I don't get Buddhism

We’ll need a context of course.

You know, this coming from one of the Stooges. And, of late, Curly no less!! [-o<

[b]Note to Moreno, von rivers and IPLers of old:

What the hell happened to phyllo? Or is it just my imagination that something did happen to him?

By the way, what the hell happened to you?!

I sure hope it wasn’t something that “I” said?[/b] :laughing: :wink: :laughing:

Just insults and pointless jabber.

And right back at you in retort mode! :wink:

Note to Buddhists:

Fit this into the quest for Nirvana!!

No, seriously.

The Role of Karma in Buddhist Morality
Barbara O’Brien

In conclusion…

And it is in regard to “ideals” that I am most likely to react as I do. Ideals derived from ideas derived from words defining and defending other words in general description intellectual/spiritual contraptions that define and defend still more general description intellectual/spiritual contraptions.

You wouldn’t think these “worlds of words” have anything to do at all with actual human interactions.

And is it or is it not appropriate to ask of these long time practitioners that their “spiritual” understanding of karma be reconfigured in a philosophy venue into a description of these changes that encompasses the behaviors deemed enlightened on this side of the grave reconfigured further into an attempt to describe the fate of their own particular “I” on the other side of the grave.

In other words, what am I really missing here about Buddhism that sets it apart from Western “there is a God” religions?

Warrior monks exist in a number of religions.

Which suggests that non-violence is not always workable even if it is preferable.

Let’s take the Dalai Lama as an example …

Let’s say a woman makes a pilgrimage to visit him and a man walks in the room and starts raping her right in front of him … his training teaches him that’s her karma and that he should be unattached. That’s some evil fucking shit!

What he should do is stand up and beat the shit out of the rapist!

No my friend,
That is not how the concept of the karma should be implemented. Karma is not supposed to work in isolation but implies that karma shouldnot be seperated from Dharma. In Hinduism( including Buddhism and Jainism) the term Dharma stands very close to duty. The concept is that one is supposed to react to all kind of cercumstances how he or she ought to be.

Means, do the karma with Dharma, and then leave the results to the destiny.

With love,
Sanjay

@Zinnat… it seems that it’s not only Gib that doesn’t get Buddhism.

Buddhism, Hinduism, Vedism Brahminism etc. are the vehicle, in which rta/Dharma are delivered through… it is beyond religion… it is irreligious. The second that a person realises that, is the second they will start to understand.

Rta, is a state of mind, borne from original thought, disseminated through South/SE/E Asian Canons and Religions… either you’ll get it or you won’t, but it ain’t fucking rocket science. How is knowing what the right thing to do, so difficult and complicated… like rocket science is?

We… as a peoples and planet are truly doomed, if we cannot simply differentiate right action from wrong… the difference between maturity and immaturity/adult and children. Ffs!

Phyllo: Speaking for Moreno, as I very well can, what I notice is you not getting as stuck, as we all have been at some time or other, in the goop of his not responding or his not being clear or his attacking or his not making sense or his repeating himself for no reason or here, as you point out, merely insulting you (and not bothering to respond at all with any substance). So nice catch simply pointing out what is doing and not doing, rather than getting entangled in the muck.

Not getting entangled in the muck might be one way to describe Buddhism.

If something isn’t working, then I will try something else.

Although at this point, there may be nothing left to try.

Zinnat,
I am an extremely spiritual atheist.

If Vishnu or anyone else held in high esteem came to this world and taught “zero sum realities are shit”, this species would be a billion times better. These are all false gods! I know all the eastern religions (except Shintoism) came from India.

The dharma should have been, “zero sum worlds are shit, but while you’re here, reduce consent violation as much as possible”

Now wouldn’t that have started a REAL conversation in this species!!!

Nobody said that before me! I don’t claim to be the king or queen. I’d never in forever sit on a fucking throne. I’d never forever decide it’s a good thing to be eternally the ‘best’. I want everyone on my level, not simply to be better than. This is a hard task in this species.

I always tell people that their concept of god is what they’d be if they were god!

Never an equal, always prayer and worship. I’m trying to wake this species up and you’re not letting me!

Note to warrior monks of any and all denominations:

Describe examples of violence in your own life. Describe in turn how you intertwine violence on this side of the grave with that which you imagine as the fate of “I” to be on the other side of the grave.

As, finally, all of this might be understood by the hundreds and hundreds of religious warriors in other denominations. As it all might be encompassed in a philosophy venue with respect to the existential relationship between morality and immortality.

My own fascination of choice here and now given that I possess some measure of autonomy and accepting that what any of us think about all of this can only be wild ass guesses going back to an explanation for existence itself.

Oh, and link us to arguments and evidence that will serve to demonstrate that what you believe in your head is in fact true for all rational men and women.

Note to others:

Know any religious warriors? Persuade them to join us here as, to the best of our ability, we connect the dots being beingness and nothingness. As but infinitesimally tiny specks of existence in the context of all there is.

We’ll need a context of course. Stooge or not. :sunglasses:

MagsJ,

It looks to me that it is not me but you who needs a bit more clarity about karma and religions.

Let me take the intellectual issue first.
People often get it wrong but prophets are the most important parts of the religions, even more than respective Gods itself. That begs a question. Why so?

The answer is that it is not the gods but prophets who bring these religions in this world. It were Jesus and Mohammad who founded Christianity and Islam, neither God nor Allah by themselves. So, you have to believe the prophets first before believing the Gods and religions. It cannot be the other way around. There cannot be any Islam without Mohammad and neither any Christianity without Jesus. And, that applies to all religions. You have to believe the massanger first before believing in the dilevered massage. It would be illogical to claim that I believe only in the massage, not in the massanger.

The important thing to remember here is that if you follow this route and believe in the prophets first, you become religious by default. In the same way, if you are believing in karma and Dharma, you are accepting that what Buddha and Mahavira said about Karma is true. That makes you a religious person, whether you like it or not. Because, the concept of Karma has no place in pure western intellectual philosophy, it is an out and out eastern religious doctrine.

Secondly, other than Buddhism but in all other Indian religions, the concept of Karma goes beyond one life but spreads its jurisdiction to all previous and future incarnations. Now again, how one is supposed to be a irreligious and believing in incarnations?

MagsJ, unlike west, there is no pure intellectual philosophy or philosophers in the east, especially in india. All philosophers were religious scholars first, though they covered all non religious verticals also. Both of Kamsutra and Ayurveda were written by religious sages, not any medical professional.

With love,
Sanjay

Ecmandu,

Before replying me, you have to read my previous post addressed to MagsJ and consider it in your reply.

As I said there, the concept of spiritual atheist is oxymoron to me. An atheist cannot be spiritual in strict sence, unless you consider morality as spirituality, which is not logical. Moraliy is spirituality but only a part of it and does not cover spirituality completely. Means, one can be moral without being spiritual which is fine to me but being spiritual demands many others things also, of course including morality.

Not violating other consents is only morality not spirituality, unless you explain me otherwise.

Let me ask you one thing.
Think of a child suffering of diabetes. As we all know that it is not right for parents to let him have cakes and pastries but he continues to demand these.

Now, what should the parents do? Either they shoud reject the demand of the child to have more sweets because of his heath condition or should allow him having more sweets in order to honour his consent?

See, understanding and decoding even the morality is not as simple as only not violating others consent. That would not be enough. Spirituality is even more complicated.

With love,
Sanjay

It violates the child’s consent to have diabetes in the first place.

I deal with voices and possessions on a daily basis. I meet gods on a regular basis. I have no choice but to believe in gods and spirits. But, my mind is tough. Anyone less than me would believe what my life has been would believe in god, that it was god interacting with them. But I had a very simple revelation through all this demonstration of power, if I were god, reality would not violate consent or even be zero sum in nature (winners and losers), and so I balked at the spirit world. I’ve seen things that would certainly turn anyone else into a theist. But, then again, my mind is tougher than that. The illusion never got to me as it does to the weak minded.

Sure, and yes.

Amen brother.

Fixed Cross,

“Amen brother”. That’s the best you can do for zinnats idiocy…

I’ve been to hell. I took the entire wrath of the god you call god and I’m still fucking standing. There are not many people who’ve ever lived on earth who can do that.

When zinnat states that Spirituality is more complicated than nobodies consent being violated, he sounds mentally fucking retarded!

I was actually in hell. I know that of which I speak. Zinnat just thinks it’s some kind of joke “pfft Consent violation smialation… what a laughable thing! Spirituality is complicated man!” Fuck you assholes! Life is very simple. This is how I survived hell… I made friends. I made sense to lots of people. I taught that consent violation is the only problem in existence. I taught that you have to regret all of your memories stretching back to forever because god fucked up so bad (making a zero sum existence) Slowly, slowly I crawled out of hell… you make a spiritual friend here, a spiritual friend there, next thing you know… gods in the hotseat…

This was my next reply to zinnat, which you avoided:

viewtopic.php?p=2772311#p2772311

Have you considered toning it down … avoiding words like idiocy, fucking and retarded?