Religion and works

[Rainbow Mage]

Actually Buddhists can drink alcohol, we just can't get drunk.

 

[Mr Cheese]

Actually Buddhists can drink alcohol, we just can't get drunk.

many prohibit it...

.......................................

Buddhism and Alcohol
By Sanja Blackburn
Alcohol consumption is inconsistent with a Buddhist's quest to understand and develop the mind. Buddhists believe that by practicing meditation, wisdom and morality, every individual has the innate ability to experience true happiness.
The Buddha encouraged his followers to refrain from consuming any kind of intoxicant. This included alcohol, cigarettes and drugs. These substances are said to be inconsistent with Buddhist beliefs as they distort the mind. Buddhists regard the mind as precious; they work diligently, through meditation, to master it.
Buddhists follow five precepts, serving as guidelines for correct and moral behaviour. One of the precepts clearly states that Buddhists should 'refrain from taking intoxicants'. Buddhists adhere to these guidelines with differing degrees of success.
Only a small number of followers practice Buddhism seriously, even though an overwhelming number of people in Buddhist countries, such as Thailand, identify as Buddhists. Despite the Buddha's teachings, a number of Thai adolescents consume alcohol.
Despite the popularity of Buddhism as a philosophy in the west, few people are willing to follow the Buddha's advice regarding alcohol. People with a shallow understanding of Buddhism may believe that alcohol is acceptable if used in moderation, justifying this in terms of the Buddha's preaching of the 'Middle Way' philosophy.
The Buddha was against any form of alcohol consumption, even in moderation, because of the effect it has on the mind.
Mindfulness is central to Buddhist philosophy. This concept requires a constant awareness of changes occurring in the mind and body. Mindfulness enables the individual to react wisely to emotions and sensations when they arise. Alcohol distorts the mind and makes it impossible to practice this tenet.


Buddhism and alcohol

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Yes it's true that a Buddhist isn't supposed to alter our state of mind, and you'll find, many scholars don't consider drinking alcohol moderately to threaten that. I don't alter my state of mind either, I never get drunk. The reason a Buddhist is supposed to be mindful at all times is because people often inflict harm by accident, when they're being wreckless and not thinking their actions through. Although I will say this- if a person can't control their drinking it's probably best they don't do it.

 

[Evee]

I think it's more important to be good by which I mean respect (if not follow) the same G-d-given standards of morality I do. (Honestly, what other standards would you have me choose? If I thought they were no good, why would I be following them? I'm pretty comfortable that they're wide enough for all sorts of people to live with happily.) Having more people follow those standards would create a better world for all of us than having more people who believed in G-d, but weren't behaving morally. Since I believe that at some point, the Messiah will come and we'll all know G-d then, I'd rather have a bunch of nice people working, even without knowing it, to make the world a better place than a bunch of people who believed in G-d but were mean/greedy/hateful etc.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I agree with the chatter above me.

 

[SugaCubez352]

In your opinion- Is it more important to believe a certain religion, or more important to be good and benevolent no matter what your religion is? I think of course that being good and benevolent is the most important

Being good and benevolent is nice, but aimless.

Religion has a point to it, or an end goal or a destination: heaven, paradise, nirvanna, whatever. Religion via its rites and rituals also gives one's actions a point and aim. Religion also gives rise to shared culture which adds to a religious community's every day life and quality.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Well yes I agree religion has a point to it and gives one's actions aim, but is it more important to have a religion or be good to one another? One can have a religion and not practice what they preach, whilst a non-religious person can be the most benevolent person on earth.

 

[Mr Cheese]

Being good and benevolent is nice, but aimless.

Religion has a point to it, or an end goal or a destination: heaven, paradise, nirvanna, whatever. Religion via its rites and rituals also gives one's actions a point and aim. Religion also gives rise to shared culture which adds to a religious community's every day life and quality.

poppycock

being good and benevolent of course is to partake of divine union
that is where exotericism ends and esotericism begins in that "being good" is understood and acted upon in sucha way that being good has far deeper connotations than simply being good.

Again, on an outward exoteric level there is a "goal" a "destination" an "end"
at a deeper level we understand this is merely an analogy

consider:

"I gained nothing at all from supreme enlightenment
It is for this very reason it is called supreme enlightenment"

--Buddha

“There is no path that leads to Zen.​

How can you follow a path to where you are right now?”​

–Robert Allen​

“When my Beloved appears,With what eye do I see Him?
With His eye, not with mine,
For none sees Him except Himself.”

–Ibn Arabi

 

[berrychrisc]

Being good and benevolent is nice, but aimless.

Religion has a point to it, or an end goal or a destination: heaven, paradise, nirvanna, whatever. Religion via its rites and rituals also gives one's actions a point and aim. Religion also gives rise to shared culture which adds to a religious community's every day life and quality.

The point to it is love - loving God and loving other people. The 'end goal' is love. Heaven means nothing if the point of it all -love- has been missed. The point and aim of one's actions is love. Religion is "nice, but aimless" without it. Religion is not necessary, but love is.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Well I don't know what Therevada teaches regarding the nature of the afterlife and nirvana, but my particular school of Mahayana, Chinese Pure Land, teaches that it is through good works that one attains heaven, not through nirvana. The reason being that not every person can reach nirvana, it takes a person with a special kind of mind, to put it as the Buddha did: "A one such as the Buddha is not born everywhere." The Buddha had a very unusual sort of mind. The Buddha knew that not everyone could attain the state of mind he did, but they could cultivate their minds through meditation, and live as a good follower of the way by following the precepts.

 

[SugaCubez352]

poppycock

being good and benevolent of course is to partake of divine union
that is where exotericism ends and esotericism begins in that "being good" is understood and acted upon in sucha way that being good has far deeper connotations than simply being good.

Again, on an outward exoteric level there is a "goal" a "destination" an "end"
at a deeper level we understand this is merely an analogy

consider:

"I gained nothing at all from supreme enlightenment
It is for this very reason it is called supreme enlightenment"

--Buddha

“There is no path that leads to Zen.​

How can you follow a path to where you are right now?”​

–Robert Allen​

“When my Beloved appears,With what eye do I see Him?
With His eye, not with mine,
For none sees Him except Himself.”

–Ibn Arabi

So what Mr. Cheese? Do you think Buddhhism is Christianity where you can quote scriptures and expect people to follow the written word?

So what if Buddha said that or if some guy named Robert Allen said this? What does Robert Allen apprehension of Life and Buddhism have anything to do with me?

You posted a quote by the Buddha. Do you think I am just going to accept those two lines without questioning where the quote came from, what context it was stated in, and what surrounding writings it was found in?

The Buddha also said:

Kalama Sutta:

“Do not believe in anything because you have heard it. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. Do not believe in anything because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. But after observing and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all then accept it and live up to it.” – Buddha (Anguttara Nikaya, Vol1, 188-193)

So just because Buddha said something and some guy named Robert Allen said something about Zen, that I - a Theravada - should just obey and listen to them?

What happened to my freedom to observe and collect my own insights from my own experiences: Vibhajjavada?

It is from my own personal experience and observation that I stated that a religionless life is aimless and that religion, because of it's end goal(s) - be those goals heaven, compassion, Buddhahood, relationship with Christ, enlightenment, or whatever - that gives people something to work towards, as well as giving them/us a common culture.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

What happens when a religion following a said religious figure becomes corrupt though, like I believe has happened with Christianity? I believe Christianity has lost sight of Jesus and what he taught in their quest to legislate government and rid the world of those they call "wicked".

 

[TheKnight]

What you are essentially advocating is religious fanaticism and extremism though

A sensible seeker of course abandons extremism but does not wander off to marry a dog or whatever libertine fears you have about people not following rigid extremism.....

They practise DISCERNMENT
Perhaps the most startling advocation of this is the Buddhist middle way or path
where no extremes are met. Here then we can see illustrated how faith and works are to interact, how bioth are needed and how ultimatly one is not superior to another.

But since you're "Jewish" I will use a modern jewish perspective:

I am well aware that Judaism advocates a rejection of extremes. My point is that when it comes to dealing with an extremist or a non-religious person I'd rather deal with the extremist.

It would be better if both the extremist and the non-religious person were to take a moderate approach.

The question, in a lot of cases, is what counts as extreme. Is having a separate fridge for meat and dairy extreme? That depends on the individual. For some, perhaps the only way they'll be able to avoid mixture of the two is if they keep separate fridges for the two.

Yes I pretty much agree that some take it to a level of extremism, to agree with the Gnostic guy. See I don't see the point in morals like that, kosher laws, etc. What does what a person eats have to do with who they are?

Following Halakha (Jewish law) is more a matter of love than it is one of morality. It's a matter of being/attempt to be engaged in a relationship with the Creator. In essence, an Observant Jew/Noahide looks at the laws as a way to please the Creator.

Imagine that you were deeply in love with a woman, and over the years you gathered a list of all those things which were most precious and dear to her. Would you not then go out of your way to ensure that she had those things (even if you didn't know why they made her happy)?

Similarly, when a person like myself looks at the Torah, I see God saying to me "this is what makes me happy." If I truly love Him, then I'll do those things because I want to make Him happy.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I am pretty sure Noahides are not required to keep kosher

 

[Mr Cheese]

So what Mr. Cheese? Do you think Buddhhism is Christianity where you can quote scriptures and expect people to follow the written word?

So what if Buddha said that or if some guy named Robert Allen said this? What does Robert Allen apprehension of Life and Buddhism have anything to do with me?

You posted a quote by the Buddha. Do you think I am just going to accept those two lines without questioning where the quote came from, what context it was stated in, and what surrounding writings it was found in?

The Buddha also said:

Kalama Sutta:

“Do not believe in anything because you have heard it. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. Do not believe in anything because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. But after observing and analysis, when you find anything that agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all then accept it and live up to it.” – Buddha (Anguttara Nikaya, Vol1, 188-193)

So just because Buddha said something and some guy named Robert Allen said something about Zen, that I - a Theravada - should just obey and listen to them?

What happened to my freedom to observe and collect my own insights from my own experiences: Vibhajjavada?

It is from my own personal experience and observation that I stated that a religionless life is aimless and that religion, because of it's end goal(s) - be those goals heaven, compassion, Buddhahood, relationship with Christ, enlightenment, or whatever - that gives people something to work towards, as well as giving them/us a common culture.

Ok, you can be the first thredeva Buddhist who ignores the four noble truths if you like.....
then I know you attempt to mix satanism with your form of buddhism....


The story of Buddha is clear...he returned to where he was

Wherever you go
there you are.

You in your insistance on thinking for yourself...miss the entire point..shrug

the whole point, there is no path to zen, is exactly the same as your kalama sutra quote.... there is nothing to gain, nowhere to go, nothing to believe.....

..............

 

[Mr Cheese]

I am well aware that Judaism advocates a rejection of extremes. My point is that when it comes to dealing with an extremist or a non-religious person I'd rather deal with the extremist.

.

Yes, your views on homosexuality for instance have demonstrated this..arguably

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Mr. Cheese I keep trying to tell Suga Cubez this, but let's leave her be. She strives to follow the precepts of the dharma I'm sure, which is all that's truly required of a Buddhist. Yes, the Buddha returned to where he came from, the Golden Land where the Cosmic Buddha is all that is. The universal mind that the gods are all expressions of.

 

[SugaCubez352]

Ok, you can be the first thredeva Buddhist who ignores the four noble truths if you like.....
then I know you attempt to mix satanism with your form of buddhism....


The story of Buddha is clear...he returned to where he was

Wherever you go
there you are.

You in your insistance on thinking for yourself...miss the entire point..shrug

the whole point, there is no path to zen, is exactly the same as your kalama sutra quote.... there is nothing to gain, nowhere to go, nothing to believe.....

..............

And?

What does your interpretation of Buddhism have anything to do with me as a person?

What makes your opinions better and truer than mine? Who died an made you Buddha that your opinions should be adopted by me?

What makes you think I do not know Buddhism? Even if I reject the Four Noble Truths, such rejection is/was permitted by the Buddha who admonished us to even question what he says.

Please do me a favor and list for me the Four Noble Truths, and then show me how such Truths lead to nothing. I'd like to see...

I appreciate your in put... but don't be passing such personal interpretations of yours as fact that must be adopted by all Buddhists.

What does Zen have to do with Theravada Buddhism? I'm not a Zen Buddhist?

You can't even spell Theravada, and insistence right? How do you then presume to tell me your understandings of Buddhism is truth?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

But perhaps I could use this oppurtunity to point something out to you Mr. Cheese, if I may. You said the Buddha returned to where he came from. In Mahayana we believe this to be the Golden Land or Pure Land of the Cosmic Buddha and the gods and blessed Bodhisattvas who have ascended. We believe the Cosmic Buddha is the one supreme force from which all the gods eminate, that being said, you have said previously that the gods are at times petty and bind people to this lower existence. Can you not see that the Buddha is accomplishing it's will and purpose through the gods as he is through all life? The gods taught people things like the way of Ma'at, the universal way, the Tao, etc. these are all the same as the way of the dharma. The way of the dharma is the original nature of all things before disorder and chaos arose. The gods told the Egyptians of a time called Zep-Tepi "the first time" in which all things lived in accordance with the way of Ma'at and her precepts. The universal cosmic Buddha is accomplishing his will through all things, even the gods. Consider what I just said.

 

[Mr Cheese]

And?

What does your interpretation of Buddhism have anything to do with me as a person?

What makes your opinions better and truer than mine? Who died an made you Buddha that your opinions should be adopted by me?

What makes you think I do not know Buddhism? Even if I reject the Four Noble Truths, such rejection is/was permitted by the Buddha who admonished us to even question what he says.

Please do me a favor and list for me the Four Noble Truths, and then show me how such Truths lead to nothing. I'd like to see...

I appreciate your in put... but don't be passing such personal interpretations of yours as fact that must be adopted by all Buddhists.

What does Zen have to do with Theravada Buddhism? I'm not a Zen Buddhist?

You can't even spell Theravada, and insistence right? How do you then presume to tell me your understandings of Buddhism is truth?

I could....
but I don't really think entering into a discussion with you is all that fruitful
you are a very angry personage....

I dont see how a thredeva buddhist can reject the four noble truths, it would be like a christian worshipping Odin instead of Jesus....but shrug your choice as you say....
you seem concerned about beign superior, i am not

but shrug....

as we say in england, I'm not going to touch this with a 10ft barge pole.....

....

The Father of Greatness is Love – he who dwells in his glorious land. The entirety of the divine has been revealed (therein)!

These two are a single living body: the Father and his Love. For he has given himself for everything.
He exists in his aeons. Indeed, because of this they called the Father the Lord of Totality, ‘Love.’
For he gave victory to his aeons and his limbs.

–Kephalaia (Manichaean)