Buddhists are losers?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by tiltbillings »

Denisa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:I would not be so judgmental, not knowing the all that was at play in their choices.
You mean something like that the woman threatened the monk: "if you don't marry me I'll commit suicide!" So, out of compassion to save that being, the monk let go of his robe and celibacy... Could be!

For sure my feeling towards that issue is not THE final judgment, neither yours, but I believe Dhamma has enough medicine for this kind of situations if one is mindful and willing to apply them, especially after 20 years being a monk of some note!

EDIT: Sometimes I noticed a bit of "minimisation" when come to such issues.
No blackmailing of a monk implied. Also, I never said my feelings were the final judgment, nor have I implied much less said anything about yours. Simply, unless the once-monk tells you why he has done what he has done, not being a mind reading Buddha, we simply do not know why he has opted to act the way he has. And being a monk is not necessarily the sine qua non of Dhamma practice.
Sometimes I noticed a bit of "minimisation" when come to such issues.
Movtivation for behavior is often very difficult to determine. Given the case of Japanese monk (the other of whom I know nothing), I am more than willing to give him the benefit of consideration, given his experience and age.
>> 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
Denisa
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 1:57 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by Denisa »

Oh dear... the reason I mentioned the two monks and ALSO THE BOY is to talk about losers as examples from both sides taking the face value of the stories, nothing else, I didn't even mentioned names. Because from the boy's relatives point of view, monks leaving the Order and going back to join the lay life would be the correct thing -- a winner. I never thought it might go this far!
tiltbillings wrote:
Sometimes I noticed a bit of "minimisation" when come to such issues.
Movtivation for behavior is often very difficult to determine. Given the case of Japanese monk (the other of whom I know nothing), I am more than willing to give him the benefit of consideration, given his experience and age.
If he had disrobed and lived a solitary life, that would have been a different matter. But to disrobe and get married to a wealthy beautician, now that indicates lust. I just wonder what are the reactions will be if the Dalai Lama disrobes and marries Madonna (tongue in cheek). Anyway, letting go can be practiced either way...

From Dhammapada:
13. Just as rain breaks through an ill-thatched house, so passion penetrates an undeveloped mind.

19. Much though he recites the sacred texts, but acts not accordingly, that heedless man is like a cowherd who only counts the cows of others — he does not partake of the blessings of the holy life.

259. A man is not versed in Dhamma because he speaks much. He who, after hearing a little Dhamma, realizes its truth directly and is not heedless of it, is truly versed in the Dhamma.
However, about the Japanese monk (since you mentioned): I already mentioned in another thread in Lounge that I have a friend in Thailand. She also a beautician who took meditation instructions from the Japanese monk. In the beginning of January 2012, she told me something an affair between the Japanese monk and another beautician, that's I think more than one year before his leaving the robe. Anyway, this is my last post about the Japanese monk.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by tiltbillings »

Denisa wrote: . . .
Assuming the beautician story is true, which is questionable; however, assuming it is not, getting married or not, standing on the outside, looking at the surface, motivation remains elusive. Also, calling loser/winner is irrelevant.
>> 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
walkart
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by walkart »

A strog one is not the one who win over everybody, a strong one is the one who once win over himself.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10184
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by Spiny Norman »

robertk wrote: For all practical intents and purposes, being a Buddhist means that one will quite likely be a loser in worldly terms. Not necessarily a doormat, but quite likely a loser.
There is a real, visible, measurable worldly price that one has to be willing to pay for practicing Buddhism.
Perhaps we can examine this idea on this thread.[/quote]

I think it's difficult to generalise, but presumably Buddhists are less concerned with worldly gain and success - or at least less worried if it doesn't happen. So the priorities for a Buddhist are probably different.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by manas »

I can recall an agonizing day in which many troubles regarding interactions with other people kept plaguing my mind. I could find almost no peace at all, and upon investigation discovered that i was suffering from 'status anxiety'. I contemplated how the Buddha had said that 'praise and blame' are just these worldly conditions that always alternate for us, and I thought "what would it be like to let go of this status anxiety, and really and truly stop caring what other people think about me - to really not give a rats' about it, to only listen to wise folks whom I respect, and as for the fools, to really and truly not worry about what they think of me?" And somehow I was able to let go for a while. As I walked down the street that day, going to this vacant car park that I sometimes use for walking meditation, I can recall how happy I felt, and I thought "wow I never knew how blissful it could be, to live without attachment to either praise or blame in this life". I noticed that, for the rest of that day, people seemed to be able to sense my new attitude, and actually treated me with a bit more respect than usual. I really ought to try it more often. In other words, who cares if some folks label us as 'losers'? In their minds maybe, but really why should we give a rats' what they think? I would say that my overall happiness level is now higher than at any other time since early childhood, despite my status according to mainstream society being quite low (I'm currently unemployed and always struggling to get by from week to week in the material sense). But I don't call that being a 'loser' in any way...although my mind can still give me quite a bit of trouble if I let it, overall, I'm more content than I have been in years. And not because everything is ok all the time, just because, the Dhamma seems to have that effect over the long term...

kind regards
manas
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
Denisa
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 1:57 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by Denisa »

walkart wrote:A strong one is not the one who win over everybody...
When confronted with a such, I'm more than happy to become the loser. So I'm a Buddhist loser. :)
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by tiltbillings »

"Buddhists are losers?"

Only to the extent that one compares oneself to the world. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
>> 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
Denisa
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 1:57 am

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by Denisa »

In order to lose something, first, one has to posses it (either material or immaterial). Those who goes after gain, status, censure, and pleasure will someday face loss, disgrace, praise, and pain. Therefore one who posses less lose less, perhaps nothing.
walkart
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by walkart »

Denisa wrote:In order to lose something, first, one has to posses it (either material or immaterial). Those who goes after gain, status, censure, and pleasure will someday face loss, disgrace, praise, and pain. Therefore one who posses less lose less, perhaps nothing.
Very good reasoning.

Actually nothing is in our possesion. Our body, feeling, perceptions, mental formation, consciousness - all this is out of our full control, so we dont "have" it, it's not our proprety.
User avatar
TheNoBSBuddhist
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Loch Lomond, via the High AND Low road....

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by TheNoBSBuddhist »

Untrue.

That is nihilism, not Buddhism.
:namaste:

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.



Image

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap."
‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....
walkart
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by walkart »

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:Untrue.

That is nihilism, not Buddhism.
It is the way it is.

I can not say to my body to not aging, get ill or dead, i can not choose my mental formation i can just contamplate those which already arise.
Soo i have no full control of it. If i have not full control of it - it's not belong to me. It's not me, mine, my self.

Nihilism (from Pali Canon point of view) is the view that there is no given, no offered, no fruit of good or bad action, no this life no the next life etc.
User avatar
TheNoBSBuddhist
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Loch Lomond, via the High AND Low road....

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by TheNoBSBuddhist »

walkart wrote:
Denisa wrote:In order to lose something, first, one has to posses it (either material or immaterial). Those who goes after gain, status, censure, and pleasure will someday face loss, disgrace, praise, and pain. Therefore one who posses less lose less, perhaps nothing.
Very good reasoning.

Actually nothing is in our possesion. Our body, feeling, perceptions, mental formation, consciousness - all this is out of our full control, so we dont "have" it, it's not our proprety.
you have partial control. So it is partially yours.
To exempt yourself from full control is to say that you are not responsible for everything you think/say/do.

I disagree with your logic.
There is Not-Self.
But there is also Self.
so to a great extent, the body most certainly is yours.
if it is not fully yours, who else controls what happens to it?
:namaste:

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.



Image

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap."
‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....
walkart
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by walkart »

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:
you have partial control. So it is partially yours.
To exempt yourself from full control is to say that you are not responsible for everything you think/say/do.

I disagree with your logic.
There is Not-Self.
But there is also Self.
so to a great extent, the body most certainly is yours.
if it is not fully yours, who else controls what happens to it?
Buddha said that 5 khandhas are not me, mine, my self.

I dont belief in self, in somethink that exist without conditions. I dont find it in any of 5 khandhas.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17191
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Buddhists are losers?

Post by DNS »

In my opinion, Buddhists are not losers by any definition. A loser in unambitious, lazy, not interested in pursuing wealth, career, employment or anything else. Buddhists are not unambitious, since they strive for enlightenment. See my post on the first page of this thread.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 32#p273964

They are also not losers in worldly terms either. Many Buddhists are successful in film, sports, politics, business, careers, etc. Of course the majority are middle class or lower. This is true of any demographic group, including Christians, Muslims, Hindus, etc. The rich are called the One Percent for a reason: they are only 1% of the population. Only 1% of Christians are very wealthy. Only 1% of Muslims are very wealthy; etc. etc.

According to this site: http://www.worldwealthcalculator.org/ you only need to make $33,500 per year to be in the top 5%. You need to make $69,000 per year to be in the top 1%. We probably have many DWers who are in the top 1% or top 5%.

You can be poor and still be a winner. As long as you have some wholesome goals and work diligently toward that, you are a winner. A monk can be a winner. A nun can be a winner. A lay person can be a winner. Even the term sotapanna is often described as "stream-winner".
Post Reply