True and Proper Buddhist teaching

[grobec]

I guess Buddhism is only a path like any other that one can choose to follow or not.
Hiding behind any theology does not excuse inhumane action.
We do live in a relative world where others may or may not share our sense of right or wrong. In fact under certain circumstances we all can stray, hence the term regret.
Unfortunately it is hard to fight guns with only prayer.

Coincidently I am writing this at Bodhgaya and one hour ago I was sitting under the Bodhi tree at the
Mahabodhi Temple.
Was crowded but peaceful.



Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Rancid]

Most religions have their exoteric versions for the common man and their esoteric versions for their initiates, and there are reasons for it. Often things are said said using analogies so that two people at different levels will see a different meaning. Thailand has its own version of Buddhism and as most know it also involves animism and other modifications.

 

It is indeed ironic watching those praying at temples for material acquisition, something completely contrary to Buddhism. Even in Tibet there are many sects and views, in fact sexual tantras are often practiced, and endorsed by surprising people, hardly something most would associate with pure Buddhism. The ideas behind Buddhism have been around for a long time, even before Gautama Buddha.

 

Regardless, Thais at least are closer to the truth than those that practice many other religions. Nirvana of course is not an easy path, however each positive step we take in any life moves us closer to that ideal. Nirvana is not necessarily the end end of the journey, some do choose to renounce it for later.

[jamesc2000]

Is it OK to kill to protect Buddhism?

 

What an interesting question.

 

I think Buddhism only has 5 precepts and one of them is not killing. As far as I know there is no precepts on the importance of protecting Buddhism by killing people.

 

Buddhism is just a body of knowledge. Very useful and valuable knowledge but just a body of knowledge.

 

What is there to protect? Buddhism doesn't even exist according to Science. According to Science for something to exist it much have energy or contain matter. Buddhism has neither and but by that definition Science also doesn't exist as Science too has no energy and contain no matter. Anyway energy also cannot be created or destroyed but can just change from one form to another.

 

Buddhism is knowledge like the knowledge of gravity. If all the books on gravity is lost, one day someone sitting under a tree and an apple will drop on his head and he will go Ahh lets call that gravity.

 

So if all the temples and books on Buddhism was destroyed all knowledge lost, one day someone sitting under a tree and going into meditation will go wow that meditation has something to it. 

 

And if his name is John Smith or Joe Bloggs that we will have a new body of knowledge called Smithism or Bloggism.

 

Anyway Buddhism has something to do with less ego and I guess the ultimate act of the ego is to kill someone. And the ultimate act of less ego is to give your life to save someone else. 

 

So killing someone seems to me couldn't be more opposite to Buddhism as Buddhism is like loving kindness or something like that.

 

Its like someone eating only meat and telling everyone they are vegetarian.

 

It really couldn't be more opposite.

 

????

[jamesc2000]

I guess as Buddhism and killing is so opposite there must numerous funny examples.

 

I think Buddhism believe in rebirth so what good is killing anyone?

 

They will just get reborn and come back again.

 

What a waste of effort. Instead of preaching all that killing they should try some of that meditating stuff.

 

????

[Laza 45]

On 12/26/2017 at 3:21 PM, madusa said:

I wonder why the Sangha(the highest authority on Buddhism in Thailand)  is not doing anything to change the situation.

...The Sangha is the Buddhist community.. not the highest authority..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sangha

 

[rockyysdt]

1 hour ago, Laza 45 said:

...The Sangha is the Buddhist community.. not the highest authority..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sangha

 

You can attach to the literal meaning of the word "Sangha", or you can have awareness of those in power.

 

I suspect the meaning of the word "Sangha" and the reality of how the "Sangha" functions in the world are not synonymous.

 

It's not like the Buddhist community (all of them) have regular meetings where they discuss and vote on issues.

 

That leaves those at the top of the hierarchy who end up calling the shots.

 

And, finally, is Buddism about democracy, or is it about awareness of what there is to be aware of???

Edited January 19, 2020 by rockyysdt

[Laza 45]

1 hour ago, rockyysdt said:

You can attach to the literal meaning of the word "Sangha", or you can have awareness of those in power.

 

I suspect the meaning of the word "Sangha" and the reality of how the "Sangha" functions in the world are not synonymous.

 

It's not like the Buddhist community (all of them) have regular meetings where they discuss and vote on issues.

 

That leaves those at the top of the hierarchy who end up calling the shots.

 

And, finally, is Buddism about democracy, or is it about awareness of what there is to be aware of???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Patriarch_of_Thailand

 

..Oh.. it is spelled Buddhism... 

[rockyysdt]

14 minutes ago, Laza 45 said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Patriarch_of_Thailand

 

..Oh.. it is spelled Buddhism... 

I wonder if he's Awakened?

[spidermike007]

In my opinion the most difficult part of any spiritual practice is the inner work. The sincere prayer, and the hours spent in contemplation and meditation. 
 

Regardless of the religion, the masses are simply unwilling to devote themselves to this. And the Thais are particularly ill suited to contemplation and meditation, as it requires one to look within for the source of the problem and to introspect. 

 

So, it is far easier to simply practice exterior rituals, never do any of the far more important inner work, and convince yourself that you are a devout soul. That is what the vast majority of the world's so called religious people do. 

[VincentRJ]

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

In my opinion the most difficult part of any spiritual practice is the inner work. The sincere prayer, and the hours spent in contemplation and meditation. 
 

Regardless of the religion, the masses are simply unwilling to devote themselves to this. And the Thais are particularly ill suited to contemplation and meditation, as it requires one to look within for the source of the problem and to introspect. 

 

So, it is far easier to simply practice exterior rituals, never do any of the far more important inner work, and convince yourself that you are a devout soul. That is what the vast majority of the world's so called religious people do. 

I tend to agree. It's all a matter of personal priorities. If there's strong evidence that regular exercise will help you live longer and be healthier, why isn't everyone doing it? Probably because other activities, such as cooking meals, cleaning the house, watching one's favourite program on TV and movies, checking all one's emails regularly, and/or posts on Facebook and Twitter, and constantly answering messages on one's iPhone, are considered to be more important. No time for an hour's walk or a jog in the park every day.

 

Same applies to meditating, which is basically sitting down and doing nothing for a period of time, with iPhone switched off. ????

[Laza 45]

If you are interested in Buddhism in Thailand a good place to start is with the history of SE Asia..  Thai Buddhism is a product of that history.  In ancient times a diverse animist culture prevailed and still does in some ethnic groups and some animist beliefs and practices survive in Thailand's Theravada Buddhism today.    Hinduism which began approximately 1500 BCE prevailed over virtually all of SE Asia and Indonesia from the 1st to 5th centuries CE. Buddhism is considered an offshoot of Hinduism developed by Ashoka (268 to 232 BCE) and entered SE Asia in the 1st 2nd and 3rd centuries CE.. While Hinduism prevailed during this period Buddhism gradually took over.  What is now Thailand was dominated by the Khmer empire which initially was Hindu.  In some Thai Wats you will still see representation of the Hindu deities such as Ganesh,Hanuman, Vishnu & Phra Mae Thorani ..the water goddess... amongst others. 

 

 'True and proper Buddhism' in Thailand  cannot be considered without consideration of this history.  It is not a tidy and easily defined and packaged commodity.  It is what it is and contains many aspects that someone with a purist illusion would find incompatible.   Much like Christianity really...

 

It is a very complicated history and my potted version here does not do it justice.  For anyone interested there are many links to be found with simple Google searches..  Here are a few that have interested me..

https://www.google.com/search?q=Ashaoka+when+did+he+live&rlz=1C1GGRV_enTH748TH748&oq=Ashaoka+when+did+he+live&aqs=chrome..69i57.6928j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_in_Southeast_Asia

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_in_Southeast_Asia

 

 

 

[spidermike007]

2 hours ago, Laza 45 said:

If you are interested in Buddhism in Thailand a good place to start is with the history of SE Asia..  Thai Buddhism is a product of that history.  In ancient times a diverse animist culture prevailed and still does in some ethnic groups and some animist beliefs and practices survive in Thailand's Theravada Buddhism today.    Hinduism which began approximately 1500 BCE prevailed over virtually all of SE Asia and Indonesia from the 1st to 5th centuries CE. Buddhism is considered an offshoot of Hinduism developed by Ashoka (268 to 232 BCE) and entered SE Asia in the 1st 2nd and 3rd centuries CE.. While Hinduism prevailed during this period Buddhism gradually took over.  What is now Thailand was dominated by the Khmer empire which initially was Hindu.  In some Thai Wats you will still see representation of the Hindu deities such as Ganesh,Hanuman, Vishnu & Phra Mae Thorani ..the water goddess... amongst others. 

 

 'True and proper Buddhism' in Thailand  cannot be considered without consideration of this history.  It is not a tidy and easily defined and packaged commodity.  It is what it is and contains many aspects that someone with a purist illusion would find incompatible.   Much like Christianity really...

 

It is a very complicated history and my potted version here does not do it justice.  For anyone interested there are many links to be found with simple Google searches..  Here are a few that have interested me..

https://www.google.com/search?q=Ashaoka+when+did+he+live&rlz=1C1GGRV_enTH748TH748&oq=Ashaoka+when+did+he+live&aqs=chrome..69i57.6928j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_in_Southeast_Asia

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_in_Southeast_Asia

 

 

 

All that is fine and accurate, but it does not answer why the vast majority of the Thai people completely reject the core of Buddha's teaching, when they totally refuse to engage in contemplation, meditation, introspection, self analysis, penance, modesty, and anything more than rote and very brief prayer.

Edited January 20, 2020 by spidermike007

[rockyysdt]

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

All that is fine and accurate, but it does not answer why the vast majority of the Thai people completely reject the core of Buddha's teaching, when they totally refuse to engage in contemplation, meditation, introspection, self analysis, penance, modesty, and anything more than rote and very brief prayer.

 

My thoughts are that it's quite clear why the majority of Thai people (and indeed all people), completely reject the core of Buddha's teaching, when they totally refuse to engage in contemplation, meditation, introspection, self analysis, penance, modesty, and anything more than rote and very brief prayer.

 

It relates to expending effort and altering ones life habits and beliefs.

 

"Habits" are like approaching the event horizon of a black hole.

It's extremely difficult to overcome the pull towards ones acquired habits and beliefs.

Some psychologists are saying that one's habits remain with us for life and the only known way of breaking from them is by creating new habits which are stronger.

 

The three afflictions are Greed, Aversion, & Delusion.

So, with Thais (as with us all), it will be one or all of these.

 

 

Edited January 20, 2020 by rockyysdt

[spidermike007]

12 minutes ago, rockyysdt said:

 

My thoughts are that it's quite clear why the majority of Thai people (and indeed all people), completely reject the core of Buddha's teaching, when they totally refuse to engage in contemplation, meditation, introspection, self analysis, penance, modesty, and anything more than rote and very brief prayer.

 

It relates to expending effort and altering ones life habits and beliefs.

 

"Habits" are like approaching the event horizon of a black hole.

It's extremely difficult to overcome the pull towards ones acquired habits and beliefs.

Some psychologists are saying that one's habits remain with us for life and the only known way of breaking from them is by creating new habits which are stronger.

 

The three afflictions are Greed, Aversion, & Delusion.

So, with Thais (as with us all), it will be one or all of these.

 

 

Good point. And good habits could be referred to as discipline. Alot of people are somewhat revolted by the idea of maintaining personal discipline within their own lives.  Those same people rail against others who are not behaving as they think they should. But, to look within? To take responsibility? Heaven forbid. 

[DaveK68]

The most admirable quality of Buddhism that I've noted is its lack of the overbearing dogmatism that dominates the religions of the West. 

I would not arrogate to myself the authority to tell others how they should relate to and practice Buddhism. That path leads to the madness of inquisitions, mass forced conversions on pain of death, and organizations such as the Taliban, al Qaeda and ISIS. 

Buddhism is almost always merged with local cultures, customs and mores. 

Why would I force my idea of Buddhism upon those who think and believe differently than I do?

Isn't the whole idea behind Buddhism a leaving of attachment. Yet, now we advocate for an attaching to dogma and ideology. 

I feel the same way about those who rail against Buddhist tattooes and the like. The "Buddha is not your ornament." mentality.

I call these folks The Budiban. They would persecute those who disagree with them. The whole idea is anathema to everything that I've read about the Buddha, Buddhism and the Way.

 

[DaveK68]

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

All that is fine and accurate, but it does not answer why the vast majority of the Thai people completely reject the core of Buddha's teaching, when they totally refuse to engage in contemplation, meditation, introspection, self analysis, penance, modesty, and anything more than rote and very brief prayer.

 Can the mind of a "vast majority" of any people be known?

[rockyysdt]

55 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Good point. And good habits could be referred to as discipline. Alot of people are somewhat revolted by the idea of maintaining personal discipline within their own lives.  Those same people rail against others who are not behaving as they think they should. But, to look within? To take responsibility? Heaven forbid. 

Basically, through natural selection, humans have evolved to be social beings.

In order to survive, the genes those genetically and environmentally predisposed to behave in a way which ensures their acceptance in a group, will proliferate.

The genes of those who were ostracized would diminish over time.

 

In order to fit in there are strong forces to conform.

Even those who rebel against conventions are conforming within a sub group or hieracrchy.

Their unifying stance against old ways, is a form of conforming.

 

If some rail against others who are not behaving as they think they should, then this is an illustration of what happens to those who don't conform.

 

As individuals, attempting to practice Buddhism with discipline is an uphill battle as we must overcome diversions which our modern digital age makes available to us.

 

Edited January 20, 2020 by rockyysdt

[spidermike007]

28 minutes ago, DaveK68 said:

 Can the mind of a "vast majority" of any people be known?

Hard to say. But can you dispute this statement?

 

"totally refuse to engage in contemplation, meditation, introspection, self analysis, penance"

 

Really. How many Thais have you encountered who are able to engage in introspection, or taking responsibility for the problems they have created? It sometimes feels like the polar opposite of this is the case.

Edited January 20, 2020 by spidermike007

[Laza 45]

9 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

All that is fine and accurate, but it does not answer why the vast majority of the Thai people completely reject the core of Buddha's teaching, when they totally refuse to engage in contemplation, meditation, introspection, self analysis, penance, modesty, and anything more than rote and very brief prayer.

Well.. there are many answers to your questions.. and I certainly don't have them all.. Like people everywhere Thai people are mainly just trying to make ends meet.. like people everywhere they are caught up in Maya.. not a lot different from Christians or Muslims in that respect..  There is a slight difference though in my eyes.. Buddhism pervades Thai culture in subtle ways & some not so subtle..  I think Thais appreciate the way of the Buddha and show their understanding by supporting the Wats so that those who want to embark on a spiritual journey may do so.  Of course there is a cynical view that they only do so to 'make merit' and there are many monks that do not walk the walk.. Still.. I believe there is something deeply spiritual in their belief.  Many do go on retreats and follow their own spiritual path.  I see this in some of my Thai friends.  Some like my wife live their belief without a thought.. she is a Buddhist through and through in everything she does...but she doesn't meditate or do any of the practices that many westerners think a Buddhist should do.. she IS a Buddhist.. 

[rockyysdt]

On 1/20/2020 at 10:53 PM, Laza 45 said:

Some like my wife live their belief without a thought.. she is a Buddhist through and through in everything she does...but she doesn't meditate or do any of the practices that many westerners think a Buddhist should do.. she IS a Buddhist.. 

My understanding is that the term "Buddhist" was never coined by the Buddha and has been made up and adjusted over the years.

 

I thought that the main aim of Siddhartha Gautama's teaching was "the truth of the cause of suffering, the truth of the end of suffering, and the truth of the path that leads to the end of suffering", culminating in the state of Nirvana.

 

Further,  the ultimate benefit of adhering to the precepts (minimum of 5), is that influences and obstacles which may impede progress to ones goal are reduced.

 

Although the world would be a far better place if everyone lived their life adhering to these precepts, in themselves, they can't yield the goal Siddhartha Gautama was teaching.

 

 

Unfortunately most people who profess to be Buddhist continue to live their lives around a "religion" loosely based on some elements of what Siddhartha Gautama taught.

 

A major consequence of this is that many may reject Siddhartha Gautama's teachings by association with Buddhist practices, or more accurately, malpractices.

Edited January 27, 2020 by rockyysdt

[jamesc2000]

Who are we to say what is true Buddhism?

 

Maybe to them they are practising true Buddhism?

Just like all Christians are practising true Christianity and all Muslims practice true Islam?

 

Have you ever met a Buddhist claiming to practice fake Buddhism or a Muslim claiming to practice fake Islam or a Christian practising fake Christianity?

 

Anyway if a person is practising true Buddhism will he or she even think about whether other people are practising true or fake Buddhism?

 

????

 

So is practising true Buddhism about being smug that I practice true Buddhism and other people do not?

[VincentRJ]

12 hours ago, jamesc2000 said:

Who are we to say what is true Buddhism?

 

Maybe to them they are practising true Buddhism?

Just like all Christians are practising true Christianity and all Muslims practice true Islam?

 

Have you ever met a Buddhist claiming to practice fake Buddhism or a Muslim claiming to practice fake Islam or a Christian practising fake Christianity?

 

Anyway if a person is practising true Buddhism will he or she even think about whether other people are practising true or fake Buddhism?

 

????

 

So is practising true Buddhism about being smug that I practice true Buddhism and other people do not?

Hello James,

It's understandable in this age when so many different opinions on so many different issues can be expressed so easily on Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, and the Media in general, that a lot of doubt and skepticism can exist as to what is the most valid opinion on any issue, whether religion or not.

 

Fortunately, this issue was addressed by the Buddha long before the internet existed. A group of villagers known as the 'Kalamas' had experienced many different preachers or Gurus passing through their village, each giving different advice and claiming that their 'opinion' was the true one, and that the villagers should ignore other Gurus with contradictory advice.

 

When the Buddha arrived at the village, the elders mentioned this predicament they were in, of not being able to decide which Guru was providing the best advice, and therefore asked why they should accept the advice of the Buddha. 

 

The Buddha agreed that the villagers had reason to be doubtful because of so many different views from different teachers, or gurus, or ascetics, who had passed through their village, and he took this into consideration when delivering his speech to them, which is now known as the Kalama Sutta. Here's an extract.

 

The criterion for acceptance
 

"Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' 

 

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them."

 

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/kalama1.htm

[rockyysdt]

5 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them."

 

Hi Vincent.

 

The only caveat to this criterion is that one must devote ones entire life (or perhaps lives) towards conscientious practice before one can arrive at "knowing"!

 

In other words, considerable faith is needed.

 

Rocky

 

[VincentRJ]

2 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

Hi Vincent.

 

The only caveat to this criterion is that one must devote ones entire life (or perhaps lives) towards conscientious practice before one can arrive at "knowing"!

 

In other words, considerable faith is needed.

 

Rocky

 

Hi Rocky,
I interpret 'knowing' in this context as 'accepting that something is true as a result of personal experiences and observations', as a starting point, rather than mere faith as a starting point.

 

The fact that the Kalamas had questioned the Buddha on these religious issues implies that they were thoughtful people. 
After the Buddha listed the criteria for rejection and acceptance, he provided some examples of things one should avoid, such as greed, hate, and delusion, and asked the Kalamas if these conditions of greed, hate and delusion were harmful or beneficial.

 

Their reply was 'harmful', of course. However, I suspect that some people might not 'know for themselves' that such conditions are harmful. For example, some people might think that greed for food, which makes them obese, is beneficial and makes them happy. Pictures of the 'Laughing Buddha' might confirm this view that greed for food is beneficial. ????

 

Some people might think that 'hating' whatever deserves to be hated, such as poisonous snakes, could be beneficial. Others might also think that 'delusion' could be beneficial, in circumstances where the 'reality' or 'truth' is too stressful to bear.

 

The main message in the Kalama Sutta, as I see it, is to encourage thoughtful reasoning and introspection, as opposed to 'specious reasoning' and automatic acceptance of all authority.
 

[jamesc2000]

Is it possible that everything in life leads us to awaking?

 

Right decisions and mistakes are detours that all lead us to the same place?

 

No mistakes means no opportunity for learning.

 

Is it possible that there is only one perfect number and the number is 0.

 

Everything is all about being better, or achieving more, more spiritual knowledge, more advance practice in mediation, more more more.

 

More just leads to more and more.

 

Surely the answer is less is better. Less ego, less feeling of superiority, less one up man ship, less feeling of mine is the true practice of Buddhism and other people just go through the motions.

 

If people are deluded life will undelude them but it will take time. But does time really exist? Maybe there is no time and there is only now. Maybe because we are deluded we have the concept of time.

 

So if there is no time and there is only now then lets not rush people to awaking as they can take all the time in the world.

 

Then there is the uncertainty principle. We really don't know anything but we all think we know and we all think we are right but maybe we really don't know.

 

If we are really deluded that means we even have to be more careful about thinking we know and are right.

 

Maybe the only we will ever know is direct experience but the more you want to know it might make it harder because it has been said here there is no you and if this true then there is no you to know.

 

????

 

The difficulty understanding and complications makes it very cool.  

[rockyysdt]

On 2/6/2020 at 7:53 PM, VincentRJ said:

Hi Rocky,
I interpret 'knowing' in this context as 'accepting that something is true as a result of personal experiences and observations', as a starting point, rather than mere faith as a starting point.

 

The fact that the Kalamas had questioned the Buddha on these religious issues implies that they were thoughtful people. 
After the Buddha listed the criteria for rejection and acceptance, he provided some examples of things one should avoid, such as greed, hate, and delusion, and asked the Kalamas if these conditions of greed, hate and delusion were harmful or beneficial.

 

Their reply was 'harmful', of course. However, I suspect that some people might not 'know for themselves' that such conditions are harmful. For example, some people might think that greed for food, which makes them obese, is beneficial and makes them happy. Pictures of the 'Laughing Buddha' might confirm this view that greed for food is beneficial. ????

 

Some people might think that 'hating' whatever deserves to be hated, such as poisonous snakes, could be beneficial. Others might also think that 'delusion' could be beneficial, in circumstances where the 'reality' or 'truth' is too stressful to bear.

 

The main message in the Kalama Sutta, as I see it, is to encourage thoughtful reasoning and introspection, as opposed to 'specious reasoning' and automatic acceptance of all authority.
 

Hi Vincent.

 

When I look at Buddhism, I don't just see the journey, but I see the ultimate goal, Awakening.

 

How can one "know for themselves" Awakening?

 

Why would one embark on a very demanding lifestyle and practice if there is no "know for themselves"?

 

Further, isn't thoughtful reasoning and introspection coloured to varying degrees, due to each individuals conditioning?

Wouldn't such reasoning and introspection be tainted by each individuals degree of greed, hate, and delusion?

 

Things, such as reasoning before acting, to avoid greed, hate, and delusion, can also be achieved through ethical living.

 

Why the Buddhist path unless there is more?

 

 

Doesn't that bring us back to the need for quite a lot of faith, for without it how can one possibly embark on immense sustained effort (specific practice), in order to work towards attaining a level of "knowing for oneself"?

 

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by rockyysdt

[ThaiBunny]

On 2/6/2020 at 11:17 PM, jamesc2000 said:

Is it possible that there is only one perfect number and the number is 0

'42' surely?

[jamesc2000]

10 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

Hi Vincent.

 

When I look at Buddhism, I don't just see the journey, but I see the ultimate goal, Awakening.

 

How can one "know for themselves" Awakening?

 

Why would one embark on a very demanding lifestyle and practice if there is no "know for themselves"?

 

Further, isn't thoughtful reasoning and introspection coloured to varying degrees, due to each individuals conditioning?

Wouldn't such reasoning and introspection be tainted by each individuals degree of greed, hate, and delusion?

 

Things, such as reasoning before acting, to avoid greed, hate, and delusion, can also be achieved through ethical living.

 

Why the Buddhist path unless there is more?

 

 

Doesn't that bring us back to the need for quite a lot of faith, for without it how can one possibly embark on immense sustained effort (specific practice), in order to work towards attaining a level of "knowing for oneself"?

 

 

The beauty of Buddhism is that its a science. Provable and repeatable.

 

Sure many "Buddhists" see it as a religion with the faith aspect. Like believing a Buddha amulet will protect them from a bullet.

 

Buddhism is exactly not faith based as no one says just believe I have all the truth and you will never understand the truth but just do what you are told.

 

Buddhism is all about try for yourself and if its not for you move on to something that is.

 

I can only guess that if a person is awaken the last thing they would want to be is greedy, selfish, hateful etc.

 

If you see monks womanising, getting drunk, hoarding money then its because they are not awakened.

 

I think Buddhism also talks about reincarnation so if this life you do a bit and get tired next life you can do a bit more if that's what you want.

 

I don't think time or lives is a constraint.

 

????  

[jamesc2000]

10 hours ago, ThaiBunny said:

'42' surely?

Hehe I am partial to 69 myself.

 

????

[jamesc2000]

Most people don't even have the slightest urge to want to be awaken.

 

They are too busy getting on with their lives.

 

For people that even think about it is really wonderful.

 

????