The problem with all religions

[VincentRJ]

One of the attractions of Buddhism for me is its spirit of enquiry, which unfortunately often tends to get buried under a heap of rituals and mindless incantations.

I've often thought I would like to experience the life of a Bikkhu in Thailand, for a period. Wat Pah Nanachat near Ubon Rachathani is an option I have considered because there are lots of Westerners there who speak English.

However, what troubles me is what I see as a mindless conformity to ritual, although perhaps this is an illusion on my part. I'm confident I can survive on one meal a day, but it goes against the grain to eat such a meal at a specific and regular time each day, as though I'm an automaton. I eat when I'm hungry and I'm very particular about the wholesomeness of the food I eat. White rice is a 'no-no'. I'm sure the Buddha did not eat white rice.

Shaving one's face and head regularly also seems foolish to me. I understand perfectly that it might have been very a very good practice during the time of Gautama Buddha to shave for hygenic reasons. Lice was probably a major problem in those days.

I'm reminded of the mythical explanation for the presence of so many monkeys at the temple of Swayambhunath in Kathmandu. At first I thought that the local population would consider the monkeys as reincarnations of their Great Grandmothers.

However, a search on the internet revealed that the monkeys are holy because Manjushree, the Bodhisattva of wisdom and learning who raised the hill on which the Swayambhunath Temple stands, allowed his hair to grow long, and as a consequence head lice grew. It is said that the head lice transformed, or were reincarnated into these monkeys.

It's a charming story which highlights the impotance of hygiene. However, nowadays, with general access to clean water and soap, even amongst monks, there should no longer be a reason of hygiene to shave one's face and head. Whenever I've posed the question to monks, why do they shave their face and head so meticulously, they replied along the lines that it is to avoid concerns of vanity.

This explanation simply doesn't ring true to me. If you are not concerned about vanity, then just let your hair and beard grow. You will eventually look very unappealing to the opposite sex.

This brings me to the problem with religions in general. At the time they were formulated and the principles laid down, there were probably good, practical reasons for certain practices. Don't eat pork because pigs are so frequently diseased. Shave your head and beard in order to avoid getting lice, and so on.

But times have changed. Modern man is privy to new facts and knowledge which neither the Buddha, nor Jesus, nor Mohammed were aware of. Circumstances have changed and therefore, if we are sensible, our practices should change accordingly.

Comments are welcome, but judging from the dynamic interaction on this section of the forum in the past couple of days, I'm not holding my breath. (Although I do occasionally contemplate on my breath ).

[daveAustin]

'problem with all religions' is it turns, or tries to turn, people into sheeple. Though more a philosophy and somewhat attractive in principle, the problem with Buddhism in Thailand for me is the way it is misconstrued by the vast majority that purport to be Buddhist, but tend to miss the teachings of the Buddha by a country mile. The lengths that many natives go to to make up on merit for their consistent wrongdoings is hypocritical in the extreme and seems to go beyond the level of hypocrisy of what your average, non-practicing Christian might indulge... though I guess we're touching on social conditioning, and also not to suggest that the one is better than the other.

With your examples above, I think it is more a case of 'this is how we've always done it' and nobody would have the stones to want to change things up, which again goes against the 'tenets' of Buddhism somewhat because they are all desiring to conform.

Man is indeed a fallible, fragile beast.

[rockyysdt]

Hi Vincent.

I am not an expert in the field but can put forward some thoughts from my experience and past readings.

The benefit of being a Bikkhu allows you the privilege of focusing your resource and energy to full time practice.

Things like abode, & food, being taken care of.

In the 21st century, those who have taken steps to ensure their future (pension, home ownership, family support base, medical insurance, welfare) may find they have sufficient support in order to devote themselves to practice without the need to ordain.

Your only other need is to have the appropriate teachers/guides along your path.

This can be accessed via Buddhist forums, and retreat establishments.

Also there are a number of guides who will appear over time.

I'm confident that such guides have appeared on this very forum.

Ordaining as a Bikkhu in a quality Sangha may have the added benefit of isolation from the temptation of modern life with its many traps.

In terms of eating once a day, I found that after attending a number of retreats, eating once daily is the optimal way to go.

I found that anything more than one meal a day, especially when practicing long sits and generally slowing down, easily led to feelings of being bloated, sluggish and sleepy.

Whilst on retreat, I became very mindful/aware of my digestive system and its impact on my being, feelings and thoughts.

I broke the process into three stages.

• Ingestion.
• Assimilation (digestion).
• Elimination.

Digestion uses up a lot of energy.

Eating once a day allows one to limit such sluggish, sleepy torpid states.

Many of us live largely unaware of digestions impact on us, but it when engaged in continous mindfulness, this is amplified.

Also, until elimination takes place, ones concentration can be hampered.

I found that quality elimination leads to a lightness of body and mind which enhances concentration and leads to deeper levels of stilling the mind.

If one is constantly in a state of pre elimination (multiple main meals) then ones level of practice takes second place/ is hampered.

I definitely found a single meal a day was greatly beneficial to my levels of concentration and ability to focus.

Focus on my posture, on my breath and subsequently stillness of mind.

For me the resultant experience exponentially outweighed any attachment I have to the delights food.

In terms of brown/white rice, eating well is good, but occasional dishes of white rice will not kill.

Edited October 11, 2014 by rockyysdt

[VincentRJ]

Hi Vincent.

I am not an expert in the field but can put forward some thoughts from my experience and past readings.

The benefit of being a Bikkhu allows you the privilege of focusing your resource and energy to full time practice.

Things like abode, & food, being taken care of.

In the 21st century, those who have taken steps to ensure their future (pension, home ownership, family support base, medical insurance, welfare) may find they have sufficient support in order to devote themselves to practice without the need to ordain.

Your only other need is to have the appropriate teachers/guides along your path.

This can be accessed via Buddhist forums, and retreat establishments.

Also there are a number of guides who will appear over time.

I'm confident that such guides have appeared on this very forum.

Ordaining as a Bikkhu in a quality Sangha may have the added benefit of isolation from the temptation of modern life with its many traps.

In terms of eating once a day, I found that after attending a number of retreats, eating once daily is the optimal way to go.

I found that anything more than one meal a day, especially when practicing long sits and generally slowing down, easily led to feelings of being bloated, sluggish and sleepy.

Whilst on retreat, I became very mindful/aware of my digestive system and its impact on my being, feelings and thoughts.

I broke the process into three stages.

• Ingestion.
• Assimilation (digestion).
• Elimination.

Digestion uses up a lot of energy.

Eating once a day allows one to limit such sluggish, sleepy torpid states.

Many of us live largely unaware of digestions impact on us, but it when engaged in continous mindfulness, this is amplified.

Also, until elimination takes place, ones concentration can be hampered.

I found that quality elimination leads to a lightness of body and mind which enhances concentration and leads to deeper levels of stilling the mind.

If one is constantly in a state of pre elimination (multiple main meals) then ones level of practice takes second place/ is hampered.

I definitely found a single meal a day was greatly beneficial to my levels of concentration and ability to focus.

Focus on my posture, on my breath and subsequently stillness of mind.

For me the resultant experience exponentially outweighed any attachment I have to the delights food.

In terms of brown/white rice, eating well is good, but occasional dishes of white rice will not kill.

Hi Rocky,

I understand the value of eating no more than once a day. As a matter of fact, I believe one meal a day was the habit of the ancient Romans. Those who ate more than one meal a day were considered to be gluttons, and of course there were a number of gluttons in ancient Rome, usually from the wealthy class, who would sometimes feast all day long.

What I find unappealing is not the one meal a day scenario, but the clockwork regularity, for example, of rising at 3 am and taking the daily meal at 8 am whether I like the food or not, and whether I think it's wholesome or not.

I find that 'elimination', as you put it, is not regular for me if my diet lacks fibre, which is often the case when I eat white rice without compensating for its lack of fibre by taking a high-fibre supplement such as All Bran, or lots of vegetables.

When I say one should eat when one is hungry, I'm referring to the one meal per day. If I'm not hungry at 8 am, I might sometimes prefer to have my daily meal at 12 am or 5 pm. I'm not keen on the idea that, "you'd better eat now (at 8 am) even if you are not hungry, because by 5 pm you probably will be hungry but will not have the opportunity to eat". I also believe in the benefits of fasting.

Now I admit that such concerns in the general scheme of things are probably trivial, especially for any short period. However, on a long term basis, I would consider the nutritional quality of one's diet very important.

I recently came across some photos of that famous Thai monk, Buddhadasa, who had some interesting ideas on the concept of reincarnation, that is, it's one's thoughts that are reincarnated rather than an entire life after death.

I was rather amazed that Buddhadasa appeared so overweight in the photos. He seemed half way to being a Laughing Buddha. I'd definitely place him in the 'obese' category. How did he manage that on one meal per day, I wonder? Hope no-one thinks I'm being too disrespectful here. I'm just trying to get to the truth.

[VincentRJ]

'problem with all religions' is it turns, or tries to turn, people into sheeple. Though more a philosophy and somewhat attractive in principle, the problem with Buddhism in Thailand for me is the way it is misconstrued by the vast majority that purport to be Buddhist, but tend to miss the teachings of the Buddha by a country mile. The lengths that many natives go to to make up on merit for their consistent wrongdoings is hypocritical in the extreme and seems to go beyond the level of hypocrisy of what your average, non-practicing Christian might indulge... though I guess we're touching on social conditioning, and also not to suggest that the one is better than the other.

With your examples above, I think it is more a case of 'this is how we've always done it' and nobody would have the stones to want to change things up, which again goes against the 'tenets' of Buddhism somewhat because they are all desiring to conform.

Man is indeed a fallible, fragile beast.

Dave, I can't disagree. However, I detect a degree of cynicism here which I'm also guilty of. When I see Thai people, and people of other nationalities, prostrating themselves in front of a huge statue of Buddha, I can't help wondering what Gautama Buddha would think of this, if he were able to come back to life and witness the scene.

[IMA_FARANG]

In Zen Buddhism there is a thing called the "Monkey Mind".

Beginners often exhibit the "Monkey Mind" state ...... their mind runs around chattering like a Monkey unable to focus on the reality of the situation they are in ..... spouting irrelevant and meaningless objections to what they are told.

You, dear beginner, are living in that "Monkey Mind" state right now.

Exactly what relevance does you eating White Rice have to do with anything?

Or anything in your post that you mentioned?.

Everything you have said is meaningless chatter, like a monkey running around mindlessly screeching and chattering.

The "Monkey Mind" state without learning discipline.

That is precisely why you first have rules you are told to follow...... to tame your Monkey Mind.

That's why in Zen the beginner spends time sweeping floors, cleaning toilets, and other menial tasks.

To tame and quiet the beginners Monkey Mind ..... so that his rampaging Monkey Mind state can be broken and tamed by your true contemplative and focused disciplined mind.

Until, by your own effort, your Monkey Mind can be replaced by a true disciplined focused mind, you can not start the real work of learning Buddhism.

It is up to you, stop your silly Monkey Mind chatter, and get on with the real work of finding your true nature,

Only you can decide when to learn and accept that discipline to get on with the next stage.

So do it.

[VincentRJ]

Exactly what relevance does you eating White Rice have to do with anything?

Or anything in your post that you mentioned?.

I thought I'd explained the relevance; but apparently not well enough. Monkeys will happily eat white rice because they do not have the awareness that white rice is processed and deficient in nutrients. Humans on the other hand, are able to have a greater degree of awareness, especially Buddhist humans who specialise in awareness.

One significant Buddhist principle is the recognition of cause and effect, or in other words, one reaps what one sows.

A large part of our trillion dollar medical industry is devoted to fixing the problems of an inadequate diet which includes white rice amongst many other types of junk food.

A life-long consumption of white rice can actually contribute towards suffering. Didn't you know that?

Buddhism is about solving the problem of suffering. You know that, I'm sure.

[fabianfred]

Vincent... your first post made me laugh...

Not even ordained and complaining already about absolutley insignificant things like hair and meals.

Those monks who do eat only once a day (not compulsory in most places) eat very lesiurly somewhere between 9 and 11 am.....eating slowly and mindfully to properly chew and contemplate every mouthful. What food it is, as long as it is edible, is not a matter for complaint, since it has been given by the faithful. A monk should never look down upon this or that since the food is merely to dispel hunger and give enough nourishment for the body to continue to practice (meditation).

Meditation is a monk's work, so since hard physical labour is not necessary then the food value needs only be enough to sustain....not to taste nice and get all attached to.

In thailand hair is just a nuisance and hot..... far more comfortable to keep shaven. If you feel so strongly about hair, then go and become a naked ascetic in India, not a Buddhist monk..

[fabianfred]

'problem with all religions' is it turns, or tries to turn, people into sheeple. Though more a philosophy and somewhat attractive in principle, the problem with Buddhism in Thailand for me is the way it is misconstrued by the vast majority that purport to be Buddhist, but tend to miss the teachings of the Buddha by a country mile. The lengths that many natives go to to make up on merit for their consistent wrongdoings is hypocritical in the extreme and seems to go beyond the level of hypocrisy of what your average, non-practicing Christian might indulge... though I guess we're touching on social conditioning, and also not to suggest that the one is better than the other.

With your examples above, I think it is more a case of 'this is how we've always done it' and nobody would have the stones to want to change things up, which again goes against the 'tenets' of Buddhism somewhat because they are all desiring to conform.

Man is indeed a fallible, fragile beast.

Dave, I can't disagree. However, I detect a degree of cynicism here which I'm also guilty of. When I see Thai people, and people of other nationalities, prostrating themselves in front of a huge statue of Buddha, I can't help wondering what Gautama Buddha would think of this, if he were able to come back to life and witness the scene.

I am aware that as a foreigner we are always carefully observed when in a temple, so i always try to do very sincere and graceful prostrations, unlike the frequent bobbing and hands fluttering like dying butterflies one often sees the Thais doing. I have been a Buddhist for nearly 40 years now and have great respect for our greatest teacher....it is not worship...but respect ...for those worthy of respect.

[BuddhistVirus]

Exactly what relevance does you eating White Rice have to do with anything?

Or anything in your post that you mentioned?.

I thought I'd explained the relevance; but apparently not well enough. Monkeys will happily eat white rice because they do not have the awareness that white rice is processed and deficient in nutrients. Humans on the other hand, are able to have a greater degree of awareness, especially Buddhist humans who specialise in awareness.

One significant Buddhist principle is the recognition of cause and effect, or in other words, one reaps what one sows.

A large part of our trillion dollar medical industry is devoted to fixing the problems of an inadequate diet which includes white rice amongst many other types of junk food.

A life-long consumption of white rice can actually contribute towards suffering. Didn't you know that?

Buddhism is about solving the problem of suffering. You know that, I'm sure.

So, your main reason to be ordained monk is to eat healthy?

If you are so concerned about nutrition and physical appearance, monk hood is not for you. Buddhism is all about training the mind. As the good poster above pointed out, all those 'rituals' as you call it are to aid you to train/discipline the mind that is as stubborn as a piece of rock but as directionless as the wind (and of course, as wild as a monkey).

If you still feel food at Buddhist retreat centers are unhealthy, or that shaving your hair is nuisance, maybe you should try gym or enroll yourself at some touchy-feely stress-eliminating feel-good yoga classes. I think you can eat anytime of the day there and in your desired quantity and also you can style your hair anyway you like.

When Buddha talked of suffering, he meant all emotions cause pain/suffering. Of course, healthy body is important, but more important is a healthy, realized, awakened mind. The fact that you are already caught up in food related dilemma is suffering...that must be overcome!

But that said, why don't you try the monastic life for a few days or even for a week? You already know your shortcomings, I think you can be a very good practitioner...

Best wishes.

[fabianfred]

The problem with many Westerners is that they are too conceited and think that in this modern age with high technology and scientific learning they are superior to those of old...even thinking they know more than the Buddha

[transam]

The problem with many Westerners is that they are too conceited and think that in this modern age with high technology and scientific learning they are superior to those of old...even thinking they know more than the Buddha

The problem with all religions is that nobody needs them. All living creatures on this planet do not need or follow a religion except humans. Now why is that.....?

Religious stuff was created by humans way back, no other living creature has the need to go down that route, they live their life, reproduce and pop off. Only humans want to create stuff to kill each other.

All sounds crazy to me...........

[VincentRJ]

Vincent... your first post made me laugh...

Not even ordained and complaining already about absolutley insignificant things like hair and meals.

Fabianfred,

You also make me laugh. You write, "Not even ordained and complaining already about absolutley insignificant things like hair and meals."

Are you really attracted towards a religion in order to engage in insignificant things? Why should one shave one's face and head regularly if it's such an insignificant thing. Have monks got nothing better to do than engage in insignificant activities that are outdated and purposeless?

Those monks who do eat only once a day (not compulsory in most places) eat very lesiurly somewhere between 9 and 11 am.....eating slowly and mindfully to properly chew and contemplate every mouthful.

That's fine. I have no complaints about that. It's sensible to slowly and mindfully chew one's food. It helps the digestion.

Meditation is a monk's work, so since hard physical labour is not necessary then the food value needs only be enough to sustain....not to taste nice and get all attached to.

Exactly! That's my point. Food should be sufficient to sustain... for a long and healthy life...the longer the better.

As I understand, white rice is preferred because (1) it was initially introduced by the upper classes and then seen as something 'cool' and superior by the lower classes who strive to emulate the upper classes, (2) its white appearance is suggestive of purity and superiority, just as white-skinned races are sometimes seen as superior to dark-skinned races, (3) white rice is bland and doesn't conflict or interfere with the taste of the delicious ingredients in the meal that the cook is particularly proud of.

I would suggest that all of these 3 reasons are specifically un-Buddhist in their characteristics. Attachment to nice taste is not what I'm recommending. I'm recommending an awareness of the nutritional value of the food one is eating in order to sustain oneself for the maximum period of time in order to provide the maximum opportunity for one to reach Nirvana. Got it?

Edited October 11, 2014 by VincentRJ

[VincentRJ]

Exactly what relevance does you eating White Rice have to do with anything?

Or anything in your post that you mentioned?.

I thought I'd explained the relevance; but apparently not well enough. Monkeys will happily eat white rice because they do not have the awareness that white rice is processed and deficient in nutrients. Humans on the other hand, are able to have a greater degree of awareness, especially Buddhist humans who specialise in awareness.

One significant Buddhist principle is the recognition of cause and effect, or in other words, one reaps what one sows.

A large part of our trillion dollar medical industry is devoted to fixing the problems of an inadequate diet which includes white rice amongst many other types of junk food.

A life-long consumption of white rice can actually contribute towards suffering. Didn't you know that?

Buddhism is about solving the problem of suffering. You know that, I'm sure.

So, your main reason to be ordained monk is to eat healthy?

If you are so concerned about nutrition and physical appearance, monk hood is not for you. Buddhism is all about training the mind. As the good poster above pointed out, all those 'rituals' as you call it are to aid you to train/discipline the mind that is as stubborn as a piece of rock but as directionless as the wind (and of course, as wild as a monkey).

If you still feel food at Buddhist retreat centers are unhealthy, or that shaving your hair is nuisance, maybe you should try gym or enroll yourself at some touchy-feely stress-eliminating feel-good yoga classes. I think you can eat anytime of the day there and in your desired quantity and also you can style your hair anyway you like.

When Buddha talked of suffering, he meant all emotions cause pain/suffering. Of course, healthy body is important, but more important is a healthy, realized, awakened mind. The fact that you are already caught up in food related dilemma is suffering...that must be overcome!

But that said, why don't you try the monastic life for a few days or even for a week? You already know your shortcomings, I think you can be a very good practitioner...

Best wishes.

BuddhistVirus,

You seem to have misunderstood my points in so many ways. I'll list them.

First, you ask, "So your main reason to be a monk is to eat healthy?" Answer: No. Eating healthy is a basic requirement whatever my circumstances. No eat, no life. Unhealthy eat, unhealthy life. That should not be difficult to understand, surely.

You write, "If you are so concerned about nutrition and physical appearance, monk hood is not for you."

I'm concerned about nutrition for the reasons mentioned above, but I'm not concerned with appearance. I'm questioning why monks are concerned with their appearance. I would have no concern for my own appearance if I became a monk. My concern would be only with hygiene, nutrition and meditation practices, and possibly any opportunity to engage in charity work. I would object to wasting my time shaving my face and head every few days. Life is precious. Why waste time doing ridiculous things.

When Buddha talked of suffering, he meant all emotions cause pain/suffering. Of course, healthy body is important, but more important is a healthy, realized, awakened mind. The fact that you are already caught up in food related dilemma is suffering...that must be overcome!

I'm not sure I understand your point here. Are you falling into the trap of dualism? You recognise that a healthy body is important, but claim that an awakened mind is more important. Surely a mind which is not awakened to the advantages and necessity of a healthy body, is not fully awakened. I rest my case.

[BuddhistVirus]

Vincent, sorry for all the misunderstanding...I really didn't mean to do that.

A deluded being that I am, I sure am caught up in dualistic and half baked concepts.

Like I said, why not give it a try and see how it goes? You will surprise yourself. After a while, you may not care what you eat or why monks take the trouble of shaving their heads...

Best wishes...

Edited October 11, 2014 by BuddhistVirus

[VincentRJ]

Vincent, sorry for all the misunderstanding...I really didn't mean to do that.

A deluded being that I am, I sure am caught up in dualistic and half baked concepts.

Like I said, why not give it a try and see how it goes? You will surprise yourself. After a while, you may not care what you eat or why monks take the trouble of shaving their heads...

Best wishes...

You're right. I think I should give it a try. It's an experiences that I've always felt I should have, for better or for worse. Now that I'm fairly old, but still healthy as a result of a good diet, sexual desires should no longer be a hindrance. I might give my fellow monks a hard time, though, with my constant questioning.

[slipperx]

Focussing on the wrong thing. Religion in the conventional sense is just about control - well intentioned in the beginning maybe as in the reason Jews, Muslims et al don't eat pork ( no refrigeration those days) - then taken over with people using religion for their own irreligious reasons. Whoever your God is does not make any difference - essentially the same thing whatever you want to name that idea. God is everything to everyone and omnipresent because God is goodness and life. What is everyone searching for when it is right in front of your eyes every day in the live from your parents, your kids or your friends. It is a simple idea just live for the life you are given, respect where it's deserved and love your family first and others after without harming either family or others in everything you do.

We live in a world where people are obsessed by nationalism - why? Because maybe everyone wants to think they are better or .......?

The world and its places belong to no one - it is a shame people and nations think differently and in the end it is all but transitory anyway.

[I Like Thai]

The problem with many Westerners is that they are too conceited and think that in this modern age with high technology and scientific learning they are superior to those of old...even thinking they know more than the Buddha

Maybe you have that superiority affliction yourself

[BuddhistVirus]

Vincent, sorry for all the misunderstanding...I really didn't mean to do that.

A deluded being that I am, I sure am caught up in dualistic and half baked concepts.

Like I said, why not give it a try and see how it goes? You will surprise yourself. After a while, you may not care what you eat or why monks take the trouble of shaving their heads...

Best wishes...

You're right. I think I should give it a try. It's an experiences that I've always felt I should have, for better or for worse. Now that I'm fairly old, but still healthy as a result of a good diet, sexual desires should no longer be a hindrance. I might give my fellow monks a hard time, though, with my constant questioning.

Questions are good as long as they lead you to answers.

[fabianfred]

Yes...questions are good... but remember the old saying...'I seek not to find the answer, but to understand the question..'

Instead of "why must I shave and why can't I eat the food I prefer..?' try this...

" why am I .... a monk who has turned my back on the householder's life ... to be unconcerned with fine fashionable clothing... to eat what is given and not crave for fine foods.... to be unconcerned with looks and craving for comforable feelings ... asking such silly questions..?'

To defeat the defilements is a monks goal... not increase them.

When the Buddha first left the palace and donned robes he choked upon the coarse food offered him, then admonished himself, what did he expect as one going amongst the ordinary people and accepting the food they offered...after which he was never bothered again.

Craving for existence is what holds us back in Samsara ..we should not be afraid of death.... our alloted span is due to our karma...be content with it.

[sustento]

What I find unappealing is not the one meal a day scenario, but the clockwork regularity, for example, of rising at 3 am and taking the daily meal at 8 am whether I like the food or not, and whether I think it's wholesome or not.

Is this not a prime example of attachment?

[sustento]

What I find unappealing is not the one meal a day scenario, but the clockwork regularity, for example, of rising at 3 am and taking the daily meal at 8 am whether I like the food or not, and whether I think it's wholesome or not.

Is this not a prime example of attachment?

Attachment or neccesity?

Food is a necessity. Whether you like it or not is an attachment.

[rockyysdt]

What I find unappealing is not the one meal a day scenario, but the clockwork regularity, for example, of rising at 3 am and taking the daily meal at 8 am whether I like the food or not, and whether I think it's wholesome or not.

Is this not a prime example of attachment?

Attachment or neccesity?

With wise reflection I eat this food

Not for play, not for intoxication

Not for fattening, not for beautification

Only to maintain this body

To stay alive and healthy

To support the spiritual way of life

Thus I let go of unpleasant feelings

And do not stir up new ones

Thereby the process of life goes on

Blameless, at ease, and in peace.

[VincentRJ]

Yes...questions are good... but remember the old saying...'I seek not to find the answer, but to understand the question..'

Instead of "why must I shave and why can't I eat the food I prefer..?' try this...

" why am I .... a monk who has turned my back on the householder's life ... to be unconcerned with fine fashionable clothing... to eat what is given and not crave for fine foods.... to be unconcerned with looks and craving for comforable feelings ... asking such silly questions..?'

To defeat the defilements is a monks goal... not increase them.

When the Buddha first left the palace and donned robes he choked upon the coarse food offered him, then admonished himself, what did he expect as one going amongst the ordinary people and accepting the food they offered...after which he was never bothered again.

Fabianfred,

I fail to see how such a question would be relevant to my circumstances since I have no desire for fine fashionable clothing nor any craving for fine foods. My preference for certain types of food, such as a preference for brown rice over white rice, is not based on a craving, but based on a respect for the health of the body and an awareness of what is good for myself and others with regard to diet. In fact, brown rice would be considered by many to be a 'coarse' food compared with white rice.

I consider this attitude to be consistent with the advice of the Buddha in the Kalama Sutta. In other words, "Only accept as true that which is taught by the wise, and which you test for yourself and find to be good for yourself and others."

In this context, the wise with regard to food, in our modern era, would be considered as qualified dieticians and scientists free from any bias of employment in the food industry

During the times of the Buddha, about 2,500 years ago, understanding of diet would have been very rudimentary. However, whilst on the one hand general hygiene would have been a problem, most food would have been wholesome and organically grown. There were no artificial chemical pesticides in those days, which can sometimes introduce harmful residues of heavy metals and arsenic into the diet. There would have been no white rice, since white rice requires modern milling practices, and no fructose from corn syrup which is added to most processed foods to make them tasty, and increase our appetite, and cause obesity.

In those days, there would have been no reason to question the nutritional value of the food offered by the local population, unless one suspected that the food was harmful or contaminated. It is reported that the Buddha died as a result of eating wild mushrooms that had been offered to him; presumably the wrong type of mushrooms for eating. Whether this is true or not I couldn't possibly know. It might have been the case that such mushrooms would have been safe for a healthy person to eat, but not for an old man who was already afflicted with a number of ailments.

Craving for existence is what holds us back in Samsara ..we should not be afraid of death.... our allotted span is due to our karma...be content with it.

That seems to be a very fatalistic attitude, Fabianfred. I thought Buddhism was at least partially about taking control of one's life and destiny, becoming aware of one's conditioning, and freeing oneself from the desires, cravings and illusory opinions that can have the harmful consequences of suffering.

[trd]

Was it fatalistic of you to accept your birth?

[VincentRJ]

Was it fatalistic of you to accept your birth?

Trd,

I've never met anyone who even remembers their birth. I don't see how it's possible for a baby to accept or reject his/her birth. I don't see how a baby with no understanding nor knowledge of language could be given a choice on such a matter. Your question seems meaningless.

[trd]

So what were you prior to birth. What are you prior to mind. What are you prior to consciousness?

[VincentRJ]

So what were you prior to birth. What are you prior to mind. What are you prior to consciousness?

Is there a God, a creator of all things? If there is a God, who created God? If the universe began with a big bang, what existed before the Big Bang?

I believe that both Confucius and the Buddha advised against speculating on the existence of a creator God, but the discipline of Physics didn't exist in those days of course. What existed before the Big Bang might be another meaningless question. However, there is a sort of answer, although perhaps not completely satisfactory. There is a fourth dimension of 'time'. Time was created during the Big Bang, therefore, the question 'what existed before the Big Bang' could be considered meaningless. The word 'before' is a quality of time. Time did not exist before the Big Bang.

Your questions, what was I prior to my birth, mind and consciousness, I place in the same category as the above questions, although it's true to say that prior to my birth I was a developing embryo in the womb. Perhaps you meant to ask what was I before conception.

[trd]

So why are you speculating on the existence of a creator God? How is it possible for something to be created from nothing?

Edited October 13, 2014 by trd

[trd]

.....prior to my birth I was a developing embryo in the womb. Perhaps you meant to ask what was I before conception.

What is the difference between the "I" you refer to as an embryo and the "I" you consider yourself to be now. I would assume that you have knowledge now of language and much knowledge of the relative world which you didn't have as an embryo. Yet you refer to both stages as the same "I". So your investigation is simple. Find out what both instances of the "I" have that has not changed apart from the accumulation of synaptic connections.