Hello,
there are practising Christians and non-practising Christians.
I'd like to ask if there are practising Theravada Buddhists and non-practising Theravada Buddhists?
What generally, is considered to be important in defining a practising Theravada Buddhist? Regular meditation, and frequent reading of Theravada scriptures, perhaps?
Particularly, is the excercise of kindness towards others, and non-violence considered very important?
Thanks.
Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Hello, I am not actually a Buddhist, and I know only some very limited basics about Buddhism. I'd like to know a bit more and to ask a few questions, if that's OK.
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Kindness towards other is important, that's why buddhism have a thing called metta which is like to wish people well and happy always. Be kindMarmalade wrote: Particularly, is the excercise of kindness towards others, and non-violence considered very important?
Non-violence and self control is what buddhists train too. When there's no aversion, no dislike or "self". You won't intend to hurt someone else since you think you and others is a "whole".
Metta meditation is something good you can practice.
Generally if you are doing something that is cultivating concentration, normalcy/virtue, wisdom. You are pretty much practicing it. But to make it much better, we do meditate to change the inner self of us so that we able to conduct good act in a much better intention and accumulate something better
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Buddhism is not a system of beliefs. Buddhism is a path of practice. If one is not practicing the eightfold path one can not be rightly called a "Buddhist" let alone a "Theravadin Buddhist".]I'd like to ask if there are practising Theravada Buddhists and non-practising Theravada Buddhists?
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.
- BB
- BB
- Modus.Ponens
- Posts: 3853
- Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
- Location: Gallifrey
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
I wouldn't go that far bodom. I think you can call yourself a buddhist if you've taken refuge in the 3 jewels and if you follow the 5 precepts.bodom wrote:Buddhism is not a system of beliefs. Buddhism is a path of practice. If one is not practicing the eightfold path one can not be rightly called a "Buddhist" let alone a "Theravadin Buddhist".]I'd like to ask if there are practising Theravada Buddhists and non-practising Theravada Buddhists?
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Some readings...
Lay Buddhist Practice
Suttas/Articles for lay people
Suttas for the Householder
'Engaged Buddhism'...walking the talk...some samples... 1 2 3
Lay Buddhist Practice
Suttas/Articles for lay people
Suttas for the Householder
'Engaged Buddhism'...walking the talk...some samples... 1 2 3
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
That distinction betweeb beliefs and practice corresponds very closely to what I had in mind, thanks, Bodom.bodom wrote: Buddhism is not a system of beliefs. Buddhism is a path of practice. If one is not practicing the eightfold path one can not be rightly called a "Buddhist" let alone a "Theravadin Buddhist".
Hello, I am not actually a Buddhist, and I know only some very limited basics about Buddhism. I'd like to know a bit more and to ask a few questions, if that's OK.
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Thanks, unspoken, I found that very clear and helpful.
Hello, I am not actually a Buddhist, and I know only some very limited basics about Buddhism. I'd like to know a bit more and to ask a few questions, if that's OK.
- Goofaholix
- Posts: 4017
- Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
- Location: New Zealand
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
To me a practising Buddhist is somebody who is genuinely trying to follow the Buddhas path to awakening, genuinely trying to follow in the footsteps of the Buddha.
People who go to the temple, take refuges and precepts, make donations etc and maybe try to keep the precepts maybe not but that's all I think of as Buddhist supporters, as they are supporting the Buddhist practioners.
By that definintiion I'd estimate about 5% of Theravadin Buddhists are practising Buddhists.
People who go to the temple, take refuges and precepts, make donations etc and maybe try to keep the precepts maybe not but that's all I think of as Buddhist supporters, as they are supporting the Buddhist practioners.
By that definintiion I'd estimate about 5% of Theravadin Buddhists are practising Buddhists.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
I would like to think that all those who take refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha and undertake to keep the Five Training Rules (Precepts) are "practicing Buddhists", even if, for example, they do not practice formal meditation at all. They simply practice at different levels.
My practice is simply this: Avoid evil, do good, and purify the mind.
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Well saidbodom wrote:Buddhism is not a system of beliefs. Buddhism is a path of practice. If one is not practicing the eightfold path one can not be rightly called a "Buddhist" let alone a "Theravadin Buddhist".]I'd like to ask if there are practising Theravada Buddhists and non-practising Theravada Buddhists?
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
It's everything.Marmalade wrote:
Particularly, is the excercise of kindness towards others, and non-violence considered very important?
Thanks.
adosa
"To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to cleanse one's mind — this is the teaching of the Buddhas" - Dhammapada 183
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Thanks for the further replies.
Hello, I am not actually a Buddhist, and I know only some very limited basics about Buddhism. I'd like to know a bit more and to ask a few questions, if that's OK.
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
At this point I would disagree with this because Right Concentration is defined as developing the jhanas, if I'm not mistaken, and the Buddha's teaching to householders that I've seen rarely if ever includes a call to develop jhanas, that call is always prefaced by "Bhikkhus..."bodom wrote:Buddhism is not a system of beliefs. Buddhism is a path of practice. If one is not practicing the eightfold path one can not be rightly called a "Buddhist" let alone a "Theravadin Buddhist".]I'd like to ask if there are practising Theravada Buddhists and non-practising Theravada Buddhists?
A householder's practice focussing on doing dana and keeping the precepts is still hugely valuable and we are still very much followers of the Buddha's teaching if we go that far....
Keeping the precepts is an awesome undertaking, and sets conditions for deeper developments.
I think the conventional wisdom that all followers of the Buddha practice meditation is either a modern phenomenon or a Western phenomenon, I'm not sure which. We should be grateful for it, even faulty meditation is better than no meditation in my opinion, but I'm not sure the Buddha urged householders to practice meditation except in a few suttas. Happy to be corrected...
Last edited by phil on Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Kammalakkhano , bhikkhave, bālo, kammalakkhano pandito, apadānasobhanī paññāti
(The fool is characterized by his/her actions/the wise one is characterized by his/her actions/Wisdom shines forth in behaviour.)
(AN 3.2 Lakkhana Sutta)
(The fool is characterized by his/her actions/the wise one is characterized by his/her actions/Wisdom shines forth in behaviour.)
(AN 3.2 Lakkhana Sutta)
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
To be a buddhist you train your awareness within the framework of the noble eightfold path and the four noble truths
Anyone can call themselves buddhists
Anyone can call themselves buddhists
Re: Practising and non-practising Buddhists?
Please see Analayo's Satipatthana Sutta commentary for an in depth look at sutta's that define right concentration not using the four jhana model.phil wrote:At this point I would disagree with this because Right Concentration is defined as developing the jhanas, if I'm not mistaken, and the Buddha's teaching to householders that I've seen rarely if ever includes a call to develop jhanas...
And you believe dana (generosity) and right action (5 precepts) to be something apart from the eightfold path?A householder's practice focussing on doing dana and keeping the precepts is still hugely valuable and we are still very much followers of the Buddha's teaching if we go that far....
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.
- BB
- BB