Lemme Get This Straight

[The Sum of Awe]

Okay, so a Buddhist goes whatever is possible without harming oneself or another. Correct?

So indulgence is possible in Buddhism if it doesn't harm an innocent and conscious being. Right?



I'm wondering if I'm a Buddhist because:

I do indulge but use common sense with it and if it harms something or someone that does not deserve to be harmed, and they are aware of it, I will not indulge there.

I was thinking about making a book with the moral at the end of it as: Accept what is possible to have. And I agree with that. Accept everything as it is.

If I see a can of Pepsi and nobody around me claims it, I will drink it. But if it isn't there I will accept that it's not.

Although if someone who stole a friend of mine's Mountain Dew or something and that is their can and they are ignorant of me taking it, I will take it because they don't deserve it since they stole a Mountain Dew.

If this is true in Buddhism; Satanism and Buddhism are not so different after all in my opinion.

What are your thoughts? Is this right on?

 

[Willamena]

I'll just say that, if you're Buddhist, there is no one who deserves to be harmed.

 

[Onkara]

Okay, so a Buddhist goes whatever is possible without harming oneself or another. Correct?

So indulgence is possible in Buddhism if it doesn't harm an innocent and conscious being. Right?

I'm wondering if I'm a Buddhist because:

I do indulge but use common sense with it and if it harms something or someone that does not deserve to be harmed, and they are aware of it, I will not indulge there.

I was thinking about making a book with the moral at the end of it as: Accept what is possible to have. And I agree with that. Accept everything as it is.

If I see a can of Pepsi and nobody around me claims it, I will drink it. But if it isn't there I will accept that it's not.

Although if someone who stole a friend of mine's Mountain Dew or something and that is their can and they are ignorant of me taking it, I will take it because they don't deserve it since they stole a Mountain Dew.

If this is true in Buddhism; Satanism and Buddhism are not so different after all in my opinion.

What are your thoughts? Is this right on?

Hi TSoA
I am pretty new to Buddhism, but my understanding is that greed is not helpful in the pursuit of enlightenment and goes against the five precepts which are summarised here as follows:

1. I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking life

2. I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking what is not given.

3. I undertake the training rule to abstain from sexual misconduct.

4. I undertake the training rule to abstain from false speech.

5. I undertake the training rule to abstain from fermented drink that causes heedlessness.


According to this site/author precept 3 covers over indulgence or greed also:

"3) To undertake the training to avoid sensual misconduct. This precept is often mistranslated or misinterpreted as relating only to sexual misconduct but it covers any overindulgence in any sensual pleasure such as gluttony as well as misconduct of a sexual nature."

Really the judge is your own consciousness, it seems. I do not know enough about Satanism to compare this attitude. The similarity I assume is that all beings follow their will or volition.

I would be happy to learn from others responses

 

[Me Myself]

There are many ways and paths in buddhism and also many traditions.

I say that they key in all of it is as buddha says, to keep what makes sense to you and works to you and leave the rest that doesn´t work for you or sounds senseless to your understanding.

The general idea in buddhism is not only not to harm but to develop universal kindness and compassion.

I think buddhism is less "egoist" than satanism. At least it aims to be. Satanism as I understand it claims there is nothing wrong with being greedy or egoistical or egotistical on itself (again, I may be wrong the only thing Iknow from itcomes from numerous posts I´ve read inthis forum from satanists)

Buddhism for the other hand thinks there is more peace and selfrealization at trascending the ego than in finding ways to indulge it (responsably or otherwise). So buddhism tries to find a way in the middle between not being too selfindulgent nor being to ascetic and self punishing. Eventually leaving to universal compassion, peace and true freedom.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Thanks guys, still open for more answers too from different Buddhists.

 

[nnmartin]

One of the main aims in Buddhism is to avoid obsession.

So you can indulge, but not too often!

 

[SageTree]

^ more or less... this is a pretty good answer for what SoA is looking for.

I agree the 'ego' is embraced or seen different in the two Paths.

 

[SageTree]

One of the main aims in Buddhism is to avoid obsession.

So you can indulge, but not too often!

And don't forget... avoiding obsession can become it's own obsession

 

[The Sum of Awe]

So you can indulge just not make it your whole life's purpose? I can agree to that.

 

[SageTree]

Perhaps I could generalize the Mahayana perspective and add there is much to be said about intention in 'indulging' in anything.

 

[DreadFish]

This may provide a different perspective on the precepts. These are Bodhidharma's one-mind precepts, they are basically a non-dual version of the precepts.

In the instruction, to receive is to transmit; to transmit is to awaken; and to awaken the Buddha Mind is called true Jukai. Each precept is a vignette of the one-mind that is always with us.

1. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the everlasting Dharma, not raising the view of extinction is called “not killing.”

2. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the ungraspable Dharma, not arousing the thought of gain is called “not stealing.”

3. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the Dharma of nonattachment, not raising the view of attachment is called “not being greedy.”

4. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the inexplicable Dharma, not expounding a word is called “not lying."

5. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the intrinsically pure Dharma, not arousing ignorance is called “not being intoxicated.”

6. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the faultless Dharma, not talking about sins and mistakes is called “not talking about others’ faults and errors.”

7. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the Dharma of equality, not talking about self and others is called “not elevating oneself and putting down others.”

8. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the genuine, all pervading Dharma, not clinging to a single thing is called “not being stingy.”

9. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the Dharma of no-self, not contriving a reality of self is called “not being angry.”

10. Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the Dharma of oneness, not raising a distinction between Buddhas and beings is called “not slandering the Three Treasures.”

Personally, I would say that just agreeing and thinking about these things when performing such actions is not enough. Rather, contemplate and realize, when realized, these understandings are simply spontaneously present without effort.

In the different vehicles of the dharma, there is sutra (renunciation), tantra (transformation), and dzogchen, the natural great perfection (self liberation). I also hold the path of zen with that of dzogchen, because they both have the same approach (zen simply being more gradual for the most part). Self liberation is not renouncing, because renouncing implies that there is something to renounce; it is not transformation/transmutation because that implies that there is something to transform. It is the simple abiding in ones natural enlightened nature and letting all things be as they actually are, thus enlightenment is naturally present in transcendent awareness.


Sources: The One-Mind Precepts of Bodhidharma

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Okay, thanks for taking time for working on that post, Dreadfish, but I still don't understand.


So a Buddhist just lets whatever happens happen and doesn't try to change anything? A Buddhist can't go buy a soda when they just want it, they have to wait until it arrives to them?

 

[koan]

No one here can really help you. What is needed is to begin actual practice with a teacher. May I suggest, that you begin with the four noble truths and the noble eightfold path. It's like learning a new game. Someone gives you the rules, then says ok, now you can play. But do you really understand the game?

 

[no-body]

It is called the middle way for a reason. Indulging once in a blue moon in something that harms no one is OK if you use common sense but I don't really think you can make it part of your practice. Well I mean you could in theory as long as you where totally mindful but you would ride the natural highs and lows that Buddhism tries to avoid.

 

[SageTree]

No one here can really help you. What is needed is to begin actual practice with a teacher. May I suggest, that you begin with the four noble truths and the noble eightfold path. It's like learning a new game. Someone gives you the rules, then says ok, now you can play. But do you really understand the game?

+1

I think the old cliche, how do you tell someone who has never eaten a mango what it tastes like?, kind of fits this.

You deciding the answer to your question 'in Buddhist terms' has a lot to do with your own experiences with Buddhist teachings.

Starting with the 4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Path is good advice.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

K wait, here's a better way of explaining my thought:

Accept life as it is. If you live off a seed, no clothing, no house, live with it, for it could be worse and it will all be over sometime. But if you have the chance to get a house and it doesn't hurt another go get that house.

If you already live in a rich house, tons of cloths, and tons of food, it's alright to be picky, but make sure you don't waste useful things still. And if you run out of money and can't afford anything anymore, become the seed man, accept that.

So I am rich and I have the opportunity to get 24 packs of mountain dew and not have to drink water which I also have. It doesn't mean I waste the water. And if I do become poor I will accept the lacking of mountain dew and live with water.

 

[DreadFish]

I +1000 that you should practice and find a teacher. Actually, im not sure how necessary a teacher is for everybody, but it certainly helps. I've never had an external teacher. BUT, what you (and anyone who's interested in the path) must do is practice. Theres no ifs, ands, or buts, practice will answer more questions. The things you read, teachings, perspectives, are all food for thought, you bury them near your plant for nourishment and your plant will grow. So anyone who wants to understand reality, must practice.

Meditate, find one that works for you best, I prefer calm abiding and single-pointed focus meditations. Also, practice as constantly as you can. Simply being aware in the moment does wonders.

But yeah, basically, these teachings are meant to be understood through practice, not theory.

 

[SageTree]

Biggest thing here.....

I don't think anyone is going to be able to conceptually tell you whether or not to drink that Mt. Dew or Pepsi....

You must investigate.

Find a local Buddhist centre or meeting in your town and go.

I'm pretty sure you live in North America... so click this like and go to the country/state/town you live in and look around....

This might not have them all, so google around as well:

World Buddhist Directory - Presented by BuddhaNet.Net

:namaste
SageTree

 

[Vasiel]

I think the Buddha can answer this himself:

"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it." - The Kalama Sutta

And this:

"Therefore, be ye lamps unto yourselves, be ye a refuge to yourselves. Hold fast to Truth as a lamp; hold fast to the truth as a refuge. Look not for a refuge in anyone beside yourselves. And those, who shall be a lamp unto themselves, shall betake themselves to no external refuge, but holding fast to the Truth as their lamp, and holding fast to the Truth as their refuge, they shall reach the topmost height." - Mahaparinibbana Sutta.

The general idea of Buddhism is relatively simple in that it's main teaching is to avoid any extreme view, thought, speech or action. Ultimately it will be up to the individual to discern mindfully what they do, or do not consider to be indulgence.

Remember also that there is no concept of "sin", nor a concept of "absolute evil". The beings in hell also have the potential to be rebirthed into higher states of compassion and consciousness. As much potential as every human being has of reaching enlightenment.

You will hear Buddhist teachers speak a lot on Mindfulness. They do this because it is important and often we go around in our day by day lives often with little to no attention given to our actions, or the reactions they cause... until something comes back to hit us in the face.

Buddha taught time and time again, that the individual's path was up to the individual. Yes he found a path that worked for him, and has worked for many people, but he was also aware that not everyone was the same as him. He knew that every individual had individual needs that needed addressing. So whilst he spent much of the time answering questions of his monks and lay-people, he always stressed that the best person to go to advice on our journeys... was ourselves.

Or as people say, our innate "Buddha Nature". I do hope I've been of some assistance.

Namaste!

 

[ratikala]

Okay, so a Buddhist goes whatever is possible without harming oneself or another. Correct?

:yes: no question about that one !

So indulgence is possible in Buddhism if it doesn't harm an innocent and conscious being. Right?

depends wether you count your self as a concious being and of course the degree of the indulgence

I'm wondering if I'm a Buddhist because:

I do indulge but use common sense with it and if it harms something or someone that does not deserve to be harmed, and they are aware of it, I will not indulge there

so , if you want to indulge in something your self , and you are aware that it is an indulgence , may be you should think twice about dooing it ?

I was thinking about making a book with the moral at the end of it as: Accept what is possible to have. And I agree with that. Accept everything as it is.

writing a book is a good idea as whilst writing and re reading one gets to realy examine ones own thoughts

If I see a can of Pepsi and nobody around me claims it, I will drink it. But if it isn't there I will accept that it's not.

strictly speaking "not to take that which is not freely given" if the can of pepsi has a lable on it saying please take me , then that is freely given ! if it is just un attended , it still belings to someone ( who might have lost it )!!!

Although if someone who stole a friend of mine's Mountain Dew or something and that is their can and they are ignorant of me taking it, I will take it because they don't deserve it since they stole a Mountain Dew.

sounds like two wrongs dont make a right ....to me

If this is true in Buddhism; Satanism and Buddhism are not so different after all in my opinion.

well .....seeing as I think this is not realy true of buddhism , I think I'll have to agree with earlier comments about satanism !!!

What are your thoughts?

as far as buddhism goes I suppose one starts with agreeing with one precept ,

not killing , or not harming and when you've realy understood the first precept , then you start on the next

not stealing not to take that which is not freely given .

not to indulge in missconduct , that means any missconduct including sexual missconduct , any thing that might bring about diss harmony , (in any ones life including your own) .

not to tell un truths , simple no lying ! not even tiny ones !!!

not to indulge in intoxicants , strictly speaking anything which dulls the mind or dissrupts our practice of mindfullness !!!

Is this right on?

well .....not harming is a good start ,
but if you realy wnt to call your self a buddhist ....then im affraid you realy ought to be keeping all five precepts and thats just for starters , those are just the lay precepts ,

its a good thing to read more about them and reflect on the harm we can thoughtlessly inflict upon eachother when we do not respect such basic dharma , not to mention the inadvertant harm we do to ourselves ,
ok a little harmless indulgence , its up to you but examine carefully the word harmless and then reflect on the good fortune you have , merely by having in inteligent human birth , ah ha how lucky ! I should not waste it , I am fortunate enough to have understanding , I should practice mindfullness

so if you realy want my thoughts .....and you want to be" right on " then
mindfullness is realy where its at !!!!

namaskars ......ratikala