Questioning the Path (article re-named)

[宁]

hi lin, these days am reading again dalai lama's autobiography, where he speaks about the clash between the Chinese and Tibetan civilisations... i think this is the same with this topic... the Chinese seem to be more a-moral than the Tibetan, at least thru the Dalai Lama's lenses.

the doctrine of nonperpetuation of violence is more Tibetan than Chinese

if we stand aside and just contemplate the two different cultures, it is just something incredible

 

on one thing i agree with your detractors: anyway we put it, wether we eat rice or apples or steak or bull energy... we still eat life... vegetal life is for some people the most sensitive and affectionate they could ever find, i remember my aunt and her flowers, and the garden... even when we drink water, there is much microorganism life that is killed inside our stomach... even when we wash away the dirt of the day taking a hot shower...

 

how could we surpass this, lin?

[林愛偉]

hi lin, these days am reading again dalai lama's autobiography, where he speaks about the clash between the Chinese and Tibetan civilisations... i think this is the same with this topic... the Chinese seem to be more a-moral than the Tibetan, at least thru the Dalai Lama's lenses.

the doctrine of nonperpetuation of violence is more Tibetan than Chinese

if we stand aside and just contemplate the two different cultures, it is just something incredible

 

on one thing i agree with your detractors: anyway we put it, wether we eat rice or apples or steak or bull energy... we still eat life... vegetal life is for some people the most sensitive and affectionate they could ever find, i remember my aunt and her flowers, and the garden... even when we drink water, there is much microorganism life that is killed inside our stomach... even when we wash away the dirt of the day taking a hot shower...

 

how could we surpass this, lin?

 

 

Well, though killing is killing, the consciousness of the living being does play a role in the karma we create

through killing. For instance, if the living being in its body has no sensation of emotional pain and suffering, then when they are physically killed, they will not actually feel a physical pain and thus not attach so much to the body when dying. In that respect, the killing of incalculable microorganisms isn't has heavy as that of killing a much larger, and more physically sensitive being. Also, not intentionally killing them, with concentrated emotion intended towards them, changes a bit of the karma. If in your heart/mind you are not looking to kill them, because of their physical make up and conditions of the mind, the karma isn't that heavy.

 

If you want, which I do as well, keep in your mind an intention to let them know that you are about to drink them, and before you drink the water wait a moment to let them adjust to that realization, though their physical make up doesn't allow for much of that function because of their karma, it is a nice deed to do, and shows consideration for the living beings. In that sense, though emotionally they can't pick it up, they will feel uplifted without discriminating the feeling like other living beings do.

 

 

Peace,

Lin

[宁]

please lin, i do understand your point...

but did you learn about the experiments that were done years and years ago, connecting a plant to EEG and EKG, and aplying pressure, tearing the leafs etc ?? these experiments have been done by both the US and Russia... it's no bogus, they are real...and you can google a lot on it.., i may reccomend a book on it: the secret life of plants by peter tompkins and christopher bird... plants are very sensitive and very involved in practices of shamans and telepathy... of course they feel...

[dunbar]

well, the dali lama eats meet every second day and says it's okay to kill animals for food and medicine. he says people should eat less meat and respect and care for animals, but that there is no need to take the buddha's rule on non-killng to extremes... it seems clear that there are many different opinions among buddhists- and the buddha did stop short at condemning meat eating. i think it comes down to intention and balance... to say that people are going to hell for eating meat or using animals for medical purposes is fanaticism. it is about personal choice, leave judgement to the buddhas, enlightened masters or god, not people with a religious agenda... my two cents

[dunbar]

...kind of an interesting story with the dali lama... after he was ill with hepatitis, his doctors and nutritionist advised him to eat some meat. i guess he followed the 'eat right 4 your blood type diet' which says that people with 'o' and 'b' blood types need to eat meat and fish for optimal health. this makes sense since people have been eating fish and meat for millions of years.

[林愛偉]

please lin, i do understand your point...

but did you learn about the experiments that were done years and years ago, connecting a plant to EEG and EKG, and aplying pressure, tearing the leafs etc ?? these experiments have been done by both the US and Russia... it's no bogus, they are real...and you can google a lot on it.., i may reccomend a book on it: the secret life of plants by peter tompkins and christopher bird... plants are very sensitive and very involved in practices of shamans and telepathy... of course they feel...

 

 

I agree plants feel.. one hundred percent agree. They even scream when being pulled from the ground, and chopped up.

[林愛偉]

well, the dali lama eats meet every second day and says it's okay to kill animals for food and medicine. he says people should eat less meat and respect and care for animals, but that there is no need to take the buddha's rule on non-killng to extremes... it seems clear that there are many different opinions among buddhists- and the buddha did stop short at condemning meat eating. i think it comes down to intention and balance... to say that people are going to hell for eating meat or using animals for medical purposes is fanaticism. it is about personal choice, leave judgement to the buddhas, enlightened masters or god, not people with a religious agenda... my two cents

 

 

Well, there is a a bit of an over sight with how people have translated what the Buddha meant by not eat meat. There are certain outcomes that will be for eating meat. Of course conditions must be considered. Yet, karma is karma, and they can be heavier and or lighter than other manners of karma.

 

When the Buddha was in the world, because some of his disciples lived on barren land, and growing vegetables was not possible, he said, "I permit the bhikshus to eat 5 kinds of pure meat. This meat is a transformation by my spiritual powers and compassion. It has no life force. You Brahmans live in barren land where vegetables do not grow. So I assisted you with my powers and compassion. What you eat that tastes like meat, is said to be meat, but it isn't. After my extinction, how can those who eat the flesh of living beings be called the disciples of Shakya... You should know that these people who when their retribution ends, they are bound to sink into the seas of birth and death. They are not disciples of the Buddha. Such people as these kill and eat one another in a never-ending cycle, how can such people transcend the triple realm?"

 

5 types of meat

..."Flesh of an animal that I did not see killed, flesh of an animal that I did not hear killed, flesh of an animal that I am sure was not killed for my sake, flesh from an animal that died by itself, flesh that is the leaving of an animal after birds have scavenged. This meat is a transformation of brought into being by my spiritual powers, it has no life force..."

 

-- The above quote is taken from the Four Instructions on Purity and commentary by Ven. Master Xuan Hua.

 

The flesh is not from living creatures, no consciousness no temperature, no breath. The first 3 are according to the Buddha not seeing the animal getting killed, not hearing the animal getting killed and an animal not killed for his sake as an offering to him to eat. The last two means an animal that died without the help of other people or animals, and flesh that was not eaten by birds after they have eaten.

Now since the Buddha was a human at one point, and went into Nirvana, his Buddha nature is the same as every living being. That means the 5 types of meat are not possible to be eaten now because all beings have the Buddha Nature, and thus the Buddha indeed hears an animal being killed, sees an animal being killed, receives an animal as an offering from others. An animal which dies by itself is that which has no influence to do so. Can anyone find one? Animals that have died and eaten by scavenging birds with leftovers to spare...can anyone find those?

 

He said the above quoted words specifically because killing, or aiding the killing of living beings has its inevitable outcomes. Does anyone know about the hells? They are of the minds of living beings, created by them and experienced by them.

 

Not eating meat isn't about religious fanaticism. Its about realizing the results of one's actions and choosing not to partake in those actions. What is funny is that which is not of the norm, and left to the side is seen as religious fanaticism. Desires seem to control what we think about right and wrong. Right and wrong are basic things that all beings know, but because of the education they receive in the world, they become confused.

 

 

On bloodtpes and body types, One gets a body due to karma and all the conditions of that body are expressions of the manners of karma, retribution, one will under go for that life time. BUT if they work to change their habits, views and life style, it doesn't matter what kind of body they have, they can change its structure, make up and not have to live with certain"problems and needy conditions". So if one has a blood type that dr.s say must have meat, change the mind, change habits, and you wont need to eat meat. Because the body has conditions for it, doesn't make it right. The body is subject to mind and views. therefor change the mind and views, and the body transforms as well.

Edited December 4, 2007 by 林愛偉

[mantis]

wow... that earthlings film really hurt...

[Wayfarer64]

When we treat all life with respect then what we do to feed ourselves has no inherant value- when we respect our own lives we eat in a healthy way that for most will enclude eating meat as our circumstances dictate, for healthy protines and energy.

 

Most of us probably do not eat as much meat as the average American does and far more than the average Tibetan. The whole history of Asian meat-eaters I found pretty spurious and out of context. The Chinese had too many famines to claim any semblance of control, everyone just ate whatever whenever they could -as many still do as in other cultures.

 

I have seen the faces of hungry people in Asia, and N.America, I have not always had a good diet due to poverty. Not all Amereicans are rich pigs many of us do not live as Manderines...

 

The inequities of life enclude getting eaten for many life forms. Just because I can empathize with those being eaten; can I claim my abhorance to the killing as a reason for me to avoid the sometimes bitter experiences my bodys' energy requirements lead me into??? For many this is the case. I have been a vegitarian. The first time when I was 4- which lasted 4 months- in 1958, NYC was not vegetarian -friendly...Now I accept the pain as but one of many in this world of strife and hunger...

How I get my energy is far less important to me than how I use it.

 

I do not believe that all life is suffering - I believe life is what we make of it.

Some of the cruelest activities ever committed (the Rape of Nanking for instance), were perpetrated by supposedly devout Buddhists...Or were all of those bastards Shintoists?

 

The freaking Christian crusades were pepetrated by devout Christians etc etc...Any "holier than thou" line of philosophical rant is just not for me...

I say eat the meat you are comfortable eating and thank the spirit within the creature you eat for giving you the energy to go on about yr bidness...

[agharta]

I have a joke. here it is----A vegetarian and a meat-eater get into a fight. Oh wait, vegetarians are non-violent, so the vegetarian just gets his ass kicked.

 

[mYTHmAKER]

Edited December 5, 2007 by mYTHmAKER

[林愛偉]

I have a joke. here it is----A vegetarian and a meat-eater get into a fight. Oh wait, vegetarians are non-violent, so the vegetarian just gets his ass kicked.

 

 

haha

 

Well, a vegetarian that is not cultivating proper views would get their butt kicked.. haha

 

 

Why is it said life is suffering? Because living beings get stuck in their views and states, and do not know the causes of their experiences. This suffering... getting pulled in happiness, and then the next minute sadness. Having arguments with people, being with people whom you do not like... having views of like and dislike... all of these and more add to confusion. To not know one's causes and conditions just keeps one riding up and down on the waves of their own influence.

 

Peace,

Lin

Edited December 5, 2007 by 林愛偉

[Wun Yuen Gong]

Just my 2 cents, for instance all the Cultivation methods that is in question do or was created from a Religous people, clan, temple etc. So here is a few things one should ponder that is if you care about cultures, ethics, secrets, dogma or not!

 

Why was it kept secret?

Why only in a relgious order?

Why not to the public?

What was the rules and laws for skills that was kept in those religions?

Can it benifit outsiders without those beliefs?

Is it fit for outsiders?

Can different religious energy methods be mixed?

 

These are somethings that is important in what you are doing!

 

WYG

[林愛偉]

I changed the name of this article. It is now called "Questioning the Path"

 

obviously...lol

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

[thelerner]

OOoo, Oooo can I get on the soap box now? Thanks here I go:

 

 

Taoist, Buddhist, whatever. If you can't agree that minimizing suffering is good then you've got a problem.

 

Those seeking ..(enlightenment?!) are in tiny minority, both here and in the East. In the East there's traditions, temples and clearer paths that don't exist here in the West. There's no monastery to walk to, Buddhist or Taoist. Nor are we any of Taoists in the manner any religious taoist would agree.

 

My point??? We want something, we don't want to be suckers or misled, we want to help beginners and learn something valuable and walk a real path. Its harder in the West. But we have advantages too. We ask questions, we try things out, we talk to each other without going to war(mostly).

 

Western teachers tend to synthesis the best of different traditions and hand them to us asking only that we practice. But is synthesis the right way? Do we get handed things too easily? Not practice enough?

 

Kunlun might be a dead end, created by a phony. Thats what we're practicing to find out. Maybe its a faster way to open channels and accomplish completeness. We'll see. There's people on that route and they're leaving crumbs and reports. The truth will be known. Not through argument, but the old fashioned Buddhist way(borrowed by the scientific method). Think it through, without prejudices or bias.

 

We're not going to be on the same path, but hopefully we're heading slowly toward the same destination. The person obsessively screaming insults may be on a higher path, but I can't help but think there negativity is causing them to slide down.

 

Leading by example, with words and actions that reflect a deep practice is where the juice ultimately comes from.

 

 

leave sweaty soap box to next person, head for beer

 

 

Michael

[AugustLeo]

.

[林愛偉]

I don't get it...

 

What are we soapboxing?

[Mal]

I don't get it...

 

You would...... if you were the one on the soapbox

[林愛偉]

The idea of minimizing suffering is a good one. Now, we can all attain eyes to see the cause and outcomes without having to do something. It just takes cultivation.

 

So, an idea is good, but overall outcome..longterm and short term, must be considered. It may feel good for now, but in the end may not help at all... lol

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

[hagar]

If I might chip in to this discussion, one has to separate between ideas about reality and reality itself.

 

Lins post is one of the best I have read on this forum. But there is a danger in what he writes, as it may create a dogmatic view of what is "right" and "wrong" related to practice.

 

At one point in my life I was in a huge moral and existetial dilemma, and went to a reterat to ask my master for advice. His answer to my question made my mind go totally silent.

I asked him if a particular choice I was confronted with would create bad Karma, and feeling both embarassed to sit there and bother him with it, and desparate for direction, I was in a state of total uproar.

He said that he could not answer the question related to Karma. It was based on faith, and related to religion, and not direct experience. Forget about karma, and ask yourself what is right.

 

My point is that whatever you do, either eating meat, hurting someone, or doing "left handed" practice, is all related to intention. It is inent that comes first, and the consequences of your actions are closely related to that first mover.

 

In my experience, I cannot but help hurting, killing, creating suffering. Its unavoidable.

It's impossible not to, and you create even more suffering if you attempt to avoid life, and condemning yourself for it. But you can minimize it. Most suffering in the modern western world is made through having a bad conscience, or compensating for it all the time.

 

The only way to be without these constraints is to have direct insight, pranja wisdom, and be a realized sage. And that is further down the line for me atleast =)

 

What we all CAN do is seeing what is necessary and what is avoidable. And if something is necessary, just do it. And if you do practice eating meat, or hurting someone, or doing a practice, make a blessing out of it. Do it gracefully, seeing the inherent interconnection between you, what you do and the object, person or situation you are in (no pun intended).

 

Nature can teach us how to live. If we spend time in nature, like most of the ancient founders of Daoism and other spiritual traditions did, they opened to the inherent grace in all actions in Nature. A Tsunami does not have bad karma, its just the ocean moving.

Mankind is also basically like this.

The only thing separating us from the natural state is our state of intention, and this has both energetic, pragmatic and spiritual causes and consequences. Purify and lessen intention, and whatever practice you do will reveal its inherent quality or lack thereof.

 

In whatever practice we have, it should be done from an open heart. Then all actions will be in the form of a blessing, or finally like a symbol, or a prayer.

 

just my 2 Kroner

 

h

Edited December 14, 2007 by hagar

[林愛偉]

I agree with you Hagar.on the Dogmatism fact..and yet anything can be taken dogmatically. People will take it, or anything to be dogmatic teachings...lol and they have haha

Not saying you do, its just that anything that is believed in , can be taken without questioning.

 

It just so happens that I don't blindly take anything to be fact without investigating it myself. Also, one doesn't have to read a teaching to know the truth of that teaching. What I have written is not taken directly from any text, any beliefs, any ideas. Yet it is written in meaning in various sutras.

 

I just hope that people start asking questions.

 

I posted some things on the Foundation forum and received replies like "... the masters taking lives of bulls are Arhats...have left the cycle of birth and death and when they kill the bulls they are doing the same thing for them..."

 

Talk like this is ridiculous! No one, not even the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas can take a life and make someone end the cycle of birth and death. If they could, they would, but they can't ..lol A disciple of the Buddhas is never to kill anything for any reason. Those people killing bulls are simply not Buddhist. They may wear clothing that resembles Buddhist monks, but they are surely not authentic, disciples of the Buddha.

 

This is what I mean by people taking anything and simply believing it to be fact without questioning. If people don't believe anything I say, then don't just oppose, question, investigate your mind, and find the truth. I don't write to preach. My goal is to make people uncomfortable.

 

 

So a word of advice, and thank you Hagar for pointing it out overall.... Don't believe anything anyone tells you, Not even the Buddhas....Question them, personally investigate your mind through meditation and contemplation...then and only then will you find the truth.

Blind faith was never part of Buddhism, glad for that, yet living beings are living beings...they are subject to their own afflictions, mind. They can take a good thing and turn it into a bad thing.

 

 

I could have made this post much simpler...: there is an inherent knowing of what is proper and what isn't. If doing what is proper benefits people without them having to know that it does good, its just believed, then that dogmatic practice is great. It is people that label things and get stuck to those labels. They label something and then disregard it for what its worth because of that label.

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

Edited December 14, 2007 by 林愛偉

[seadog]

:Quote "There is an inherent knowing of what is proper and what isn't."

I agree with the wonderful simplicity of this statement, I believe if our intention is for benifit of all and ourselves our actions will be correct.This is simple.If this truth resides whithin us and is the foundation of our actions such things as instruction & dogma,will appear for what they really are.

 

I firmly believe all of us inherently know what is correct,if we don't or are in a state of confusion the application of the simple adage "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"soon clears the way.

Perhaps my view is too simplistic, but its the only conclusion that has ever made sense and regardless of how I apply it,whatever the scenerio,it remains that if our intention is for the benefit of others and ourselves we accord with the way of heaven.

[Wayfarer64]

Thanks Hagar -as usual yr words rang true for me...

 

many good thoughts on this thread from many ways of life and paths to walk...

right wrong proper improper the whole good-bad aspect of these views is not how I see the Middle Way -

 

I see it as valueless because it is inherent in all things and gives them no preference.

 

What is IS - we can work on ourselves to transcend our animal natures -or we can cultivate a fuller unity of our entire nature as both spiritual and mortal... animal, lower basic realms of being -whatever as well as our higher selves, one without the other is an empty life that has avoided challanges inherent in a complete biology and spirit.--

 

I am not only a being of spirit and light -I am a being of natural desires and thirsts and any refinement there of - Life is a good thing to savor with gusto... And I for one plan to leave any non-attachment regime for a later date, though it does have a strong allure for me already... I do not have much of any consumerism to speak of anyway- giving up things that I don't relish is easy, I will never strive to end my deep appreciation and sensual delight in being alive. I have spent many hours over many years in meditation to bring me perspective and peace of mind.

 

Lin - You say yr intention was to make people uncomfortable - is this not creating suffering (albeit on a small scale)...

 

Feel what you will for the suffering in the world -compassion is the core of spiritual meaning for me... but I will live as full a life as I possibly can -not in a materialistic sense but in an experiential way...And at any one time the actions I take at one stage of my life will be abhorant to the man I was -or am at another time of my life...

 

I do not believe we all have the same view of proper and improper -nor do I think that if we did that it would be a good thing-some sort of cosmic truth that tells us what is right and wrong -

the right and wrong of things is dictated more by cercumstance than intent -

once you know the right and wrong of things (which any trained animal can do) -

 

Then it is will and knowledge that creates intent - Intent based on ignorance can be disasterous -good intentions can be misapplyed and dire conciquences may result...

 

So for me intent is ephimeral without the strength it takes to just live day by day -With love in your heart for all of life and the courage it takes to live in this dangerous world...eating whatever you can when you can -as most have lived through out the ages...

 

Counting our blessings bite by savory bite...

[林愛偉]

 

 

Lin - You say yr intention was to make people uncomfortable - is this not creating suffering (albeit on a small scale)...

 

 

haha the uncomfortable feeling of putting down afflictions is bliss...hahaha