha gave on the topic were in response to the prevailing belief in India at the time and other than that it's not an important part of the teaching.

What is an important part of the teaching is that every action I take now has a result, and it's the intention behind the action that's the key. This where the rubber hits the road, not in my previous life when I was Shirley Maclaines butler.

As I say, others may see it differently.

Amulets work with subtle energies which modern science chooses not to explore, except perhaps a little in quantum physics.

I'm sorry but statements like this are meaningless unless you have proof.

So lets have the proof then.

It is common currency in many ancient and occult arenas.

Hardly a ringing endorsement.

Everyone has a passion. Yours might be painting. Each passion will probably be tested out. Each individual should make there own choices about what they do. The universe is limitless, all limitations come from a lack of understanding truth. If you want to learn more about this kind of thing from a Buddhist perspective, you might look at Vajrayana and the supporting tantras.

Yes but what's it in aid of?

In terms of the four noble truths and the noble eightfold path where does it get you?

Following your passion sounds kind of fun, but it sounds more like a spritual dead end to me, a distraction from what the Buddha would have you do, remember the handful of leaves.

If you understand the limitlessness of the universe but still don't understand your own heart you've got nothing, other than perhaps interesting topics to discuss at cocktail parties.

It is better to understand where you came from so that you get a clearer picture of where you are going, not withstanding the need to be aware of the present.. Buddhism is disparate to some degree and the vast array of Indian philiosophies cover everything and are often contracdictory. But one thing is true - There is unity in diversity, everyone has to find there own way. Don't forget also that Buddhism is an Indian philosophy.

Ok then. I've got a birth defect, I'm short sighted. Where did it come from? Both of my parents are short sighted so I think that's more than coincidental don't you. Is that Kamma? Who knows? Who cares? Knowing whether it is or isn't won't help me see a clearer picture of where I'm going... spectacles will.

So I'd be interested in someone explaining an example of how knowing the kammic causes of something you were born with you would get a clearer picture of where you are going, and how you could prove that was not merely speculation.

My belief, as a Buddhist, but also as a sentient being that can think for themself, is that we are here for a reason - the life bit is not as important as we think; in as much as a single piece of a 10000 piece jigsaw isn't important that is. We pass through many lives and make many errors and, hopefully, learn something. Some lives will be 'easy' other 'less easy' - the aim is to move forward. How can we judge a single life - is it really about 'blame' for being 'bad' in a earlier life (quote Hoddle!) - a punishment? a chance to make up for it? I think neither, I think its just the next set of lessons we need to learn to move us towards enlightenment.

Just me 2 satang.

True. The Buddhas teaching on Kamma (at least the affect part) is about being aware that everything you do now affects your future, it's not about speculating how you got where you are now. The latter may be the case with other Indian philosophies and perhaps that's where the confusion come from.

Quite subjective on the basic level and not obvious usually. There is a science behind it but it is not for the faint hearted. If you make a study of shamanism, tantrism or magick. Try to appreciate the state of universal consciousness then some can affect this state with various methods.

So the question arises... why bother?

I think we should avoid references to Christianity on this thread. It is obvious that few, if any, have a real understanding of Christianity. As a previous poster said (garro, I think?) I would'nt go to the Sports section and start commenting on sport - I know nothing about sport! So please, don't start pontificating on Christianity when you know so little and obviously care even less.

I think it's fine to draw on ones past experiences with religion to compare and contrast it with Buddhism on this forum.

For most of us that's Christianity, now that may have been Catholic, Protestant, Pentecostal, Quaker, Mormon, JW, you name it.

I don't think there needs to be any requirement that this conform to correct theology according to the version of Christianity that Suegha follows, as long it adds to the discussion of Buddhism (which isn't always the case, granted).

Wow, some genuine Bhuddhists.

My understanding was that one is born into the life and that conversions really aren't encouraged. Only two religions that I know of where they don't proslytize and they try to discourage folks from joining - Bhuddism and Judaism.

Seems a bit snooty to me. That's why I'm a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, where we welcome all.

It isn't necessary to convert if one wishes to practice the Buddhas path, I'm not even sure how someone would be considered to have "converted".

In fact you can continue to belong to ones original religion if you want to.

As long as the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster are fine with that too you should have no problems.

Do you judge Christianity by the actions of those countries or activities of their citizens?

Actually, I do. Religion installs core believes and values in citiziens. In the west these values are undeniably of Christian origin, even if the people have stopped practicing.

If there's no connectin between religion and societies this thread would be meaningless in the first place.

"Thailand and Thai culture is a model of what Buddhism teaches" - actions speak louder than words. Thailand is an example of how it works out in real life with real people, not on centruries old manuscripts.

I won't deny that Christianity has been a large influence on western culture and the way we think. Nowadays though the vast majority of westerners have no interest in it

Thailand is an example of how religion gets corrupted and distorted over time, as would the West be also if we hadn't gone beyond it into secularism.

Much of what we see in Thai Buddhism bears little relation to the original teachings. The most popular form of Chritianity in the West is all about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and what we see in modern popular Thai Buddhism is on the same level.

First off, I would like to say that I think the moderators on the Buddhist part of the forum do a great job. I have gotten a lot of useful information here and found out about areas of Buddhism which I might not have come across. It was from this site that I came across the teachings of Ajahn Teean and I will always be grateful for that. At the time I was worried about makining progress as a layman and his story was exactly what I needed to hear.

I have just noticed that a lot of the threads on this section end up turning into debates on comparitive religion. I do think that there is a need for this debate but not on so many threads. Would it be possible for their to be a sub-section for comparitive religion and then can the rest of this part of Thaivisa be related purely to Buddhist topics?I sometimes only want to find out about Buddhist opinion as I don't have the time or the energy to think about the views of all belief systems. I also find the arguing very tiring. What do you think?

Are things fine the way they are and there is no point in fixing something that isn't broken? Would this cause too much extra work for the moderators? Am I being too intolerant and un-Buddhist for suggesting that the material on the Buddhist section should be more Buddhist related?

I understand why you feel that way, but Thaivisa is about Thailand and the only reason there is a Buddhism forum is that it's the prevalent religion, also Buddhism is one of the things that attracts westerners to Thailand, well a few.

Surely there are comparative religion forums, and Christian forums etc out there. If you want specialist Buddhist advice there are good forums on that too.

I enjoy the wide variety of viewpoints here.

... capitalism/consumerism is the antitheses of Buddhism...

Is it?

In what way? I'm thinking about how a Buddhist country, Thailand, is the most capitalistic of it's muslim/christian neighbours. Low taxes, no social services, non-existing charities, largest income gap in the region.

In Thai interpretation of Buddhism individuals are disconnected from each other, every one is on his own, karma doesn't work on a society level. Merit making is not aimed at improving a society but rather for personal gains in the next life. Hardly a case for socialism or compassion.

Thailand is no more a Buddhist country than England or the USA is a Christian country. Do you judge Christianity by the actions of those countries or activities of their citizens? of course not.

If you think Thailand and Thai culture is a model of what Buddhism teaches then you obviously haven't been paying attention.

Please try again.