This One Should Get People Riled Up...

[fa_jing]

It would be nice if religion, science, and philosophy all eventually came together. They are at least working towards a common objective which is Reality. We can't prove reality exists but our observations imply that it exists. Each of these three takes a different path towards the truth. As they get ****her along their paths we expect they will become closer and closer. That said, Reality may be duality or tri-ality or multi-ality, so there may always be differences. We have finite knowledge and finite minds so what's to say that the infinite would reveal itself to us.

An example: Science currently indicates that the Universe began in a single point. It also says that the laws of physics are pervasive throughout the Universe. Then you have religions that say everything is one, a unity. Some level of convergence of idea is seen here.

[Dreadnaught]

Hahah, I'll study the master who says anyone can be enlightened, I don't want to believe that some beings are hopeless, I might be one of them.

I think another point that started all this was whether it is worthwhile to want to be enlightened.

[KC Elbows]

"So can anyone be enlightened? Good question. It depends which master you study."

The intellectual answer depends on which master, but the actual answer? I suppose it is a matter of viewpoint. Perhaps now is the time for a style vs. style debate?

[Dreadnaught]

Originally posted by KC Elbows
"So can anyone be enlightened? Good question. It depends which master you study."

The intellectual answer depends on which master, but the actual answer? I suppose it is a matter of viewpoint. Perhaps now is the time for a style vs. style debate?

My Simon-style, taught exclusively at Temple Kung Fu, is far superior to any other style. I personnally assualted 4 BJJers last night, right after attaining enlightenment completely randomly without any desire for it.

[ewallace]

It would be nice if religion, science, and philosophy all eventually came together.

Sure would. Kind of like when Taco Bell, KFC and Pizza Hut started opening restaurants with all three in them.

Speaking of Pizza, true enlightenment comes when you first drink milk while eating pizza. That sucked.

[The Willow Sword]

this is what i think about it all
.................................................. .....................
.................................................. ....
.................................................. ..................
..............................................
................................................
.................................................. ........................
.................................................. ........................
.................................................. .........................
.................................................. .........
.................................................. .....................................
.................................................. ........................
.................................................. ...........
..................................................
........................................
..............................
..........................
......................
...............
..........
......
....
...
..
*

and thats about it.
Many respects,,TWS

[fa_jing]

True enlightenment is when you mix beer and milk. I was enlightened by age 12, not to ever mix beer and milk again.
Thirsty anyone?

[fa_jing]

Let's see, Fa_jing, KC, and Ewallace have already posted on this thread. TWS has posted on this thread. The thread must be dead or hijacked. It's all very simple, actually. Now for my next trick...

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Dreadnaught


People in China over a 1000 years ago (i'm ignorant as to exactly when Bodhidharma supposedly taught) lived entirely different lives than we do right now in the west. For example, they didn't talk to people halfway around the world on electronic devices. Suffering is universal, but there are an infinate variety of causes, and these causes affect how we make discriminations. Hence some methods work better than others at different times and places.

this sounds more hindu than buddhist to me. gautama's objective, as i understand it, was to identify the root of all suffering. independent of context. so while we today may be attached to different things, the answer is still the same.

besides, are we really attached to different things? material wealth? status? etc. what's the specific difference?


stuart b.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Dreadnaught


Buddhism does involve faith, and you certainly don't have to believe it, however, if you are interested in Buddhism, then you should know that that is generally accepted by Buddhists. even if you subscribe to Buddhism, you still don't need to believe that of course, like you said, it's difficult to believe. I don't totally believe it myself. However, it is taught that way. Try it out, if you like, come to your own conclusions.

I myself subscribe to Buddhism, because I like it. So I talk from that point of view, but I definately don't believe in any purely right doctrine. I think I could talk Buddhanature, someone else can talk Tao and another can talk Kingdom of Heaven and we can still understand eachother.

well, i guess i have tried it out, in a sense. and i don't subscribe to the notion that gautama was buddha before he was born gautama. to my mind, it undermines the point. the point, as far as i'm concerned, is that individuals have it within themselves to end their suffering. that point loses a lot of its strength when it comes from someone who was 'born' to the role. if gautama was enlightened before he resolved to end his ignorance, then how does that relate to those of us that weren't born into the role? and if we aren't born into it, what cause do we have to believe ourselves capable?

i don't know. that just doesn't sound very compelling to me.


stuart b.

[ShaolinTiger00]

This thread causes suffering.

Hi guys. Long time no see.

[Dreadnaught]

Originally posted by apoweyn



this sounds more hindu than buddhist to me. gautama's objective, as i understand it, was to identify the root of all suffering. independent of context. so while we today may be attached to different things, the answer is still the same.

besides, are we really attached to different things? material wealth? status? etc. what's the specific difference?


stuart b.

Gautama was Guatama, he was a little different from Bodhidharma. Yes, Guatama identified the root of all suffering, then he travelled around for 40 years teaching people according to their different needs. If you read his teachings, you will find an enourmous difference between what he said to Subhuti, and what he said to householders. That's the precise reason for all the different schools of Buddhism. He started them all. He adapted it to every person's needs.

Bodhidharma was teaching to people who were attached to the rituals of Buddhism. They chanted, bowed and gave offerings, but misunderstood the goal of these things. They thought the Buddha was a god who would come help them. So he reminded them that THEY are the Buddha, that Buddha is not outside.

From my experience, it seems we are quite far from being attached the the Buddha statutes and the chanting and bowing. Telling someone who has never cultivated or tried to improve themselve that they are already enlightened and don't need to do anything does not help them.

Also, I can assume that Bodhidharma's students were uneducated farmers, whereas we are quite educated and very very attached to that.

[Dreadnaught]

Originally posted by apoweyn


well, i guess i have tried it out, in a sense. and i don't subscribe to the notion that gautama was buddha before he was born gautama. to my mind, it undermines the point. the point, as far as i'm concerned, is that individuals have it within themselves to end their suffering. that point loses a lot of its strength when it comes from someone who was 'born' to the role. if gautama was enlightened before he resolved to end his ignorance, then how does that relate to those of us that weren't born into the role? and if we aren't born into it, what cause do we have to believe ourselves capable?

i don't know. that just doesn't sound very compelling to me.


stuart b.

Right, obviously you have formed an opinion, I was sort of saying that to everyone who might be reading it. =)

I don't the story negates the fact that he earned enlightenment, he did earn it all on his own. Then he came back, and set an example. He still did it through his own hard work. In fact, this part of the story adds on eons of hardwork rather than 35 years (or however old he was when he gained enlightenment, not totally sure).

Anyways, it's DEFINATELY hard to believe in past lives. Like I said, I'm not 100% convinced, but if we're going to talk Buddhism, we can't leave it out.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Dreadnaught


Gautama was Guatama, he was a little different from Bodhidharma. Yes, Guatama identified the root of all suffering, then he travelled around for 40 years teaching people according to their different needs. If you read his teachings, you will find an enourmous difference between what he said to Subhuti, and what he said to householders. That's the precise reason for all the different schools of Buddhism. He started them all. He adapted it to every person's needs.

i know that gautama and bodhidharma were different. but you seem to know more about buddhism than i do. so... what precisely was different about gautama's advice to subhuti and to these householders?

Bodhidharma was teaching to people who were attached to the rituals of Buddhism. They chanted, bowed and gave offerings, but misunderstood the goal of these things. They thought the Buddha was a god who would come help them. So he reminded them that THEY are the Buddha, that Buddha is not outside.

right. i'm familiar with the story of bodhidharma's visit to the emperor of china (is that right?) and his subsequently correcting the emperor's misunderstandings. your citation of it seems to support my point. but i'm a little unclear on how the whole reincarnated and already enlightened bit figures in. could you clarify?

Also, I can assume that Bodhidharma's students were uneducated farmers, whereas we are quite educated and very very attached to that.

well, right. but they were attached to one thing. we're attached to another. but the root of the problem remains constant, yeah?


stuart b.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
This thread causes suffering.

Hi guys. Long time no see.

hey mate! that's very funny.

i owe you an email, my friend. i'll be in touch.


stuart