It's not so strange for a Buddhist to endorse killing

[Marblehead]

The Buddha when he was in his human incarnation wasn't perfect but still he was far more evolved than any one else on the planet in his time and today..

 

He is certainly far more evolved than each and every one of his critic in this insignificant little thread.

 

I won't argue that point. I have no intention of trying to belittle or degrade the Buddha.

 

I am speaking to the difference between the truth and lies.

 

Truth is a funny thing. Truth stand totally on its own. A truth is valid for everyone under all conditions. If something is not a truth it is then either an opinion or a lie.

 

There are not many truths in theis universe. (Are there really any?) Therefore most is either opinions or lies. (Lies include illusions and delusions.)

 

So we can openly share our understandings but I think it is important that we not present our understandings (which include lies, illusions, delusion & misunderstandings) as the truth. Much better, I think, to remain in the realm of "I don't know."

 

If the Buddha did not specifically say, "Thou may kill your enemies." then I think it would be wrong to assume how he felt about this issue.

 

The same goes for Lao Tzu. He never said it was okay. He did, however, suggest that there may be times when it is necessary. But who is to be that judge?

[gendao]

YEP, a big shift AWAY from the MAINSTREAM Baby Boomers is definitely underway! The Tea Party was largely a splinter off the Right and OWS off the Left - and both actually some shared common ground. And both were sick of Right/Left mainstream puppets.

Saturday evening's results of a Des Moines Register poll showed Cain at the head of the pack, with the support of 23 percent of respondents. Romney came in just behind him at 22 percent.

 

Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a libertarian-leaning Republican, placed third at 12 percent, followed by Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann at 8 percent. Perry and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich polled 7 percent each, and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum got 5 percent.

Despite all mass media attempts to pimp Perry & Romney as the Establishment frontrunners - Cain & Ron are actually still leading the pack in Iowa!

 

And despite all his substantial press coverage, Bilderberg Perry is trailing back in 5th now!

[deci belle]

[Everything]

I am speaking to the difference between the truth and lies.

 

Truth is a funny thing. Truth stand totally on its own. A truth is valid for everyone under all conditions. If something is not a truth it is then either an opinion or a lie.

 

There are not many truths in theis universe. (Are there really any?) Therefore most is either opinions or lies. (Lies include illusions and delusions.)

Thank you for speaking of the diffrence of truth and lie.

 

Dao ke Dao

Fei Chang Dao

 

Do they really have a diffrence?

 

It seems that even the laws of physics, the longest remaining truth's, change... The Constant Truth fit for Travel is not The Constant Truth. It is just a truth/lie, both at the same time, depending on your perception.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Everything

[Harmonious Emptiness]

[Birch]

Well, I guess, by the circular logic of Buddhism, the very existence of a Buddha would refute the existence of all Buddhas, so to speak..

Pretty much! Which is why you can't argue with it and it doesn't matter (well it does to buddhists, but see why they end up laughing?)I read something neat the other day about there being an issue with things that can't be falsified. Karl Popper, I think.

Anyway, as far as I can tell, Taoism doesn't even go there, as far as i can see. You can see Tao because what you see is Tao seeing (or something like that, I keep getting confused with the differences because people seem to like to point out the similarities so much on here).

 

Anyway, it can't ALL be the same "stuff" with just different ways of looking at it, can it now?

The reason i like Taoism is because of the almost magical things that come out of it. Buddhism has been pared down so much that it might as well be anything else. No fun, except maybe those Varajana (sp?) people.

[konchog uma]

Pretty much! Which is why you can't argue with it and it doesn't matter (well it does to buddhists, but see why they end up laughing?)I read something neat the other day about there being an issue with things that can't be falsified. Karl Popper, I think.

Anyway, as far as I can tell, Taoism doesn't even go there, as far as i can see. You can see Tao because what you see is Tao seeing (or something like that, I keep getting confused with the differences because people seem to like to point out the similarities so much on here).

 

Anyway, it can't ALL be the same "stuff" with just different ways of looking at it, can it now?

The reason i like Taoism is because of the almost magical things that come out of it. Buddhism has been pared down so much that it might as well be anything else. No fun, except maybe those Varajana (sp?) people.

 

vajrayana, and yes we have fun! hahahaha some of us anyway

 

buddhists in asia eat meat too, the whole vegetarian buddhist is a western idealism

[Aaron]

Pretty much! Which is why you can't argue with it and it doesn't matter (well it does to buddhists, but see why they end up laughing?)I read something neat the other day about there being an issue with things that can't be falsified. Karl Popper, I think.

Anyway, as far as I can tell, Taoism doesn't even go there, as far as i can see. You can see Tao because what you see is Tao seeing (or something like that, I keep getting confused with the differences because people seem to like to point out the similarities so much on here).

 

Anyway, it can't ALL be the same "stuff" with just different ways of looking at it, can it now?

The reason i like Taoism is because of the almost magical things that come out of it. Buddhism has been pared down so much that it might as well be anything else. No fun, except maybe those Varajana (sp?) people.

 

 

I agree, it isn't all the same. I think people like to say that to get people to be open to what they're saying. I see Buddhism and Taoism as being night and day apart. Buddhism is about coming to enlightenment by ending suffering through detachment from the world (I know this is a very simplified definition) and in Taoism enlightenment is achieved through one's attachment to the world. Night and day, despite how one might describe it. I can't even think of a term in Buddhism for what Tao encompasses, though many might try and make comparisons.

 

Of course in the end it's probably best to put Buddhism and Taoism on the shelf and try to come to these realizations through an honest and thorough examination of one's self and the world, through meditation and introspection. Even if you fail to become enlightened, you'll at least have a fuller understanding of the person staring at you in the mirror.

 

Aaron

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Pretty much! Which is why you can't argue with it and it doesn't matter (well it does to buddhists, but see why they end up laughing?)I read something neat the other day about there being an issue with things that can't be falsified. Karl Popper, I think.

Anyway, as far as I can tell, Taoism doesn't even go there, as far as i can see. You can see Tao because what you see is Tao seeing (or something like that, I keep getting confused with the differences because people seem to like to point out the similarities so much on here).

 

Anyway, it can't ALL be the same "stuff" with just different ways of looking at it, can it now?

The reason i like Taoism is because of the almost magical things that come out of it. Buddhism has been pared down so much that it might as well be anything else. No fun, except maybe those Varajana (sp?) people.

 

Well, the similarities between many of the teachings of Chuang Tzu and Buddha or Nagarjuna are unmistakeable, in regards to self and percieving "suchness."

 

If you missed in TTB Chuang Tzu subsection "A Finger is Not a Horse."

 

So the writings of some Taoism and Buddhism are mutually beneficial to understanding the view of the other in regards to self and "suchness." For most people, that is challenge enough.

 

Buddhists also came from Hindu culture which had Ayurvedic medicine and Alchemy already, so Buddha didn't need to re-invent the wheel for elemental science (did I just invent that word? ), longevity, exercise, et all, but he taught a fast root to a/the most important fundamental of the others.

 

Surely, Taoist and Bon culture became the replacement background, once again of similar understandings, and Buddhism also has its interesting things, like Siddhis.

 

To argue one over the other misses the point of both, too, imo, so, like.. whatever...