Shaolin diet, vegetarianism and stuff

[David Jamieson]

No it is a buddhist sect. Chinese as a matter of fact, I just can't remember the name.

Buddhism and Jainism are separate but both spring from the same belief system
Jainism is Indian though.

Vedic (Hindu) Buddhist and Jain all share at the same philosophical stream and are all from India.

[David Jamieson]

this is why the tang emperor purged bddhism from china and permanently crippling its influence.

its the perfect mind control device for psychological warfare, prepareing chinese people for invasion and subjugation.

i thank grandfather sky that today the chinese people are not under the poison fog of the bald donkeys. the evil tentacles of the golden fat idol cannot hurt us.

hilarious.

It was the tang dynasty that saw the great rise of Buddhism in China. Particularly the Mahayana form of it.

Chinese Buddhism since became very unique and quite different from it's Indian roots.

[wenshu]

Buddhism and Jainism are separate but both spring from the same belief system
Jainism is Indian though.

Vedic (Hindu) Buddhist and Jain all share at the same philosophical stream and are all from India.

Look at Jamieson tryin' to know something.

Again, for the third time I am referring to a BUDDHIST sect. I know what Jainism is jimsomweed.

[wenshu]

hilarious.

It was the tang dynasty that saw the great rise of Buddhism in China. Particularly the Mahayana form of it.

Chinese Buddhism since became very unique and quite different from it's Indian roots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Wuzong_of_Tang

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_A...st_Persecution

http://books.google.com/books?id=IYh...ddhism&f=false

[David Jamieson]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Wuzong_of_Tang

http://books.google.com/books?id=IYh...ddhism&f=false

He was 1 emperor from the dynasty who ruled for 6 years.
He persecuted Buddhism because it was at it's peak, and it's temples were becoming fabulously wealthy, were tax free and landowners would make deals on the side etc etc.

so, anyway, this 1 emperor with a 6 year reign is a blip.

I find it interesting that despite these facts you would make futile attempts at refuting my incredible storehouse of knowledge.

I'll forgive you your ignorance because you in particular have good control of the english language and have shown some worthy wit along the way.

[wenshu]

He was 1 emperor from the dynasty who ruled for 6 years.
He persecuted Buddhism because it was at it's peak, and it's temples were becoming fabulously wealthy, were tax free and landowners would make deals on the side etc etc.

so, anyway, this 1 emperor with a 6 year reign is a blip.

I find it interesting that despite these facts you would make futile attempts at refuting my incredible storehouse of knowledge.

I'll forgive you your ignorance because you in particular have good control of the english language and have shown some worthy wit along the way.

I will not forgive this impertinence.

According to the report prepared by the Board of Worship, there were 4,600 monasteries, 40,000 hermitages (places of retreat), 260,500 monks and nuns. The emperor issued edicts that Buddhist temples and shrines be destroyed, that all monks (desirables as well as undesirables) be defrocked, that the property of the monasteries be confiscated, and that Buddhist paraphernalia be destroyed.[10] An edict providing that foreign monks be defrocked and returned to their homelands resulted in Ennin's expulsion from China.[11] By the edict of AD 845 all the monasteries were abolished with very few exceptions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_A...st_Persecution

[LFJ]

But granted that there is indeed such an intent, it is not a creation of the karma of killing, or breaking any non-harming moral. I'll explain:

Although karma is intentional action, there are certain factors that must be fulfilled in the accomplishment of karma beyond just the presence of intent. For example, for the karma of killing (or harming) to be completed there must be five requisite factors fulfilled. These are:

1) Presence of a living being
2) Knowledge of the living being
3) The intent to kill (harm)
4) The act of killing (harming)
5) The resultant death (injury)

If one of these factors is missing, the karma is not accomplished....

So, if one kill in one's dream is that consider a killing?

Can requisite #1 be established in a dream, that a living being is actually present? If not, then there's nothing more to talk about.

If you think killing in one's dream is karmically negative (because to you it doesn't matter if the killing physical happens or not), from a Buddhist point of view, you're plain wrong.

If even dreams produce negative karma, who has hope of escaping Saṃsāra?

For me,

The above type of Thinking mind theory is dangerous and misleading because the person who postulate these taking Thinking Mind / reasoning realm is the master realm of all.
where in fact, Thinking Mind realm are just a small part of the reality and it is the based of dellusion which cause one to reincarnate over and over.

Thinking Mind is the poison which rob one's buddha nature as the Zen practice put it. Knock this Thinking Mind bondage is the first step of the practice of Zen.

Killing is Killing with or without physical. one makes an intention, one has done it. physical or non physical both are within Non dual. Thus, the Buddha teaches " do good never do bad, always clean out one's intention, that is the teaching of the Buddhas".

The above type of theory is not clean out one's intention, instead, keep playing lawyer to defend one's distorted and poisoned intention. or trying to walking in the gray zone, in fact there is no gray zone, either one intended or not?
you raise a killing intention, you have stored it. you are going to attrack killing. there is a killing consequence, unless you clean it. The Buddha nature doesnt care about killer or victim, one sets an intention of killing it is consider done. Mind is just a creating instrument, what you store in it, it manifest.

Little do you know, what you are arguing against is even from Pali Canon/ Theravada roots. It's the most basic Buddhist understanding of karma taught by the Buddha, yet you are attacking it.

As I said, you're welcome to have your own view, but don't try presenting it as Buddhist.

[LFJ]

Killing is Killing with or without physical. one makes an intention, one has done it.

Are you actually a Christian?

As in; "Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

Fortunately, karma in Buddhism doesn't work like that, and the Buddha is not a celestial judge, jury, and executioner convicting people of thought crime.

[Hendrik]

Buddhism and Jainism are separate but both spring from the same belief system
Jainism is Indian though.

Vedic (Hindu) Buddhist and Jain all share at the same philosophical stream and are all from India.

“Bodhisattvas and bhikshus who practice purity will not
even step on grass in the pathway; even less will they pull it up
with their hand. How can one with great compassion pick up
the flesh and blood of living beings and proceed to eat his fill? ----- Shurangama sutra


It is not a philosophy. it is a practice.

[David Jamieson]

“Bodhisattvas and bhikshus who practice purity will not
even step on grass in the pathway; even less will they pull it up
with their hand. How can one with great compassion pick up
the flesh and blood of living beings and proceed to eat his fill? ----- Shurangama sutra


It is not a philosophy. it is a practice.

There is NO practice without underlying philosophy of why to do so.

[LFJ]

“Bodhisattvas and bhikshus who practice purity will not
even step on grass in the pathway; even less will they pull it up
with their hand. How can one with great compassion pick up
the flesh and blood of living beings and proceed to eat his fill? ----- Shurangama sutra


It is not a philosophy. it is a practice.

Ha! So this is where you got the idea that they levitate themselves and fly around over the grass!

[Hendrik]

Can requisite #1 be established in a dream, that a living being is actually present? If not, then there's nothing more to talk about.

If you think killing in one's dream is karmically negative (because to you it doesn't matter if the killing physical happens or not), from a Buddhist point of view, you're plain wrong.


If even dreams produce negative karma, who has hope of escaping Saṃsāra?

Your view is your view, it is not " a Buddhist point of view".

I dont think. I am telling you the fact which I learn from the teaching of the Buddha.

Yes, even in dreams produce negative karma , dream and awake has no different. you make an intention you make an intention.

if you cannot handle your dream, you can not even handle your daily emotion, you cannot handle Bardo state; and thus you can not escape samsara or your own reincarnation.


Your theory is sound but it cant do anything toward escape samasara ; because ; that is not the teaching of Buddha but your own theory based on you logic.

you keep arguing is going to get you even more into deep trap. If you dont even know about the samadhi to handle your dream and Brado, your journey in Buddhism is not even begin yet.

Little do you know, what you are arguing against is even from Pali Canon/ Theravada roots. It's the most basic Buddhist understanding of karma taught by the Buddha, yet you are attacking it.

As I said, you're welcome to have your own view, but don't try presenting it as Buddhist.

I am talking Bottom line.

You dont even know one can handle dream, how can you handle mara?
how can you handle your own brado state?



you are doing philosophy study which is limited to your thinking mind activity; and not practicing Buddhism.

So how can you call those stuffs you post Buddhist point of view?

using your view to argue against Shurangama sutra and Shao Lin Chan is totally off mark.


Chan can penetrate Bardo because Chan has the same power as the Maha mudra. Chan penetrate beyond Thinking Mind and Mara. Thus, it is called the practice of Varja sword.
Does one has the Varja Sword? Have one ever see one even if one doenst have it?

It is totally ignorance to read a few books and sutras, inteplating them as one wants and call that Buddhist point of view. If it is that simple, the Second Patriach of Shao Lin, doesnt have to kneeling in the snow and beg Damo.

[Hendrik]

Ha! So this is where you got the idea that they levitate themselves and fly around over the grass!

What is so surprise that Arahat levitate?
Didnt Damo did that to cross the river?

[Hendrik]

There is NO practice without underlying philosophy of why to do so.

even without human philosophy, the whole universe exist , running perfectly, and the animal live as they are; careless of what human reasoning and philosophy is about.

Buddhism is not a philosophy.
In one's brado state, there is no philosophy but can one see throught the illusion. when one faces to select to be reborn into different realm, even the mind set is totally twisted. how can one handle that? if one cant then one get trap.

eating meat become a loading when one cultivating Samadhi. Chan Wu Yi is based on Samadhi and Sidhi. it is not a sport or physical exercise as most think.

[LFJ]

I dont think. I am telling you the fact which I learn from the teaching of the Buddha.

Yes, even in dreams produce negative karma , dream and awake has no different. you make an intention you make an intention.

Citation please? Before you make up anything else and attribute it to the Buddha, please provide the reference from which you get these ideas.

So how can you call those stuffs you post Buddhist point of view?

It's present even in Theravāda commentaries, besides Mahāyāna sources.

Hammalawa Saddhatissa, Buddhist Ethics. Wisdom Publications, 1997, pages 60, 159.

using your view to argue against Shurangama sutra and Shao Lin Chan is totally off mark.

I wasn't arguing against either. I was arguing against your understanding of them, and not just with my view but with Buddhist sources.

It is totally ignorance to read a few books and sutras, inteplating them as one wants and call that Buddhist point of view.

So stop doing it.