Why I am not a Buddhist

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
santa100
Posts: 3191
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by santa100 » Sun Nov 04, 2012 5:58 pm

pray/not pray, believe/not believe, Mahayana/Theravada, etc. at the end of the day, if one's practice helps them upholding the silas of not killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, and indulgence, or if it helps one progressing further on the 8NP, then that's good practice. One word of advice I'd like to offer to that young fellow in the blog is to have some patience and a more thorough observation beyond the superficial rituals and forms of practice. If the praying/ritual part does make one become a filial son, a faithful husband, a responsible father, or a loyal friend, then isn't it a bit hasty (maybe even unfortunate) for those youths and educated to abandon Buddhism, be it Theravada or Mahayana?

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by beeblebrox » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:02 pm

Digity wrote: It just seems like it's more prevalent in Mahayana Buddhism. The first few Buddhist center I went to were Mahayana and I remember one of them talking about how we needed to pray more, because enlightenment was too hard...or something like that. I remember just thinking it was a silly comment and starting to sound too "religiousy". The Theravada teachings are way more in line with the Buddha's original teachings. I guess everyone needs to choose the path that suits them the most.
I think that's good you haven't encountered this in Theravada... but even then I hope that you'll still continue your practice. It's really the only thing that matters in the end.

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:08 pm

ground wrote:
pilgrim wrote:This very much describes why youths and the educated are leaving Buddhism in many parts of Asia, and partly why Theravada is increasingly appreciated.
http://warforscience.wordpress.com/2010 ... -buddhist/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Like to hear your comments..
"I" is not "a buddhist", never has been and never will be. :sage:
If this "I" is conditioned by "a buddhist", it is.
If this "I" is conditioned by "The Dhamma", there is no "I".
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:15 pm

santa100 wrote:pray/not pray, believe/not believe, Mahayana/Theravada, etc.
Anyway we all practice the same meditation, we work with same fenomena, and we have all liberation like knowledge.

Form change, nature still.
About division of teachings
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by beeblebrox » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:17 pm

DAWN wrote:
ground wrote:
pilgrim wrote:This very much describes why youths and the educated are leaving Buddhism in many parts of Asia, and partly why Theravada is increasingly appreciated.
http://warforscience.wordpress.com/2010 ... -buddhist/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Like to hear your comments..
"I" is not "a buddhist", never has been and never will be. :sage:
If this "I" is conditioned by "a buddhist", it is.
If this "I" is conditioned by "The Dhamma", there is no "I".
I think you're both right.

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:25 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
I think you're both right.
All fenomena depends on what we mean by "I".
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by beeblebrox » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:30 pm

DAWN wrote: All fenomena depends on what we mean by "I".
I think that might be a topic for another thread... let's not derail this one.

:anjali:

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:37 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
DAWN wrote: All fenomena depends on what we mean by "I".
I think that might be a topic for another thread... let's not derail this thread.

:anjali:
Actualy it is.

Question :"Why I am not Buddhist?"
Response: "Because, that is called "an Buddhist", was not the condition of your "I". This why, "you" are not "Buddhist"."

:anjali:
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by beeblebrox » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:58 pm

"I" has nothing to do with it, period... or else we would be focusing on the wrong thing. It's illusory. Believing in that kind of perception will only contribute to the dukkha... whether it's coming from either side, including yours.

You said that there's no "I" in the Dhamma. Well, why don't you try to view things in that way now? You seem to be fixated on it... even to the point where you believe that it's part of the topic. The word "I" has nothing to do with the person's issue who wrote that blog.

I think that the real issue here is that he encountered something which he didn't like, and then some people in here were concerned enough about it to discuss that. "I" had no part in this... never has been, and it never will be. It's just a word that a guy used.

:anjali:
Last edited by beeblebrox on Sun Nov 04, 2012 9:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:01 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
You said that there's no "I" in the Dhamma. Well, why don't you actually start to try view things in that way now? You seem to be fixated on it... even to the point where you believe that it's part of the topic. The word "I" has nothing to do with the person's issue who wrote that blog.
You are right. My "I" depends on Dhamma, this why i see it even when there isn't.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 11922
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by DNS » Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:06 pm

DAWN wrote: If this "I" is conditioned by "a buddhist", it is.
If this "I" is conditioned by "The Dhamma", there is no "I".
Some people call themselves Buddhist.
Some people call themselves a follower of The Dhamma.

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"

As far as I am concerned, they are the same. Others may see it differently or just want to avoid the big "R" label, which is fine; for me they are the same.

The young man in the blog link in the OP is arguing against Buddhism as it is practiced, not as how the doctrine is brought out in the Suttas. For example, there are numerous references against amulets, superstition, divinity, palm reading, etc.

Of course Buddhism does have some mythological elements brought in from Brahmanism, but they are not essential teachings of dukkha and the way out of dukkha.

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:14 pm

:goodpost:
Complitely agree.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5017
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by Kim OHara » Sun Nov 04, 2012 9:38 pm

Digity wrote:
James the Giant wrote:
Digity wrote:I'm not a fan of Mahayana Buddism.
I have lots of Theravada friends from Thailand and Malaysia, and they pretty much believe the same things in the same way as that guy rebelled against. It's not just the Mahayana.
Fair enough. It just seems like it's more prevalent in Mahayana Buddhism. The first few Buddhist center I went to were Mahayana and I remember one of them talking about how we needed to pray more, because enlightenment was too hard...or something like that. I remember just thinking it was a silly comment and starting to sound too "religiousy". The Theravada teachings are way more in line with the Buddha's original teachings. I guess everyone needs to choose the path that suits them the most. I can't really say much else.
Hi, Digity,
James is absolutely right about Theravada in traditionally Buddhist countries in SE Asia (and probably just as much in China and Japan, too). I think your perception of the difference in religiosity of the two schools reflects the way they have developed in the West - Theravada without so much of the 'cultural baggage' that Mahayana, especially Vajrayana, carried with it.
The difference may be because Theravada has been transmitted to us largely by Westerners while Mahayana has come more often via Asian teachers - especially the Tibetan diaspora - but that's just a guess.

:namaste:
Kim

User avatar
pilgrim
Posts: 1560
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:56 pm

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by pilgrim » Mon Nov 05, 2012 1:18 am

I also posted the link to a local Buddhist discussion group and some of the responses I received was some thing like, "He is ignorant . He wasn't really a Buddhist in the first place. He didn't make an effort to investigate further". I am struck by the fact that many Buddhists want to spread their religion but would place the blame on the person if he fails to believe. Somethimes comments would go further to say his wisdom is weak, he did not have good karma , etc. They fail to see that the guy picked up all these wrong beliefs and practices from other Buddhists, so who is at fault here?

In Malaysia, becoz Theravada is relatively new and being developed on the back of traditional Chinese Mahayana, thankfully, we also have less of the cultural folk religious elements.

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Why I am not a Buddhist

Post by ground » Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:21 am

pilgrim wrote:... "He is ignorant . He wasn't really a Buddhist in the first place. He didn't make an effort to investigate further". I am struck by the fact that many Buddhists want to spread their religion but would place the blame on the person if he fails to believe. ...
It is just the felt self's self-protection strategy :sage:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: fornoxe and 66 guests