Buddhism

imo the way tho it adapts is not through navel gazing by people who are too afraid to do more than scratch the surface - the way that darmha will take root in the west is by people practicing it wholeheartedly - then after like three generations you have something that maybe looks a little bit different on the surface but retains the same core potency - and no one particularly tried to or worried abt changing it

as a cavat i will say its totally fine and good for people to present the teachings so that the people theyre speaking to will understand them - teachers who have actual meditative realization should by all means feel the most free to play w/this - unfortunately a lot of entry level dudes are confusing this approach and modifying things they dont particularly understand to suit their own neurosis

i mean if you cant wrap yr head around calling yrself a buddhist maybe stay home and think abt it, the conceptual barriers only get larger from there

my atheist friend's parents who are christians have been trying to get him to go to a local buddhist meeting so he can have "some kind of spiritual view on life" cuz they know there's no way he'll ever go to a christian church. i think they're attempting to edge him along a sliding scale of belief until eventually he's going to church with them every week. he doesn't want to go, anyway. seems stupid, because he is more philosophical and ethical then most religious people i know as he is.

btw if you ever want to meet some westerners who have humbly dedicated themselves to the dharma check out these doodz, yes they are singing and enjoying themselves, deal w/it *sunglasses*

http://grab.by/8FcB

imo the way tho it adapts is not through navel gazing by people who are too afraid to do more than scratch the surface - the way that darmha will take root in the west is by people practicing it wholeheartedly

I don't claim to be able to assess whether anybody else is practicing wholeheartedly or not, but it does seem to me that there are a lot of people thoroughly engaged in a panoply of practices, and I think that exactly qualifies as the kind of planting the teachings in the soil here that we're talking about here. I--me speaking for me (in THIS thread that's funny)--don't think we can speak of the dharma with the kind of certainty that you're deploying here.

Dogen's practice in Japan in 1200 was the same as Warner's practice in 2010, and I don't think we can say that Dogen designed the Soto lineage with our hangups in mind. I agree with you that the accoutrements are silly, but I--speaking for me, as a rep of a diff lineage!!--don't think we can discount other lineage's practices as less advanced or 'shallower.'

I know this is a thing we won't agree on, but you know, such as it is.

Now somebody call me a weak-kneed syncretic.

Of course I say that knowing plenty of post-hippie Soto cats who disdain anything other than zazen as 'chasing acid trips,' so I'm not really repping anybody's opinion but my own here.

i dont think accoutrements are silly particularly, in fact i think theyre v important, they just need to be the accoutrements that enlighten rather than obscure - and i agree there are lots of people practicing wholeheartedly, certainly more wholeheartedly than me, and thats wonderful

my point i guess is basically: a) there are people who annoy me and are dumb b) they should stop

hahaq

^^ shh secret lojong slogans

lorong slogans

lolong lolgans

lol

Almost all Mahayana Buddhists regard themselves as practicing a superior form of Buddhism, the “large vehicle” of greater aspirations, higher view, and deeper compassion, which they contrast to a so-called “Hinayana” or smaller, inferior vehicle. Many Theravadins regard themselves as practicing a “pure” or “original” form of Buddhism, rather than degenerate Mahayana. Because the term “Hinayana” originated in Mahayana sectarian polemics and has never been a self-designation used by any Buddhist group, I make a special effort to discourage use of this term whenever I teach Buddhist history in a Mahayana or Vajrayana context. Many Westerners who practice a Tibetan-based form of Buddhism find it difficult to accept and assimilate this change into their speech habits no matter how many times the reasons for doing so are explained. Nevertheless, I continue to argue that the term “Hinayana” simply needs to be dropped from our vocabulary. In a pluralistic, diverse Buddhist world that is informed by an accurate understanding of Buddhist history, the term “Hinayana” is deeply inappropriate. I also suggest that the idea of progressive stages of development from “lower” to “higher” may not be the best way to understand Buddhist internal diversity.

boom

eh its part of the samaya vow to not denigrate other forms of buddhism fyi - so i mean this lady who thinks shes thinking big is just going over something thats considered already settled from a tantric pov - and i think you know being ecumenical is good as far as being open minded but if youre using it to not relate to or understand the philosophical differences in varied traditions than its just stupid

and of course she has absolutely no business just changing buddhist terminology just to suit her personal beliefs

extremely weak sauce over all

btw i am aquatinted w/her, one summer at shambhala mountain center she wore this gross cat sweatshirt around all the time w/three cats on the front facing forward and on the back were their raised tails hind legs and everything - nagl

i mean that whole essay is so buddhist challops - as if practitioners are sitting around worrying abt the origins of mahayana, thinking abt how lame theravada is - they are not! they are trying to understand how to work w/their minds, how to be kind to people

ps academia is the worst

Now somebody call me a weak-kneed syncretic.

This seems wrong and pointless, but you asked politely, so... you are a weak-kneed syncretic.

**sigh** People have such strange fetishes.

take it to tmi u 2

gross u guys

doesnt nondualism nullify this entire argument?

w/r/t little/big vehicle

i think when discussing the concept of emptiness, its not like calling shenanigans, its not going to make practical differences disappear

yea i guess i dont know enough about the differences between the schools and i have a sneaking suspicion that everything i know about buddhism comes from mahayana

from a vajrayana pov all three vehicles are essential and practiced simultaneously - so its quite easy to make too much out of the big/little naming convention - which isnt even really particularly a comment on theravada but rather describes aspects of the tantra tradition - like imagine a teacher in a remote valley in eastern tibet in 1897 caring or even knowing abt whats going on in south east asia

i mean he doesnt even know who the dalai lama is

which isnt even really particularly a comment on theravada but rather describes aspects of the tantra tradition

but dude come on you can see where theravadins might take umbrage at the naming convention: 'hey u lil guys are great and we totes respect your less evolved practices'

i mean maybe this is concern trolling if you like, but i have read bhutanese dudes insisting that this amounts to centuries of disrespect for what they do

i think when discussing the concept of emptiness, its not like calling shenanigans

i love buddhism board descrip

form is emptiness, emptiness is not shenangians

aw man i've only been able to skim most of this recent activity :(

its part of the samaya vow to not denigrate other forms of buddhism fyi - so i mean this lady who thinks shes thinking big is just going over something thats considered already settled from a tantric pov

you realize that from the opposite perspec tho this is kinda 'hey we didn't mean it like that yall dealwithit.gif' right i mean

and of course she has absolutely no business just changing buddhist terminology just to suit her personal beliefs

down with this tho, hate this 'i'm not even really a buddhist' line of bs

what makes you not a buddhist by dzongsar jamyang khyentse

loved this, btw

i mean jho i realize nobody is gonna be droppin t bombs on u itt i'm just sayin

xp

http://grab.by/8FcB

wnkiw

i think its ok to challenge jho itt

i mean that whole essay is so buddhist challops - as if practitioners are sitting around worrying abt the origins of mahayana, thinking abt how lame theravada is - they are not! they are trying to understand how to work w/their minds, how to be kind to people

― ice cr?m, Monday, January 31, 2011 5:56 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

i mean ok yes you are kind of negating the whole rest of my discussion with this post i'm just saying this is a thread that exists in the ~dharma community~ and it's not exclusively the domain of stuff-white-buddhists-like types

i think its ok to challenge jho itt

― ullr saves (gbx), Tuesday, February 1, 2011 12:11 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

oh right i just mean i'm not gonna ~blow his mind~ with some secret shit he didn't know abt

re: ari & rose, i wish that gif was drunkenly animated in 25 minutes

i spent a couple minutes like

'would not get enlightened with??'

'would not chant with??'

'would not visualize with??'

theyre awesome deep individuals you would no doubt enjoy meeting, the silliness of that jpg they had nothing to do w/excepted

anyway i feel like the lesser vehicle scandal if there is such a thing is exquisitely silly, and to all my theravada brethren i say 'do yr thing gangsta'

fair enuf

sorry if i sometimes project my resentments onto u as the sole vajrayana rep on this borad

roll on yo

if its discussed in such a away as to elucidate the teachings then fine, otherwise im totally w/e

hi 5

i mean i could see the dalai lama making a pronouncement saying 'dont call it the lesser vehicle call it the essential vehicle' and that would be a nice gesture but nothing particularly wouldve changed abt the teachings because the problem wasnt really a problem in the first place

I mean I'm just always wary of situs where I find myself saying to an offended party 'guys you really don't have a reason to be offended here'