Theravada in 2018

[User1249x]

When Buddhism tries to be expansive like that, it sooner or later goes against the Dhamma.

Do you have relative examples in mind?

Take Buddhist preaching on the internet, for example. The way seekers who are asking questions are bulldozed over by Buddhists, lays and monks alike. And these preachers can come up with a dozen rationalizations as to why "practising is better than discussing". But what does any of that help when it doesn't address the seeker's actual concern? Such preachers might as well give the seeker a mantra and say he should chant it whenever he feels troubled.

I would challenge that with pointing to examples from this forum where this does not happen, where OP ends up thanking posters and dhamma is posted. Also stackexchange platform where like 99% of questions get several answers sometimes from monastics and there is some level of scrutiny of answers, hardly ever scrutiny of the OP. Can also mention monks who make themselves available for questioning and explain their doctrine in full on the internet.

i learned all i know from internet, never saw a monk before i wanted to be one. What you talk about is true and happens but i think we all agree on this and in part why i think it would be good to have a platform that adresses it while keeping all the other good features.

[SDC]

I think it is necessary to clarify how come people remain on the level of involvement/interest, as opposed to pursuit/commitment.
Except in the case of the rare person who really just has "too much time on their hands", I find that something much more profound is going on when people seem to deliberately stay on the level of mere involvement/interest.
Personally, I find that many Buddhists seem to take pursuit/commitment far too lightly, expecting themselves and others to pursue/commit too readily. Much like expecting that two people should get married after a few dates. I find that many people who seem to hover on the level of involvement/interest realize, at least intuitively, that pursuing/committing would bring great changes to their lives, primarily in terms of losses of worldy benefits, and they are not yet ready to accept those losses, or perhaps don't believe (much less see) that by pursuing/committing, they would obtain gains greater than those losess.

In fact, I don't recall any Buddhist ever to be willing to look into this type of concern. Many just give a blanket statement that "it's worth it" and that people should just take their word for it, or "test it for themselves". But nothing is as inspiring as a real model, as someone who has really attained a great accomplishment. And I find there is a real shortage of such models in Buddhism.

Probably stems from them thinking they are walking the path when all they were doing was thinking about walking it. As if studying a map across Europe equals traveling across Europe.

Only when the interest develops into commitment can a person truly get a handle on what they are going to put on the line. Prior to that they simply do not know the difference, or that there is one.

Pretty intuitive, b. You don't give yourself enough credit.

[binocular]

I would challenge that with pointing to examples from this forum where this does not happen, where OP ends up thanking posters and dhamma is posted. Also stackexchange platform where like 99% of questions get several answers sometimes from monastics and there is some level of scrutiny of answers, hardly ever scrutiny of the OP. Can also mention monks who make themselves available for questioning and explain their doctrine in full on the internet.

i learned all i know from internet, never saw a monk before i wanted to be one. What you talk about is true and happens but i think we all agree on this and in part why i think it would be good to have a platform that adresses it while keeping all the other good features.

But on the other hand:



One doesn't become lionhearted by being in the company of pleasant people pleasantly sipping pleasant tea. I certainly don't advocate violence, nor safe spaces, but, you know, everyone's got to grow their own balls.

[binocular]

Probably stems from them thinking they are walking the path when all they were doing was thinking about walking it. As if studying a map across Europe equals traveling across Europe.

Only when the interest develops into commitment can a person truly get a handle on what they are going to put on the line. Prior to that they simply do not know the difference, or that there is one.

You mean like a bunch of interested people telling other interested people how to become committed?

Pretty intuitive, b. You don't give yourself enough credit.

Watch me.

[User1249x]

In regard to my statement;

I think one should probe for public interest more and If support is there, the people involved should get an overview of the systems in place and who wants to cooperate, get technical solutions from developers and find a trustworthy fundraising entity to be involved.

...
Buddhism (as a means of transmitting the Dhamma) simply cannot be the type of expansive religion that Christianity is, for example. When Buddhism tries to be expansive like that, it sooner or later goes against the Dhamma...

then i asked:

Do you have relative examples in mind?

to which you reply

Take Buddhist preaching on the internet, for example. The way seekers who are asking questions are bulldozed over by Buddhists, lays and monks alike. Preachers can come up with a dozen rationalizations as to why "practising is better than discussing". '

So the fact that people can rationalize practising over discussing is an example of Buddhism attempted to spread like Christianity which later went against the Dhamma? Do you consider "practising over discussing" or discussion boards in general a particularly Christian thing?
Do you have any other examples upon which you base your position?

[binocular]

Take Buddhist preaching on the internet, for example. The way seekers who are asking questions are bulldozed over by Buddhists, lays and monks alike. Preachers can come up with a dozen rationalizations as to why "practising is better than discussing". '

So the fact that people can rationalize practising over discussing is an example of Buddhism attempted to spread like Christianity which later went against the Dhamma? Do you consider "practising over discussing" or discussion boards in general a particularly Christian thing?
Do you have any other examples upon which you base your position?

It's the part about preachers bulldozing over people that is pertinent.

Did you ever actually have an open conversation with a preacher from an expansive religion? A Jehovah's witness, a Mormon, a Catholic, a Hare Krishna? I've talked to many of them, and read many conversations they've had with other people. One thing they all have in common is that they barely listen to the person they are preaching to, there is no actual discussion; at best, the preacher treats the person's concerns as trivial, glibly sweeping them under the rug. All that seems to matter to the preacher is that the other person accepts what she is being told. How and why and and what costs seems to be irrelevant to the preacher.

I think such a disregard for a person's situation is not in line with the Dhamma.

[User1249x]

It's the part about preachers bulldozing over people that is pertinent.

Is it connected to people demanding to be held in teacher position and dont engage in discussion? As in "listen to me, you have nothing to teach me, do as i say or i dont bother speaking to you at all" that kind of attitude among people who seem/claim to practice?

[SDC]

You mean like a bunch of interested people telling other interested people how to become committed?

Precisely.

[aflatun]

I dont want to say anything lightly on these things but for example some of the controversies and non-allignment within TFT.

You're talking about the "citta that never dies" which lies outside of aggregates/sense bases/conditionality ?

[Dhammarakkhito]

www.buddhistische-gesellschaft-berlin.d ... dhanew.pdf

[Saengnapha]

Does Theravada Buddhism get much goverment funding where you live guys?

LOL

[User1249x]

Does Theravada Buddhism get much goverment funding where you live guys?

LOL

where do they laugh at the idea?
all buddhist and other religious organizations do in Norway, about 200-300$ per member or so.

[User1249x]

I dont want to say anything lightly on these things but for example some of the controversies and non-allignment within TFT.

You're talking about the "citta that never dies" which lies outside of aggregates/sense bases/conditionality ?

yes more or less. that citta will be explained to gain footing in Deathless if position is pushed. As in X gaining eternal footing in X, which imho is nonsense of course.

www.buddhistische-gesellschaft-berlin.d ... dhanew.pdf

thanks. wish i read that 2.5 years ago.

Do people want to discuss what influence Christian Sects and Islam have had and may have had on Buddhism to better understand how we end up here?

[Justsit]

Does Theravada Buddhism get much goverment funding where you live guys?

LOL

where do they laugh at the idea?
all buddhist and other religious organizations do in Norway, about 200-300$ per member or so.

In US, church (ie, religion) and state are separate by law. There is no government funding for any religion, at least not overtly.
There are tax breaks for religious organizations, though.

[binocular]

Do people want to discuss what influence Christian Sects and Islam have had and may have had on Buddhism to better understand how we end up here?

I think there are two issues here in relation to Abrahamic religions:

1. Many Western converts to Buddhism come from an Abrahamic background. Some come with baggage from that particular background, and they aren't always aware of it, and they carry that baggage into Buddhism, interpreting Buddhism in line with that Abrahamic background. These things can be very subtle and abstract. For example, someone from a Christian background may have the underlying belief that it is crucial to know which religion/tradition is "the one and only right one, for all people at all times" (which is a common theme in Christianity). So when such a person comes to Buddhism, they could spend a lot of time and effort trying to figure out which Buddhist tradition/school is "the one and only right one, for all people at all times".

2. What sometimes looks like influence of Abrahamic religions may be due to convergent evolution as similar features in different religions develop independently of eachother. For example, expansive (missionary) religions have specific features in common; but those features probably develop because the religion is expansive, not because of influence from another religion. Those same features can also be observed in an otherwise non-expansive religion when that religion is channelled into an expansive form (e.g. preaching (a visible feature of an expansive religion) is characteristically similar, regardless of religion).