Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
'Lifestyle' was a poor word to use, not to infer Seculars having lavish stuff (although some do). There are many millions of secular people who are nice, sweet, aspiring good folk. But if rebirth, karma and the other elements of Right View are ignored or rejected, then they have no business calling themselves Buddhists.
Are there secular Muslims who reject or ignore their Five Pillars, maybe secular Xtians who think Jesus was very wise and good but not divine? If so, would Xtians or Muslims accept them as fellow believers? I think not.
So secular just means a modern person whose worldview is confined to the 5 senses and the brain's cogitations based on only those 5 senses.
Maybe this will clarify for kevxu too.
Exactly. And it just popped into my head that I eat vegetables. But it would inaccurate to say I am a vegetarian because I also eat meat and fish and poultry.
I don't want people to blindly accept everything that a religion proposes, but there is a big difference in saying, "I am a Buddhist" as compared to "I have incorporated a number of Buddhist principles into my life".
But no, I don't lose sleep over it, or anything of the sort.
It's a continuum, but basically in a religion there are 3 reactions one can have:
1. non-thinking acceptance of everything that is done
2. middle ground where one actively thinks about various aspects of the religion and what is happening in it
3. "going to war" over what is happening within the religion
I'm somewhere in that middle ground. Let me give you an example. I didn't know this until recently, but Thai Theravada monks cannot ask a lay person for "stuff", even the basics. In the past few months I have taken the temple fruit, vegetables, cooked dishes, writing tablets, pens, deodorant, bathing soap, shaving cream, razors, and a number of other things (including money). But I also hate to waste money. So one day I asked one of the monks what are things needed in the kitchen or elsewhere in the temple that I could contribute. He was not even allowed to answer the question. I don't care if it's one of there 200-some precepts, I think going that far is dumb. One of my friends said, "Take a case of bottled water when you go for a visit." Uh-huh...during one of the Rains Retreats events I saw that they have about 300 cases of bottled water. It's not driving me crazy, but I just find it unhelpful to all involved. But, so be it.
Let me know if I'm incorrect, but I believe that the fundamentalist monks are not telling you what they need because searching for what one needs is to invite want/desire. For a monk to do such a thing, he is tempting the the (karmic) law, which means he is not neutralizing said law, which puts him farther from enlightenment and nirvana and thus worsening his job (which is supposed to be to find nirvana for his non-self rebirth aspect, in order to at least save one non-self rebirth aspect from reincarnating in samsara).
In fact, I need to go one step further. I began incorporating Buddhism into my life way back about 1986. That's 30+ years ago. And for most of that time...until just the last 5 or 6 months...I was pretty much a solitary Buddhist. So putting down "solitary Buddhists" would be rather ridiculous for me to do.
Do not fret, language is vague. To a lot of people "solitary" and "independent" can sometimes (if not often) be synonymous.
Let me know if I'm incorrect, but I believe that the fundamentalist monks are not telling you what they need because searching for what one needs is to invite want/desire. For a monk to do such a thing, he is tempting the the (karmic) law, which means he is not neutralizing said law, which puts him farther from enlightenment and nirvana and thus worsening his job (which is supposed to be to find nirvana for his non-self rebirth aspect, in order to at least save one non-self rebirth aspect from reincarnating in samsara).
Probably technically true. As a result, lay people should waste money buying things that are unneeded and won't be used. Do you really think they need about 40 bottles of soy sauce? Or 150 cases of drinking water...mostly collected a case or two at a time. And, if I am the one asking them what they need, they are not doing the asking.
I understand your point, but when does a degree of being practical come into things.
For example, for the 3 months I was tutoring a couple of the monks in English, there would always be left-over food on the counter next to the table. One day there was half a pizza sitting there, and I guess since I am American and all Americans love pizza, they invited me to have some. I wisely asked, "How long has that pizza been sitting out on the counter?" "Three days." I suppose not throwing away food that was offered them and getting food poisoning is also technically a rule. (BTW, it is widely thought that Buddha died from eating spoiled meat and getting acute food poisoning...so I guess it's a good thing to eat spoiled food???).
If you can't be honest, then I can't debate/discuss anything with you.
I NEVER said that "all solitary Buddhists" anything.
I NEVER idealized temple-goers, although if you can be an honest poster, we can discuss that, too.
It's interesting that you view this in terms of "honesty". It's clear from your OP that you're putting temple-goers on a pedestal, to the extent that you believe they're learning/practicing "authentic" Buddhism. Here's what you said:
In some forums I notice that many of the people are what I will call "solitary Buddhists" -- they don't go to a temple or consult with monks. They sort of get a flavor of Buddhism, modify it to their liking, and then develop their own path, which may or may not be very much aligned with the Buddhism taught by monks.
Then there are those who somewhat regularly go to a temple. I have been fortunate in the last several months to begin frequent visits to a Thai Theravada temple near where I live. And when I discuss things said by some "solitary Buddhists" online, the monks are somewhere in between being appalled and amused, and find some of [B]the beliefs "solitary Buddhists" to be not "real" Buddhism as taught from Buddhist scriptures[/b].[/quote]
You're holding the Buddhism taught in temples (and practiced by temple-goers) to be "real" Buddhism, in contrast to self-taught Buddhism. You may quibble about the term "idealizing", but it's clear you feel the Buddhism taught by monks is the valid standard, one with which our understanding and practice should be "aligned".
All I'm saying is that we can't assume that teacher-monks as a general class have a correct understanding of the principles the Buddha taught. Nor can we assume that people who are self-taught have a flawed understanding. For that matter, we can't assume that purveyors of "pop-Buddhism" have made any dedicate study of Buddhism at all; they may have simply picked up ideas attributed to Buddhism from the pop-culture environment.
I think the topic is setting up a false dichotomy. I think it would be more accurate to discuss misconceptions about Buddhism that find their way into any population, whether monastic or non-monastic of whatever stripe.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 09-23-2017 at 10:35 PM..
This is an excellent post, that brings up many disparate ideas.
The Mahayana Chan monastery where I studied maintained that ahimsa, reverence for all life includes the insect world. Bhikkhu Bodhi says all sentient beings want to be happy. This is where my brain turns off.
Does this include the several varieties of mosquitoes that give us malaria and dengue fever? How about ticks, leeches, and the filaria worms that cause elephantiasis?
Perhaps this is reductio ad absurdum, but reverence for all life is simply stupid.
Mahayana denigrates Secular Buddhists, but it is clear that Buddhism over the centuries has been diluted with Tantric, Taoist, Bon Po, animist and other elements. Indeed, In Modern Nepal it is difficult to differentiate Buddhism and Hinduism.
Hindu hagiography is present in the Pali Canon, as well as later Mahayana sutras.
Secular Buddhists strive to maintain core values, not the silly gods, devas, hungry ghosts and other desiderata that have crept into Buddhism over the centuries.
As to the sanghas, many of us live far away from a Buddhist facility. This is my case. There is a SGI operation close to home, but for many reasons I feel aversion to this variety of Buddhism, if it is Buddhism.
This. Temple-going may be nearly as likely to lead would-be Buddhists astray as pop-culture "Buddhism" is. Some "independent" Buddhists feel that studying on their own is necessary in order to avoid syncretic elements that have entered into Buddhism, and to avoid misinterpretations of scripture that have crept into the various forms of contemporary Asian Buddhism over the ages.
It's interesting that you view this in terms of "honesty". It's clear from your OP that you're putting temple-goers on a pedestal, to the extent that you believe they're learning/practicing "authentic" Buddhism. Here's what you said:
In some forums I notice that many of the people are what I will call "solitary Buddhists" -- they don't go to a temple or consult with monks. They sort of get a flavor of Buddhism, modify it to their liking, and then develop their own path, which may or may not be very much aligned with the Buddhism taught by monks.
Then there are those who somewhat regularly go to a temple. I have been fortunate in the last several months to begin frequent visits to a Thai Theravada temple near where I live. And when I discuss things said by some "solitary Buddhists" online, the monks are somewhere in between being appalled and amused, and find some of [B]the beliefs "solitary Buddhists" to be not "real" Buddhism as taught from Buddhist scriptures[/b].
You're holding the Buddhism taught in temples (and practiced by temple-goers) to be "real" Buddhism, in contrast to self-taught Buddhism. You may quibble about the term "idealizing", but it's clear you feel the Buddhism taught by monks is the valid standard, one with which our understanding and practice should be "aligned".
All I'm saying is that we can't assume that teacher-monks as a general class have a correct understanding of the principles the Buddha taught. Nor can we assume that people who are self-taught have a flawed understanding. For that matter, we can't assume that purveyors of "pop-Buddhism" have made any dedicate study of Buddhism at all; they may have simply picked up ideas attributed to Buddhism from the pop-culture environment.
I think the topic is setting up a false dichotomy. I think it would be more accurate to discuss misconceptions about Buddhism that find their way into any population, whether monastic or non-monastic of whatever stripe.[/quote]
Since you're telling me what I think and say, you're on your own.
I was discussing through emails with a friend a situation I have noticed, and just thought I would get any of your thoughts on it.
I lived in Thailand for a couple of years and had visited many summers before that, and considered (until recently) myself a mix of Buddhist and Christian. An upheaval in my life recently has made me forego any faith in Christianity, leaving me as a mix of Buddhist and Atheist.
In some forums I notice that many of the people are what I will call "solitary Buddhists" -- they don't go to a temple or consult with monks. They sort of get a flavor of Buddhism, modify it to their liking, and then develop their own path, which may or may not be very much aligned with the Buddhism taught by monks.
Then there are those who somewhat regularly go to a temple. I have been fortunate in the last several months to begin frequent visits to a Thai Theravada temple near where I live. And when I discuss things said by some "solitary Buddhists" online, the monks are somewhere in between being appalled and amused, and find some of the beliefs "solitary Buddhists" to be not "real" Buddhism as taught from Buddhist scriptures.
Any thoughts?
I don't do buddhism because they go to far sometimes for my taste. Like any other religion I guess. The big 3, and I will add one to call them the big 4 (atheism is now one in the states), all go to far sometimes.
I don't do buddhism because they go to far sometimes for my taste. Like any other religion I guess. The big 3, and I will add one to call them the big 4 (atheism is now one in the states), all go to far sometimes.
I consider buddhism, atheism.
I don't know what you mean by "too far", but yes, in a sense, Buddhism is atheistic. But you can be Buddhist and another religion, because for the most part Buddhism takes the position that we can't know about God, therefore we aren't going to concern ourselves with what an unknown entity may or may not be able to do. I know Buddhists who are also christian. I was at one time.
Buddhism is more about what you can do to alleviate your own suffering and the suffering of others.
I don't know what you mean by "too far", but yes, in a sense, Buddhism is atheistic. But you can be Buddhist and another religion, because for the most part Buddhism takes the position that we can't know about God, therefore we aren't going to concern ourselves with what an unknown entity may or may not be able to do. I know Buddhists who are also christian. I was at one time.
Buddhism is more about what you can do to alleviate your own suffering and the suffering of others.
I agree entirely. That is why at my local zen center (and many others I am assuming) we refer to it as our practice. Buddha did not say much about gods or an afterlife. He simply pointed out the way to end your/others suffering.
Like any religion, there are many flavors, each with widely different beliefs and practices. There are some that even resemble the christian world-view to an extent.
Zen is the best fit for me. My local center is an affiliate of the Furnace Mountain Sangha, itself an independent off shoot of the Kwan Um School. It is a very intimate setting in the old store front of a 150 year old building. Very simple and very powerful for me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
