How to be a Buddhist

[Gem]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

If Buddhism was a religion then sure, I wouldn't care if there were heaps of sects and quarrels etc..
I hoped when diving into Buddhism I would learn what Guatama the Buddha taught.

That makes sense.

Reading translations of what is considered the earliest writings of the words of the buddha. The Pali tripitaka. I can't help but think there aren't that many buddhists around.

It is quite a small religion, but the teachings and meditation are for everyone.

I can't find where he said that there are 84.000 different ways to enlightenment.

I'd never heard that before either

I can find where he mentions One 8-fold path out of suffering.

Oh yea, I think I have seen that somewhere

It appears The Buddha or the people who continued the Sanga after his death may have left step by step instructions on how exactly to do this.

Well, Buddhist schools make that claim (as do most/all religions), but then one school contradicts another. I guess it's hard to discern what is really meant by 'samma'.

[Shaunc]

The 84,000 doors to enlightenment are referred to as the 84,000 teachings in the pali csnnon. If you are interested check out dharmawiki, it's not a bad source for basic buddhism. The 8 fold path, the 4 noble truths, the 5 precepts are basic to most Buddhist schools.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Shaunc

The 84,000 doors to enlightenment are referred to as the 84,000 teachings in the pali csnnon. If you are interested check out dharmawiki, it's not a bad source for basic buddhism. The 8 fold path, the 4 noble truths, the 5 precepts are basic to most Buddhist schools.

I see, thanks for that, Ill look it up and maybe find out something new.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Gem

I see, thanks for that, Ill look it up and maybe find out something new.

I had a 'glance' at it, and it seems the 84000 doors is a broadly interpreted reference, but I take it to mean that Dhamma isn't actually dependent on any particular approach, but accessible regardless of anyone's spiritual inclinations.

http://www.viewonbuddhism.org/vehicles.html

Just thought I'd throw this one out there.
I'm probably just an unenlightened lay blasphemer, but the way I look at it it seems that tibetan and later tantric buddhism emerged from the deep contemplation's and meditative insights of people that "fine tuned" what they thought the Buddha thought.

Of cource we could argue that the Pali canon was devised the same way, but as it supposedly was only shortly after the Buddha's death that the vinaya and sutta pitaka were written down, still fresh in the arahat's memories I think that's as close as we come to what he taught. (the abidhamma also was introduced much later.)

Tibetan and other schools seem to be interpretations upon interpretations which may or may not be what the Buddha knew.
Like the church of Mormon being an interpretation of the bible by Joseph Smith Jr
So can the mahayana tradition be seen as an interpretation by Master Nagarjuna.

Of course much of what makes theravada accesible these days is an explanation founded by mahasi sayadaw so there's that. the other way of looking at it is a tradition loosely founded on ajahn mun's understanding.

Still these are very much based(as I see it) on what the buddha taught.
I.E if you do this then this will happen. instead of the buddha was nice so we aspire to become the nicest people on the planet and help everyone.. (bodhisatva vows etc)

I think the sutta's make it clear that the Buddha wasn't all too keen on helping others at first. It needed divine intervention to get him to teach in the first place.. Withholding certain teaching from lay people for many years until persuaded to do otherwise..

With Love

Just thought of one of my favorite Osho quotes.
If you want to let go of your ego, you first have to have one.

Guess I'm building one around theravadan buddhism now. Will let it go once it's finished..

With Love

[Shaunc]

To me what the 84,000 doors represent is that buddhism isn't a one size fits all religion/practice/philosophy. See, even the definition of what buddhism is, is hard for many of us to agree on.
On Buddhist internet forums, which I might add are mostly frequented by westerners, there seems to be a tendency to judge other schools as being better or worse than the school that they belong to. This doesn't seem to happen in the asian communities. In the city nearest to me there's a Thai Theravadan temple and a Vietnamese Mahayana temple. The sangha of the respective temples will go and visit the other temple on special days, lay and ordained members.
I've got my reasons for following the school that I do but I don't belittle anyone else's practice.
Please don't let this forum degenerate into a mine versus theirs sort of place.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Shaunc

To me what the 84,000 doors represent is that buddhism isn't a one size fits all religion/practice/philosophy. See, even the definition of what buddhism is, is hard for many of us to agree on.
On Buddhist internet forums, which I might add are mostly frequented by westerners, there seems to be a tendency to judge other schools as being better or worse than the school that they belong to. This doesn't seem to happen in the asian communities. In the city nearest to me there's a Thai Theravadan temple and a Vietnamese Mahayana temple. The sangha of the respective temples will go and visit the other temple on special days, lay and ordained members.
I've got my reasons for following the school that I do but I don't belittle anyone else's practice.
Please don't let this forum degenerate into a mine versus theirs sort of place.

Judging other Buddhist sects doesn't just happen on internet forums, I frequented a Tibetan Temple for quite a while and we were banned from discussing certain leaders/teachers from other schools, you were not allowed to bring any txt's to study and chat about and compare from other schools... it was very cult like.

When you first attend it is all open and discussions are encouraged but after a while the mind control slowly creeps in and spreads it tendrils. I met and mixed with some beautiful people but it became very oppressive. Each week people started dropping out until it became a sort of drop in centre with no regular participants, sad.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sky123

Judging other Buddhist sects doesn't just happen on internet forums, I frequented a Tibetan Temple for quite a while and we were banned from discussing certain leaders/teachers from other schools, you were not allowed to bring any txt's to study and chat about and compare from other schools... it was very cult like.

Yes, in the school I'm familiar with, discussion of other practices, teachers, religious rituals is forbidden. Texts are forbidden also. Chatting is discouraged in general, and completely forbidden for those taking retreat. Any physical contact is basically forbidden as well, but shaking hands, for example, is tolerated.

When you first attend it is all open and discussions are encouraged but after a while the mind control slowly creeps in and spreads it tendrils. I met and mixed with some beautiful people but it became very oppressive. Each week people started dropping out until it became a sort of drop in centre with no regular participants, sad.

Of course, I am talking about a school, an ashram, a campus for the teaching of meditation, and people who come to learn there come from all sorts of backgrounds. Buddhists would be a minority, actually, but no one cares if an attendee is Buddhist Christian or Athiest. That just doesn't matter. The place is very strict because they have to provide the optimum environment for meditation, and the rules and codes of behaviour help to create such conditions. If people were all discussing the nonsense such as we do on SF, then all sorts of issues, distractions, animosity would ensue - as it is known to do here.

I think the difference is, we don't try to convert anyone to some sort of religion or religious group or sect. People can learn the meditation regardless of any religion they identify with. We just provide the facilities and environmental conditions that are optimal for learning and practicing meditation.

I can see why in a controlled meditation environment you' impose restrictions on what is practised. Especially as the practise yields the results promissed. That said. A clear definition of the desired result would be helpfull.

And there's the kicker isn't it. The definition of enlightenment is skewed in manny places.

In the tibetan tradition it's changed to living a bodhisattva lifestyle until everyone is enlightened. In pure land it's pushed back in favour of a good rebirth after this life.
In theravada i feel it's explained as an absence/cessation of the 5 hindrances and freedom from suffering.

Am I wrong in thinking like this?