“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
What I'm trying to say is, just because someone says they are a 'Buddhist' does that make them a Buddhist? I would think observing their actions over many years would give you a clue to the validity of their associating with being a Buddhist. Do all these people follow the 5 precepts? Would it be fair to say you would at least need to be following the 5 precepts to even be considered a Buddhist?
As I said, please feel free to start a new thread on this particular tangent that interests you rather than drag this thread off-topic.
It will be greatly appreciated.
kind regards,
Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Gazelle wrote:What I'm trying to say is, just because someone says they are a 'Buddhist' does that make them a Buddhist? I would think observing their actions over many years would give you a clue to the validity of their associating with being a Buddhist. Do all these people follow the 5 precepts? Would it be fair to say you would at least need to be following the 5 precepts to even be considered a Buddhist?
Honestly, I am not a sin keeper. I do not care what these people do in their private lives. That is their business. This thread is a bit of fluff. Don't worry about it.
>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Gazelle wrote:What I'm trying to say is, just because someone says they are a 'Buddhist' does that make them a Buddhist? I would think observing their actions over many years would give you a clue to the validity of their associating with being a Buddhist. Do all these people follow the 5 precepts? Would it be fair to say you would at least need to be following the 5 precepts to even be considered a Buddhist?
Honestly, I am not a sin keeper. I do not care what these people do in their private lives. That is their business. This thread is a bit of fluff. Don't worry about it.
It's ok, I'm not worried about it... just having a discussion with you.
Your smily thingy suggests that the question is crazy, and I agree. No guessing from me on that.
Ha ha... are you serious? From what we know of the historical Buddha (even though I can't verify 100%) it would be fair to assume that the Buddha would find Trungpa's conduct less than ideal I would think.
Last edited by Gazelle on Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Your smily thingy suggests that the question is crazy, and I agree. No guessing from me on that.
Ha ha... are you serious? From what we know of the historical Buddha (even though I can't verify 100%) it would be fair to assume that the Buddha would find Trungpa's conduct less than ideal I would think.
But does that disqualify him from being a Buddhist? Are you the arbiter that who is and is not a Buddhist?
>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
But does that disqualify him from being a Buddhist? Are you the arbiter that who is and is not a Buddhist?
Well I think it's worth discussing. If he drinks alcohol till he dies of liver failure and has sexual relations with married women, then I would think it is a far stretch to say he is following the Buddha's teachings (as far as I know of it in the Pali Canon).
I say this because I meet people that say to me, well Trungpa drank alcohol so it must be OK to drink and be a Buddhist. I respond and say, sure drink alcohol if you want, but it's not what the Buddha taught in the Pali Canon... I think these sort of teachers corrupt the Buddha's message. But who knows.... maybe you can drink yourself to Nirvana?
Last edited by Gazelle on Sat Sep 01, 2012 9:21 am, edited 1 time in total.