Great Compassion Dharani Without Precepts?

[RyanO]

I am interested in reciting the Great Compassion Dharani because I think it is quite beautiful.

 

http://www.fodian.net/world/dabei_sutra.htm

 

In the Sutra, it says that prerequisites for recitation are that one must make bodhisattva vows and adhere to the precepts.

 

However, I am not a 'Buddhist", I do not repeatedly take refuge in the triple gems nor am I in a place to make Bodhisattva vows.

 

Also, one of the precepts is that one must be a vegetarian (at least according to this particular commentator). Not only am I not a vegetarian, I believe there are ethically sound arguments for eating meat. Even the Dalai Lama eats meat! Does this mean the Dalai Lama is forbidden from reciting the dharani? (different tradition I know).

 

While I am attracted to the dharani itself, I am not so attracted the what I see as dogmatism in the sutra explaining it. Such as requirements to be clean and number recitation requirements etc (this is a reason I am attracted to Shin teachings of the power of compassion to save even the evilest of persons).

 

I do not want to disrespect the dharani by reciting it without fulfilling these preconditions. However, I could also not interpret them so literally and rather feel the spirit behind them.

 

I know it would be silly to take other people's word for it on such important matters, and I will certainly let my experience and understanding be the final say, but I am wondering what you think about it.

 

I don't have much experience with sutra interpretation, and I realize these are big questions, just wondering watcha think!

[konchog uma]

hahahaha if you want to recite the Great Compassion Dharani, do it!!

 

don't let vegetarian buddhists stop you, thats an american thing anyway... in asia many eat meat. As noted, the Dalai Lama eats pork and other meats!! hahahaha

 

dogma be damned, don't take orthodoxy and tradition that seriously is my advice. Open your heart's wings and follow it where it flies

 

what kind of buddhist deity would be offended at you reciting it?? "look there! He's not a bodhisattva! OH NO!!" hehehe call the karma police he's getting away

[konchog uma]

bonus: you won't be killed by mediumistic insects!!

 

or landslides

 

whew!

[Ish]

I believe you wouldn't get any harm from reciting it, main thing in my opinion is to approach with sincerity, then your compassion can come out.

However personally out of respect for the conditions i would find another mantra/dharani to recite.

Edited February 18, 2012 by Ish

[konchog uma]

hehehe sorry for my mood up there

 

i have my moments

 

with some time to think about it, i do think that its good to respect tradition. But i also wonder who originally laid the restrictions on chanting it? was is avalokitasvara? or was it later commentators? if it was later commentators, did they give a reason?

 

some things are more powerful than my knee jerk reactions give them credit for, and sutras can affect their readers in subtle and powerful ways. Even if i am correct so to speak, the subject deserves more respect than i gave it there

 

so apologies to all

[xabir2005]

To my knowledge it is not a necessity to take vows in order to chant... and lots of non-vegetarians chant the dharani too.

 

Also, taking refuge is not something done 'repeatedly', if you are interested to be a Buddhist, consider going to temple near you and there will usually be taking refuge ceremony (it's a once thing, not an everyday repetition thing).

 

p.s. for non-vegetarians, the Buddha's advise is that you do not eat meat from animals that you saw, suspected was made for you, or that you personally ordered to kill. Why? Avoid making bad karma... since karma is intentional. If you eat frozen meat, the intention to cause the death of the animal was not there. However if you order live seafood to be butchered, then that is bad karma. If the meat meets the three pure meat criteria, then it is edible.

 

More info: http://www.jenchen.org.sg/vol5no4a.htm

 

Buddha personally opposed Devadatta's proposed rules to make vegetarianism compulsory. He did not want his community to make vegetarian a compulsory thing. If you do that is good, but we do not impose it on everyone. The reason for taking up vegetarianism is to practice great compassion for sentient beings... this is explained in some Mahayana sutras. Also, looking at modern times, animals suffer much more than the past and pollute the environment.

Edited February 19, 2012 by xabir2005

[Informer]

Sometimes tradition and heart may conflict, when this is the case, I let heart decide.

[Jetsun]

I have similar concerns about practising some Buddhist practices without taking refuge, some of the teachers I respect the most talk about how the refuge is the foundation of the entire path and some even say it is the most important aspect of the entire Buddhadharma once you fully understand what the three jewels really mean. So without them I feel that I may not give practice 100% commitment and without 100% i'm not sure how far it can take you. I don't think there is any disrespect involved it is just a matter of not getting the full deal out of it.

Edited February 19, 2012 by Jetsun

[RyanO]

Thank you all for your thoughtful responses.

 

Yes, my concerns are similar to yours Jetsun and hint at this larger issue. I'm sure there are many people, particularly here in the west, who play with Buddhist practices and ideas without fully understanding the commitment such a path entails.

 

At the same time, arguments can be made for separating Buddhist practices from Buddhist religion. Here is a good example:

 

http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/killing-the-buddha

 

I agree in many ways with Harris' claim that in our global day and age, engaging in religious sectarianism is not only unfounded logically, but is also unethical. Metaphysical matters are too important to simply take on 'faith'. Obviously this is a big topic also.

 

Harris is almost certainly influenced by Krishnamurti (indeed he recommends K's book Freedom From the Known) in that he thinks religious 'labels' can serve to isolate and separate people. What is true for one human group should be true for others, even in matters of religion and morality. Applied to Buddhism, taking refuge can be seen as a means of further promoting this sectarianism.

 

I understand refuge a little more esoterically and a little less dogmatically. For me, taking refuge means I take refuge in Infinite Compassion, in the Truth, and in the countless other beings who also send out their love (not as poetic I know). I also find comfort in refuge as a safety net so to speak before achieving 'enlightenment' (whatever that means), as well as for when I die. Indeed in Shin Buddhism, taking refuge is the first and final practice (not in the triple gems but in Amida Buddha).

 

Anyways, back on topic, I think I'll give the dharani a shot. I want to focus on it as a metta practice and chant it for the benefit of all beings. It seems to me that any presider over the integrity of the dharani shouldn't have a problem with that, and if they do, I'm sure they will forgive me

Edited February 20, 2012 by RyanO

[mat black]

I think I'll give the dharani a shot. I want to focus on it as a metta practice and chant it for the benefit of all beings.

 

 

The maha karuna dharani is really amazing and multi dimensional in its application and effect.

 

All the best with your practice/recitation.

[RyanO]

 

The maha karuna dharani is really amazing and multi dimensional in its application and effect.

 

All the best with your practice/recitation.

 

Thanks mat! Nice graphic