Viewpoints on atheism and a supernatural being (and/or Beings, Aliens, and Santa)

[Saya]

-_-* One of the reasons I don't visit Buddhist forums anymore was because of that notion, apparently because we have periods our hormones are too out of whack and it would be extremely hard for us.

Which is weird, Buddha at first didn't want women in the sangha not because of an inherent weakness but because he was worried that the monks and nuns would start having sex, easier to be celibate (or at least closeted, hehehe) if you're in a same sex group all the time. But eventually he caved on that. After setting up Eight Special Rules For Women Practicing My Religion which were sexist, and made it hard for nuns to set up practice in other countries, but I think by now we have made our point that women are extremely important to Buddhism.

For more info, Fruitbat, you should read Zen Women, has a great history about women in Buddhism.

[Fruitbat]

Originally Posted by Saya

-_-* One of the reasons I don't visit Buddhist forums anymore was because of that notion, apparently because we have periods our hormones are too out of whack and it would be extremely hard for us.
*snip*
For more info, Fruitbat, you should read Zen Women, has a great history about women in Buddhism.

Can think of a few men I'd like to whack. **goes off mumbling about stone age ideas**

Thanks for the book recommendation. I need to stop procrastinating and start writing, so i can get into reading adult books again.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Saya

Don't eat meat, its like eating your mother! *noms on veal*

All sex other than penis in vagina sex is sexual misconduct! Its not okay to be gay and Buddhist! But I'm not a homophobe!

I'm just a simple man! But I require you to treat me like I'm holy, even if I like to emphasize that I'm not. Don't point your toes toward me, never turn your back on me.

1) Eating meat's not really waffling. Tibetain buddhists have been eating meat for centuries (due in part to the fact that adequate veggies are far more difficult to find in tibet's climate) The Dalai Llama actually tried to eat only vegetarian after fleeing to India and became so ill doctors told him he had to go back to eating meat.

2) the sex stuff doesn't surprise me. That's what happens when people ask a celibate monk for sex advice - they get a stupid answer. I will say that compared to many other "holy men" dude is remarkably liberal.

3) I haven't met the guy or heard about this last part. I'll have to look into it.

[Despanan]

I've talked to gay Buddhists who thought they could never become enlightened and felt ashamed because of the Dalai Lama's (and their own lama's) opinion on the matter.

Those folks are stupid. according to cannon a friggin' mass murderer attained enlightenment in a single lifetime. I highly doubt diddling the wrong flesh sacks is going to disqualify you.

I personally really like the Dalai Llama's open-mindedness and willingness to bend. In a world filled with so many hard-line religious leaders, it's nice to see a guy who says: "hey, I'd rather not eat meat, but looks like I have to" and "when scripture is disproven by science, that scripture must be amended".

Yeah, gays make him kinda squicky, but he's an old man. He's still said that there's nothing inherently wrong with homosexuality, just gay sex. (and coming from a religion which preaches near-universal celibacy, that's not really a shocking stance.

[JCC.]

I like titties!

[Hearts_Purple]

I could never follow a religion that teaches celibacy. Sex is awesome, especially when you can't get pregnant!

[ape descendant]

If one doesn't believe in the supernatural aspects of a religion, why take it's name at all?

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Despanan

1) Eating meat's not really waffling. Tibetain buddhists have been eating meat for centuries (due in part to the fact that adequate veggies are far more difficult to find in tibet's climate) The Dalai Llama actually tried to eat only vegetarian after fleeing to India and became so ill doctors told him he had to go back to eating meat.

Tibetan medicine holds that no one can be truly vegetarian so thats not surprising, what is surprising is that he does say that eating an animal is just as bad as cannibalism. But he doesn't even attempt the "happy meat" goal? He goes right to eating the cheeks of baby animals?

2) the sex stuff doesn't surprise me. That's what happens when people ask a celibate monk for sex advice - they get a stupid answer. I will say that compared to many other "holy men" dude is remarkably liberal.

Thay doesn't really have that problem. He thinks you should be in love with the person you're sleeping with but other than that its all good. And he's from Vietnam, he didn't grow up in a liberal country either.

Those folks are stupid. according to cannon a friggin' mass murderer attained enlightenment in a single lifetime. I highly doubt diddling the wrong flesh sacks is going to disqualify you.

Its what Tibetan Buddhism teaches though, hell when I was a teenager I thought masturbation was bad because of shit like that. I think attitudes like that are part of the reason it seems to be hard to find Buddhists who aren't prudish assholes.

And the serial killer thing isn't true of all traditions, Pure Land Buddhists don't even think anyone can become enlightened in the human realm, gotta reincarnate into the Pure Land!

I personally really like the Dalai Llama's open-mindedness and willingness to bend. In a world filled with so many hard-line religious leaders, it's nice to see a guy who says: "hey, I'd rather not eat meat, but looks like I have to" and "when scripture is disproven by science, that scripture must be amended".

Yeah, gays make him kinda squicky, but he's an old man. He's still said that there's nothing inherently wrong with homosexuality, just gay sex. (and coming from a religion which preaches near-universal celibacy, that's not really a shocking stance.

Yeah he's golden when compared to Pope Benny but pretty awful when compared to other Buddhist leaders. Again, Thay declares that God is a lesbian (and he is older), Seung Sahn actually had sex (saying he didn't need celibacy anymore, also was older), Robert Aitken even declared sex to be fun, other traditions are generally becoming more inclusive, less about elevating monks above everyone else and making Buddhism more accessible, even in conservative Asia Buddhists are becoming more accepting of homosexuality and issues like abortion, women are gaining a voice in the religion after being told for thousands of years that we are subordinates, the religion is evolving. And its not a religion that advocates near-universal celibacy, traditionally in Asia lay people weren't expected to become enlightened, there is a rule against sexual misconduct (rrape, adultery, and the Tibetan Buddhists added "anything other than penis in vagina sex" quite arbitrarily) but lay persons are not at all expected to follow rules of celibacy or even near celibacy because they were the great unwashed who had no hope like the monks had. This was very true in Tibetan Buddhism where monks ruled over everyone else. And that said, homosexuality among monks in monasteries was pretty much tolerated and accepted. As well as pedophilia and child abuse (particularly from dob-dobs) but hey, damn gays gotta learn before the **********. God knows they probably blame homosexuality like Pope Benny does.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

If one doesn't believe in the supernatural aspects of a religion, why take it's name at all?

That directed towards Buddhism? Before he died Buddha said to be a lamp unto yourself, and don't believe shit just because someone famous or even Buddha said something, investigate it to be true. The Dalai Lama is also kinda half assed about that, (he says since Buddha was right about things like where suffering came from, we can trust that he was right about reincarnation and all that supernatural stuff) but not alone in that people still become dogmatic even if its technically against the religion to be so. Anyway,depends on the tradition on how much emphasis is on the supernatural stuff. There isn't much in Zen at all, so there's not much for me to reject. I can't think of anything off the top of my head in fact.

Thing to remember is that Buddha was a Hindu before he was Buddha, and Buddhism wasn't really seen as a seperate religion right away anyway, so we carry a lot of stuff over from Hinduism, until it came to China, and Buddhism was nearly wiped out in the T'ang Dynasty (I think it was the T'ang Dynasty) and they lost much of their history, so Zen was born as a mix of the bare bones Buddhism they had and Taoism. Thats a gross oversimplification but I'm sure you don't want me to bore you with a discussion about the evolution of beliefs.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by JCC.

I like titties!

Ya creepy perv!

[JCC.]

At least I'm honest about it. Besides, it's my schtick.

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by Saya

Thats a gross oversimplification but I'm sure you don't want me to bore you with a discussion about the evolution of beliefs.

I do not find this topic boring in the least. I could listen/discuss/ponder the origins and evolution of beliefs all day.

I had thought I was interested in Buddhism, untill I read a biography about the first Buddha guy in India.... I mean... dude was a spoiled prince, saw that life really sucked for poor people, and instead of using his position to fix things, he left his wife and infant son to go "find himself"... l thought he was more of a deadbeat, than any one I would look up to. (just my opinion)

So I never really got into it.

Around that time I was in the process of losing what religion I had had up to that point, anyway, looking back, I don't think I wanted to merely replace one with another.

[Fruitbat]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

If one doesn't believe in the supernatural aspects of a religion, why take it's name at all?

That's why I don't claim to be of any religion. I don't like labels.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

I do not find this topic boring in the least. I could listen/discuss/ponder the origins and evolution of beliefs all day.

I had thought I was interested in Buddhism, untill I read a biography about the first Buddha guy in India.... I mean... dude was a spoiled prince, saw that life really sucked for poor people, and instead of using his position to fix things, he left his wife and infant son to go "find himself"... l thought he was more of a deadbeat, than any one I would look up to. (just my opinion)

So I never really got into it.

Around that time I was in the process of losing what religion I had had up to that point, anyway, looking back, I don't think I wanted to merely replace one with another.

It wasn't that he was outraged on behalf of the proletariat or anything, he realized that it wouldn't last forever. Apparently when he went outside and saw sickness and death that was the first time he ever saw it, and he realized how hollow his life was. So back then the thing to do was to cut your hair and become a hermit. Admittedly in retrospect some teachers say "he could have found enlightenment at home!"

His son later joined him and became a monk himself.

While I can't recall any social services he set up in life, King Ashoka did because of his inspiration from Buddhism, and Buddhists nun did. The chick in my signature was an abbess of Tokeiji, a convent that saved women from their brutal husbands in a time where women couldn't get a divorce.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

I do not find this topic boring in the least. I could listen/discuss/ponder the origins and evolution of beliefs all day.

I had thought I was interested in Buddhism, untill I read a biography about the first Buddha guy in India.... I mean... dude was a spoiled prince, saw that life really sucked for poor people, and instead of using his position to fix things, he left his wife and infant son to go "find himself"... l thought he was more of a deadbeat, than any one I would look up to. (just my opinion)

So I never really got into it.

Around that time I was in the process of losing what religion I had had up to that point, anyway, looking back, I don't think I wanted to merely replace one with another.

Yeah...you're looking at the story in the wrong context.

His discovery of Buddahood (if you believe in the religion) was arguably MUCH more valuable than if he spent his entire life helping the prolitariate, and it wasn't uncommon for people to become wandering Aesthetics in that day and age.

And as Saya said, his family became followers later.

[Despanan]

BTW:

back to the Dalai Lama:

On the Veal: I don't know anything about his eating veal in particular. Vegetarianism has been one of the aspects of Buddhism and Hinduism that I always thought was kinda silly. Personally I don't see it as a big deal.

On Gays: I don't know much about your boy Thay, but declairing "God is a lesbian" seems to be alot closer to IRL trawlin' than an expression of great spiritual truth.

As for the DL, he's stated again and again that he has no problem with homosexual relationships, just homosexual sex. While that's not an outlook I agree with he's also got a problem with heterosexual sex, and romantic realtionships in general. Guy is consistent and I don't think you can really see it as particularly homophobic.

As for "the horrors of oldschool tibetian buddhism" I really take alot of that with a grain of salt because a) there's a TON of communist chinese propaganda out there slaming the DL and Tibetian buddhists and b) Tibet WAS a country which was still in the dark ages. It's not fair to criticise the current Catholic church for the Spanish Inquisition, I'm not going to bitch too hard about some ancient monks banging each other 300 years ago.

edit:

Also: I'm surprised you see Zen Buddhism as a fusion with Taoism...didn't Bodidharma say that those who thought Buddhism and Toaism were the same thing "Couldn't tell black from white"?

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by Saya

It wasn't that he was outraged on behalf of the proletariat or anything, he realized that it wouldn't last forever. Apparently when he went outside and saw sickness and death that was the first time he ever saw it, and he realized how hollow his life was. So back then the thing to do was to cut your hair and become a hermit. Admittedly in retrospect some teachers say "he could have found enlightenment at home!"

It probably helps that he most likely believed in reincarnation. I found that my views on a lot of things changed dramatically when I stopped believing in it.

I must admit though, being a hermit can be tempting at times.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Despanan

BTW:

back to the Dalai Lama:

On the Veal: I don't know anything about his eating veal in particular. Vegetarianism has been one of the aspects of Buddhism and Hinduism that I always thought was kinda silly. Personally I don't see it as a big deal.

Its a BFD when it comes to ahimsa, and previous texts say that if you specifically kill an animal for a monk you will be born blind in the next life (cause and effect sutra, can't remember if thats the right punishment though but you get the idea), the idea is that monks can eat meat if its given to them by the laypeople while begging, but they shouldn't ask for it. The Dalai Lama's reasoning was that in Buddhism, the universe is generally regarded as having no beginning, it always was. Since it always was, and it is infinite, chances are there has always been life somewhere in the universe. There is however a limited number of beings, and we've all met before in previous lives. Robert Aitken wrote some really good essays about this and I'm afraid I can't explain it very well, but basically the reason we're talking as we are now on this forum, its because we have talked before and we have created karma between us over our lives. Everyone in your life is like this, and we sometimes act out previous relationships unknowingly. The Dalai Lama's point on why its cannibalism to eat animals is because since there has been finite life and infinite time, the chances that the cow you're eating was once your mother in a past life is pretty high. Seung Sahn also talked about that when you kill or cause to kill an animal, you create negative karma with that animal. So depending on how much you eat thats a lot of animals waiting to get revenge on you! Hence, if you buy into karma, without getting into ahimsa, when you're trying to free yourself from your karma, its generally considered a good idea not to generate bad karma.

On Gays: I don't know much about your boy Thay, but declairing "God is a lesbian" seems to be alot closer to IRL trawlin' than an expression of great spiritual truth.

Its actually a pretty sweet essay to empower those who are discriminated against and encourage them to forgive those who trespess agaisnt...wait....

anyway, here's the essay: http://www.buddhachannel.tv/portail/...hp?article3014

As for the DL, he's stated again and again that he has no problem with homosexual relationships, just homosexual sex. While that's not an outlook I agree with he's also got a problem with heterosexual sex, and romantic realtionships in general. Guy is consistent and I don't think you can really see it as particularly homophobic.

It is homophobic because it sets the unfair precedent that its okay for straight people to have sex, the reason homosexual sex is wrong is because they can't procreate. A hetero couple fucking without using condoms is fine. Its heteronormative and its really not far from the justification Catholics (well, other Christians too) use to discriminate against homosexuality.

Anyway, this is a pretty good article on why he's behind on the times and that being old is no excuse, the author also goes to point out other Tibetan teachers who are more than willing to stand up and say that homosexuality, sex and all is peachy:
http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.ph...k=view&id=1977

As for "the horrors of oldschool tibetian buddhism" I really take alot of that with a grain of salt because a) there's a TON of communist chinese propaganda out there slaming the DL and Tibetian buddhists and b) Tibet WAS a country which was still in the dark ages. It's not fair to criticise the current Catholic church for the Spanish Inquisition, I'm not going to bitch too hard about some ancient monks banging each other 300 years ago.

It wasn't that long ago, Heinrich Harrer talked about this in Seven Years In Tibet (the scary dob-dobs I mean) , and it was touched upon in the movie Kundun. Plus there's stories that surface nowadays but...

I do too take it with a grain of salt, but that doesn't mean that we should ignore any stories that come out of Tibet. Its not quite the feel good fix self help religion that we know it as, they ran the state there, of course they could get away with anything and it wouldn't be any surprise whatsoever that sick weirdos took advantage of that. Its part of the reason why I think pedophilia is a problem for the Catholic church too is because they have tons of power and a lot of people willing to look the other way because they don't want to admit that there is a flaw within the religious institution they love very much.

I'm running out of room so TO BE CONTINUED.

[Saya]

I think this is one thing we're really going to have to agree to disagree on, mostly I find the vegetarianism thing an old man coot thing, but the wish washy stance on one of the most important issues of the century, the inclusion of LGBTQ, shaming them, saying they shouldn't have sex at all (and heterosexuals can albeit as long as they follow really weird rules), and just basically refusing to try to understand homosexuality, and washing his hands of it saying that elders need to gather and change their minds about this before he'll change his makes him archaic. I still do like him, as an adorable old coot, but not as a religious teacher. And this was my point, he's not relevant or particularly helpful but you can buy self help books written by people who just merely interviewed him and you can buy fricken Dalai Lama POSTERS and everything. A lot of people like him because he's an exotic creature from the Orient to them, its not the only thing Buddhist that has been appropriated but its an example of why the Asian label sells. He's not all that different from Pope Benny, just bends a little further but not far enough.

Also: I'm surprised you see Zen Buddhism as a fusion with Taoism...didn't Bodidharma say that those who thought Buddhism and Toaism were the same thing "Couldn't tell black from white"?

Haha, never heard him saying that but I'll take your word for it. Thing about that is that Bodhidharma brought Zen to China but by the time the T'ang period came along he was long gone in his grave. So when writings and teachings of Buddhism was purged, when it became favourable again they didn't have a whole lot to go with. And naturally religions borrow from each other, this is pretty much inevitable. Back in the day Taoism was Buddhism's opponent in the great political dance of finding favour with royalty, and they ended up being religious bedfellows anyway.

[PortraitOfSanity]

Yea, for a supposedly tolerant "faith", there are quite a few contradictions.

[Despanan]

Actually Saya, I'm going to agree with you (in part at least). I'll agree that there are other teachers who have a more progressive, and agreeable message.

However, I'm not going to discount his worthiness as a teacher, a person, or a spiritual leader because I disagree with things he says (even very key issues like homosexuality). The guy is an absolute BASTION of peace and tolerance, and is arguably the most famous Buddhist in the world, and despite being mistaken on a number of issues, there are alot of great things he says and stands for.

Besides, I think that at times there is a real danger to be found in listening to those who only share similar opinions. I respect the guy in the same way I respect Pope John Paul and Ghandi. Ghandi hated black people, but that doesn't mean that he wasn't a great man who inspired the entire species to move forward by leaps and bounds.

(Thanks for the article btw, that really was a good read)

As to the vegetarian thingy, I've heard that argument before. I understand it, I just don't accept it. It is the nature of organic life to subvert and consume other organic life. I'm sure if reincarnation is true, I have eaten my mom and been eaten by her countless times.

What I don't accept is that this action results in negative karma. Food is food and if you're going to say that God is a lotus and a chicken and a lesbian, then there's no more negative karma to be found in chowing down on a burger than a bean-sprout. Life is life.

Now don't get me wrong, compassion and mindfulness is important, I just think there's a helluva lot more negative karma to be found in being cruel, or hateful, or gluttenous, than in disembodied pissed-off mother cow ghosts.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

Yea, for a supposedly tolerant "faith", there are quite a few contradictions.

Careful

Tolerance doesn't necessarily mean acceptance. I think a burka is a pretty silly thing to wear, but I don't get pissed-off when I see women wearing them on the street.

The Dalai Lama is always respectful and kind to gays (hell he did an interveiw with OUT magazine) he's just loyal to some musty old scrolls.

Which I will agree is silly as well, but I can tolerate it.

[Saya]

He is a loving dude for the most part, but so is the guy down the street. He's been through a lot but I guess thats why I see him more as a veteran of an illegal and unfair invasion rather than a religious teacher.

The difference between a bean sprout and a cow strictly from the religious point of view is cosmology. Buddhist doctrine holds that there are six realms you can be reborn into, the highest realm being the realm of the Devas, or the Pure Land, basically heaven, then there is the human realm below that, the animal realm below that, the hungry ghosts below that, malevolent spirits below that, and hell below that. There are instances in the Jataka stories where spirits live in trees but they're generally accepted as parables, you don't incarnate into plants.

After that, sutras such as the Dhammapada make the distinction that you must not harm sentient life, which plants are not.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

Yea, for a supposedly tolerant "faith", there are quite a few contradictions.

I do have to agree and not even necessarily because of the Dalai Lama, that didn't really blow my mind, but there have been times when dealing with Buddhists IRL and online that I sometimes thought to myself, "do I want to be in the same religion as this assface?"

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Saya

The difference between a bean sprout and a cow strictly from the religious point of view is cosmology. Buddhist doctrine holds that there are six realms you can be reborn into, the highest realm being the realm of the Devas, or the Pure Land, basically heaven, then there is the human realm below that, the animal realm below that, the hungry ghosts below that, malevolent spirits below that, and hell below that. There are instances in the Jataka stories where spirits live in trees but they're generally accepted as parables, you don't incarnate into plants.

After that, sutras such as the Dhammapada make the distinction that you must not harm sentient life, which plants are not.

Yeah, I'm familiar with that, but I've always seen the realms as metaphorical rather than physical. It's also accepted doctrine that a bohdisattva can come back as anything: a person, a place, a work of art, and yes a plant. I suppose it's not a common occurrence, but if you follow the infinite universe logic, it's rather likely you've chowed down on one of those dudes in a previous life (if not this one).

Plus there's the whole story where the buddha found the starving lioness and her cubs, and offered himself to her. When she couldn't eat he tore himself apart and fed himself to her. In their next incarnations they came back as his closest followers. Now granted that's a special case (buddha's don't accrue karma), but if you follow the idea behind the doctrine of nothingness, that there is no self, and the entire universe is "one" then what precisely are the plants, and rocks and sky? they're certainly not separate from the cycle of existence, so WTF?

I can understand the thinking behind not harming sentient life, and certainly there is allot to be said about having that as a general outlook, but again, context is important. Killing and eating out of necessity is different than killing out of malice, and while I'm sure there are those who disagree with me, mindfulness is far more important than restricting one's diet.