Dharma within Hinduism, Buddhism and beyond

[Dawnofhope]

There is an old story told of a man who fell into a drunken sleep. His friend stayed by him as long as he could but, being compelled to go and fearing that he might be in want, the friend hid a jewel in the drunken man's garment.

When the drunken man recovered, not knowing that his friend had hid a jewel in his garment, he wandered about in poverty and hunger.
A long time afterwards the two men met again and the friend told the poor man about the jewel and advised him to look for it. Like the drunken man of the story, people wander about suffering in this life of birth and death, unconscious of what is hidden away in their inner
nature, pure and untarnished, the priceless treasure of Buddha nature.

However unconscious people may be of the fact that everyone has within his possession this supreme nature, and however degraded and ignorant they may be, Buddha never loses faith in them because He knows that even in the least of them there are, potentially, all the virtues of
Buddhahood.

So Buddha awakens faith in them who are deceived by ignorance and cannot see their own Buddha nature, leads them away from their illusions and teaches them that originally there is no difference between themselves and Buddhahood.

http://www.e4thai.com/e4e/images/pdf/theteachingofbuddha.pdf

 

[atanu]

...

But beyond this, we have seen that the Bhagavad- gita begins where ordinary Vedic dharma leaves off. Lord Krishna has indicated this in various ways. Here, at the end of His teaching, the Lord most dramatically declares that full surrender to the Supreme Lord stands above the entire range of sacred duties known generally as dharma: “Renouncing all dharmas, take refuge in Me alone. Have no regret, for I shall free you from all sins.” (Bg. 18.66)
.

Shankaracharya in his Gitabhasya explains the verse as "Renouncing all works surrender to Ishwara, the Self of all". 'All works' includes righteous as well as prohibited works. Towards this he cites sruti text from Katha Upanishad Up. 1.2.24: "Not he who has not abstained from evil deed....can attain It."

The point, I am making is that this is not beyond the Vedas. Gita cannot contradict sruti of Vedanta and also the samhita portion of the Vedas.

 

[Aupmanyav]

That too is how I see Dharma. It is how we are and how we live our lives that is the most important. If our ultimate purpose in this life is the attainment of Moksha then that will come to both of us in time. If our souls reincarnate back into another life then that is what will happen. If our souls are to meet God in the next world and progress onwards then that is what will happen. If there is no soul and no God then when we die we die. You may have insight into such matters that I do not. All that I can aspire to in this world is to be the best I can be and work towards the betterment of others.

Souls, God, Gods, Goddesses, rebirth, next world. Many things that as an 'advaitist', I would not accept. 'Moksha' is understanding of the what we erroneously perceive. Betterment of oneself comes before the betterment of others. Buddha advised people to stay away from unfruitful pursuits calling them 'Acinteyya'. (The Imponderables - Acinteyya - Wikipedia)

“Therefore, bhikkhus, do not reflect about the world, thinking: ‘The world is eternal’ or ‘The world is not eternal’; or ‘The world is finite’ or ‘The world is infinite’; or ‘The soul and the body are the same’ or ‘The soul is one thing, the body is another’; or ‘The Tathagata exists after death,’ or ‘The Tathagata does not exist after death,’ or ‘The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death,’ or ‘The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.’ For what reason? Because, bhikkhus, this reflection is unbeneficial, irrelevant to the fundamentals of the holy life, and does not lead to revulsion, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna."
Saṃyutta Nikāya 56.41

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Thank you for your comprehensive reply. It is excellent and steers me in the right direction to learn more. I can not fault anything you have said.

Thanks. Gotta little personal in that reply. I love my American culture. It does shape how we view others and likewise the other way around. As long as we respect each other's views, Im good.

 

[Marcion]

Thank you.

What Anandamurti said makes sense. The references to Krishna especially resonated for me.

It is nice to see that the teachings of Lord Krishna match those of Shrii Shrii Anandamurti so closely (since they were not written down during the life time of Shrii Krishna but somewhat after. Of course Anandamurti has added things for the needs of the times, the world has changed much in 3500 years. But concepts like Dharma don't change and they certainly cannot be reinterpreted by anyone with a religious way of thinking.

 

[Vinayaka]

That too is how I see Dharma. It is how we are and how we live our lives that is the most important. If our ultimate purpose in this life is the attainment of Moksha then that will come to both of us in time. If our souls reincarnate back into another life then that is what will happen. If our souls are to meet God in the next world and progress onwards then that is what will happen. If there is no soul and no God then when we die we die. You may have insight into such matters that I do not. All that I can aspire to in this world is to be the best I can be and work towards the betterment of others.

Words just don't cut it. Actions do. Anybody can say anything. I do this, I do that, I accept this, I accept that. I am charitable, and perhaps the worst violating phrase ... "I understand."

When words are backed by actions, or actions need no words at all, then we might be getting somewhere.

Anyone can shift any 'concept' (in quotes because it may well have incorrect meaning attached) from any religion into another one, and make the claim that it works. That's just a claim, it may or may not be true. If it makes the claimant feel proud that they've convinced themselves they understand a foreign concept, so be it. Not my problem. Time will heal that.

I personally have doubts when any member of any Abrahamic faith claims they know dharma. Heck, I'm of a dharmic faith, and I don't live it well.

There are many examples of 'not dharma', homophobia being an obvious one, trying to change people to your way being another.

 

[sayak83]

That too is how I see Dharma. It is how we are and how we live our lives that is the most important. If our ultimate purpose in this life is the attainment of Moksha then that will come to both of us in time. If our souls reincarnate back into another life then that is what will happen. If our souls are to meet God in the next world and progress onwards then that is what will happen. If there is no soul and no God then when we die we die. You may have insight into such matters that I do not. All that I can aspire to in this world is to be the best I can be and work towards the betterment of others.

That is a great perspective to have in my opinion.
I personally believe anybody from any faith and worldview can be Dharmic. Nelson Mandela is a good example, so is Socrates from ancient times. Of course there will be many examples that I do not know of.

 

[Marcion]

I have seen Christians and Atheists working in AMPS, so I think Bahai would feel welcome too. Anyone has the birth right to do yoga and meditation, it doesn't depend on your cultural or religious background.

That is a great perspective to have in my opinion.
I personally believe anybody from any faith and worldview can be Dharmic. Nelson Mandela is a good example, so is Socrates from ancient times. Of course there will be many examples that I do not know of.

Was Nelson Mandela a vegetarian?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Mandela really prefers nothing more than oxtail stew, which according to Ndoyiya, is one of Mandela’s favourites.
https://www.nelsonmandela.org/uploads/files/Publicity_Guidelines_Ukutya_Kwasekhaya.pdf

Boiled Umleqwa (Farm Chicken)

Read more at:
Fresh out of Nelson Mandela’s kitchen - Times of India

 

[sayak83]

I have seen Christians and Atheists working in AMPS, so I think Bahai would feel welcome too. Anyone has the birth right to do yoga and meditation, it doesn't depend on your cultural or religious background.

Was Nelson Mandela a vegetarian?

No. And many Hindus are non-veg as well.

 

[Marcion]

No. And many Hindus are non-veg as well.

And so are many Muslims, Christians, Bahais and many more as well. Following Dharma is not only for in between meals, it means 24 hours a day.

 

[sayak83]

And so are many Muslims, Christians, Bahais and many more as well. Following Dharma is not only for in between meals, it means 24 hours a day.

Veg is recommended for certain Hindu paths, not for others. Shakta's eat meat, so do many who follow Tantric forms of Saivism. Vegetarianism is mostly for Bhakti based Vaishnava and Saiva traditions. See more here,

Are Hindus vegetarian?

In Hindu Puranas, Vishnu is a strict vegetarian god, but Shiva eats whatever he is given and the Goddess loves blood. Again this is not a strict rule. For when Vishnu descends as Ram, he hunts deer for food (an idea that many vegetarian Hindus reject rather violently). In Jain scriptures, Krishna is shown as participating in a wedding banquet of Nemi-nath, where animals are slaughtered. Also as Narasimha, the man-lion avatar, Vishnu drinks blood. Shiva being a hermit accepts whatever he is offered. In his Gora-Bhairav gentle form, he is offered fruits and milk. In his Kala-Bhairav fierce form, he is offered blood and alcohol. The Goddess is associated with nature’s most elemental actions – sex and violence. She is offered blood. In Varahi temples of Odisha, she eats fish. Yet, many Goddess temples where she is closely associated with Vishnu, she is vegetarian: as in Kolhapur Amba-bai temple in Maharasthra, or the Goddess on the Hills of Punjab and Jammu. So again, no fixed rule, even for the gods.

Like everything, eating or not eating animals is a personal choice. Some will feel its a hindrance to the praxis of Dharma, if so, they should refrain from it.

 

[Marcion]

Like everything, eating or not eating animals is a personal choice. Some will feel its a hindrance to the praxis of Dharma, if so, they should refrain from it.

You spoke of Hindu dharma's, I spoke of Manava or Bhagavad Dharma as practised and presribed by Lords Shiva, Krishna and Anandamurti. There are many many Hindu mythical stories made up by Hindus in the past. I don't think you can follow Dharma without practising Yama and Niyama and slaughtering animals for food goes against Brahmacarya, Ishvara Pranidhana and Ahimsa.

 

[sayak83]

You spoke of Hindu dharma's, I spoke of Manava or Bhagavad Dharma as practised and presribed by Lords Shiva, Krishna and Anandamurti. There are many many Hindu mythical stories made up by Hindus in the past. I don't think you can follow Dharma without practising Yama and Niyama and slaughtering animals for food goes against Brahmacarya, Ishvara Pranidhana and Ahimsa.

That's your opinion. I disagree. Krishna himself ate meat in the Mahabharata (Arjuna and Krishna often went on hunting expeditions during their time in Indraprastha), obviously. And Siva in many forms traditionally accepts meat as prasada. The Shakta path for Dharma is not for vegetarians.Bhakti path to Dharma is. Jnana path works for both, so does the Karma path depending on your role in society.

What works for you works for you, very well and good. Please don't try to say "this is the only way, and no others"...for then you move away from Dharma.
Majority of Hindus are non-vegeteranians and have always been that way.
What India Really Eats
Only eating milk giving cows is proscribed for Dharmic Hindu-s in general, nothing else.

 

[Marcion]

That's your opinion. I disagree. Krishna himself ate meat in the Mahabharata (Arjuna and Krishna often went on hunting expeditions during their time in Indraprastha), obviously. And Siva in many forms traditionally accepts meat as prasada. The Shakta path for Dharma is not for vegetarians.Bhakti path to Dharma is. Jnana path works for both, so does the Karma path depending on your role in society.

What works for you works for you, very well and good. Please don't try to say "this is the only way, and no others"...for then you move away from Dharma.
Majority of Hindus are non-vegeteranians and have always been that way.
What India Really Eats
Only eating milk giving cows is proscribed for Dharmic Hindu-s in general, nothing else.

I am not at all saying that 'there is only one way'. I'm just pointing out a difference between Hinduism and the historical teachings of those three great Guru's.

I know the Hindu mythology is very rich, but myth is not historical. Hindu's believe all kinds of stuff that seems implausable and makes even a resurrection seem realistic. So please don't try to force Hinduism on me because I'm not. So it is not "my opinion" but it is my path, my samgha, please respect it.
It may be possible that in the time of Krishna yogi's sometimes ate deer meat because its effect is sentient (sattvic) other than with other types of meat and fish (there may also have still been extensive jungles at the tie Krishna lived).

 

[Unveiled Artist]

That's your opinion. I disagree. Krishna himself ate meat in the Mahabharata (Arjuna and Krishna often went on hunting expeditions during their time in Indraprastha), obviously. And Siva in many forms traditionally accepts meat as prasada. The Shakta path for Dharma is not for vegetarians.Bhakti path to Dharma is. Jnana path works for both, so does the Karma path depending on your role in society.

What works for you works for you, very well and good. Please don't try to say "this is the only way, and no others"...for then you move away from Dharma.
Majority of Hindus are non-vegeteranians and have always been that way.
What India Really Eats
Only eating milk giving cows is proscribed for Dharmic Hindu-s in general, nothing else.

I have a quick question for you? In what manner or worldview do Hindus see gods and goddesses mythological literally as to follow and express what the gods do and dont do as well as what practitioners should do in relations to their gods or goddesses chosen?

Is it literal like goddess X was actually a vegetarian and (making this up) killed four dragons and got married to another god, like that?

How much does mythology mirror or is a part of the physical life and history to which one can speak of gods and goddesses as if they do and say the things in which hindus express?

How much does a X hindu intepret and believe about the stories of their god that affects how they practice and express their gods history and life?

I tried rephrasing it so hopefully one of them makes sense.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Souls, God, Gods, Goddesses, rebirth, next world. Many things that as an 'advaitist', I would not accept. 'Moksha' is understanding of the what we erroneously perceive. Betterment of oneself comes before the betterment of others. Buddha advised people to stay away from unfruitful pursuits calling them 'Acinteyya'. (The Imponderables - Acinteyya - Wikipedia)

“Therefore, bhikkhus, do not reflect about the world, thinking: ‘The world is eternal’ or ‘The world is not eternal’; or ‘The world is finite’ or ‘The world is infinite’; or ‘The soul and the body are the same’ or ‘The soul is one thing, the body is another’; or ‘The Tathagata exists after death,’ or ‘The Tathagata does not exist after death,’ or ‘The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death,’ or ‘The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.’ For what reason? Because, bhikkhus, this reflection is unbeneficial, irrelevant to the fundamentals of the holy life, and does not lead to revulsion, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna."
Saṃyutta Nikāya 56.41

Nicely said. Metaphysical speculation has its limits and I don't like to dwell on it. Buddha strongly emphasised the point with the parable of the poison arrow.

Parable of the Poisoned Arrow - Wikipedia

Instead we should focus on our duty in this life. That's one of the most important meanings of dharma.

 

[sayak83]

I have a quick question for you? In what manner or worldview do Hindus see gods and goddesses mythological literally as to follow and express what the gods do and dont do as well as what practitioners should do in relations to their gods or goddesses chosen?

Is it literal like goddess X was actually a vegetarian and (making this up) killed four dragons and got married to another god, like that?

How much does mythology mirror or is a part of the physical life and history to which one can speak of gods and goddesses as if they do and say the things in which hindus express?

How much does a X hindu intepret and believe about the stories of their god that affects how they practice and express their gods history and life?

I tried rephrasing it so hopefully one of them makes sense.

It depends on individuals of course. Most importantly, they provide narrative structures that provide ways to understand the present and guide actions.

 

[sayak83]

I am not at all saying that 'there is only one way'. I'm just pointing out a difference between Hinduism and the historical teachings of those three great Guru's.

I know the Hindu mythology is very rich, but myth is not historical. Hindu's believe all kinds of stuff that seems implausable and makes even a resurrection seem realistic. So please don't try to force Hinduism on me because I'm not. So it is not "my opinion" but it is my path, my samgha, please respect it.
It may be possible that in the time of Krishna yogi's sometimes ate deer meat because its effect is sentient (sattvic) other than with other types of meat and fish (there may also have still been extensive jungles at the tie Krishna lived).

I am happy to respect your path. You should do the same for paths of others.

 

[Marcion]

I am happy to respect your path.

Good to hear that, you did not give off that impression initially.
With the concept of Dharma it is (for me at least) as with other concepts that find their definitions in spiritual philosophy, i.e. they are fixed by their practical or effectual implications in real life and not by some religious or mythical inspiration. Hence they are also not affected by whether you feel that you belong to any religion or (as in my case) you do not.