Ask A Buddhist II

[notself]

I believe that JRR Tolkien - the author of the “Lord of the Rings” - was trying to create a modern “Mythos” for the secularized, post-Enlightenment Western world, a legendarium based upon ancient Norse, Anglo-Saxon etc. myths and legends, complete with its own history, languages (him being a consummate philologist) and even a “Bible” (a sacred text, the Silmarillion).

It was a noble feat. Tolkien was a devout Catholic and one who also understood the sacredness of myth and lore, as an expression of a culture’s deepest beliefs and insights into reality.

Joseph Campbell said the same thing about Star Wars. "Let go your conscious self."youtube.com/watch?v=2F7Wwew8X4Y

 

[Lodro]

Yes. I would also include anicca in there as well, since emptiness incorporates impermanence. Things which are non-empty are permanent, so all the arguments against permanence work in favour of emptiness. That is one difference from the Theravada, nirvana is shunya along with everything else.

Which explains why at some point people point out that Samsara and Nirvana can’t really exist without one another. But now I’ll have to digest that understanding with the fascinating quotation from notself – it is causing me to reexamine some of assumptions that I’ve made. Assumptions that make me wonder if later arguments around Nirvana :heaven: involve a bit of a straw man.

re: the Heart Sutra, I wanted to invite folks to take a look and contribute to this thread… forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9699135#post9699135 I’m hoping that we can get into an even deeper dialog on some of these issues. I’m going to post my final little bit about the Third Turning in the next day or two and I think it will be really interesting at that point to dive into the question of how conceptions of God compare to conceptions of emptiness and Buddha-Nature, as well as other formulations.

BTW, does it strike anyone else as sweetly ironic that we’re engaging each other in dialog about these profound Buddhist teachings on a Catholic forum?

 

[Vouthon]

Brother Lodro

I’ll be back (like Arnold Schwarzenegger ) contributing to that thread later on tonight, I just have some work to attend to today.

God Bless and look forward to it!

 

[Vouthon]

BTW, does it strike anyone else as sweetly ironic that we’re engaging each other in dialog about these profound Buddhist teachings on a Catholic forum?

I think its excellent!

It gives us the opportunity to have insights into the heart of Buddhist thinking and spirituality, which could enrich our understanding of Catholicism.

On the same token, I think its good for “Non-Catholic religions” since these Buddhist threads have, in my opinion, changed the dynanmic of “dialogue” on this forum. No longer is it simply Catholics commenting on other religions (whether negatively ie “false, satanic” or positively ie “grains of truth, rays of light, respect the good”) with the odd (name removed by moderator)ut from people of other faiths, and the rolleyes unending stream of “Do Muslims worship the same God as Catholics?” threads, where people like myself come down on the “yes” camp and others come down on the “no” camp - no, no, no - there is actual interfaith dialogue and of a kind that inspires me and gives me hope.

I say well done brothers Bakmoon & Lodro & sister Notself for creating these threads, and brother/sister Rossum for his/her (name removed by moderator)ut as well!

 

[AdamP88]

BTW, does it strike anyone else as sweetly ironic that we’re engaging each other in dialog about these profound Buddhist teachings on a Catholic forum?

I think it’s cool.

 

[notself]

AdamPeter,

Please tell us a bit about the ordination for a monk of the Dominican order:

How is the ceremony conducted?

What is the rule (vinaya) for monks?

Are Dominican Priests considered to be of a higher rank that must be deferred to or just a different calling?

What will be your duties?

 

[rinnie]

This is a problematic proposition, because in Buddhism, the mind is defined as the composite of all of the mental components which arise. They include Vedana (interpreting a sensory experience as pleasurable, unpleasent, or neutral), Sañña (interpreting what a sensory experience is), Sankhara (volition), and Viññana (awareness of a sense object.)

These things exist only for the briefest of moments before vanishing, and being replaced by something else. If you hold that the mind is the soul, then that leaves you with the proposition that the soul is constantly being destroyed and remade. If you don’t have a problem with the idea that the soul is being destroyed and remade all the time, then sure, you could say that the mind is the soul.

Usually that’s not what people mean by soul, though. What do you mean when you use the word soul?

Well according to the bible there are 3 primary goals of the soul.

One is the will that you can find in Job 7:15
One is the mind, 3:20
One is emotions 2 Sam 5:8 Deut 6:5

Our will makes decisions, remember how we talked about how God gave us free will. Although he gave us the will he left it up to us how we will use it.

The second is our mind, its what we use for thinking.

The third part of the soul is emotions, It is through our emotions we live out things.

So I believe there are 3 functions of the Soul.

Now comes the Spirit. The bible says if we do not know our human Spirit we cannot know God. Job tells us this,

ANd if we do not know our human Spirit we cannot know how to pray PROPERLY. Eph 6:8. Think about his, pray properly. Its alot of what we have been talking about this last month.

And it is our Spirit that we use to serve God. Rom 1:9

Christian SPIRIT is made ALIVE by the Spirit! John 3:6

We worship Christ in Spirit. John tells us that.

So I believe it is our SOUL that is different from our Spirit, BUt the soul is made up of the 3 primary functions.

 

[rinnie]

Reality is real, but it is deceptively real.

A mirage is not water, though it does look like water. A mirage is not nothing, it is something but just not what it looks like. A mirage looks like water, and nothing would not look like water.

I impute many things to reality that are not actually present in reality. That is our mistake, and nothing to do with what is actually present in reality.

The emptiness of emptiness is the fact that not even emptiness exists ultimately, that it is also dependent, conventional, nominal, and in the end it is just the everydayness of the everyday. Penetrating to the depths of being, we find ourselves back on the surface of things and so discover that there is nothing, after all, beneath those deceptive surfaces. Moreover, what is deceptive about them is simply the fact that we assume ontological depth lurking just beneath.

– Jay Garfield, “Empty words, Buddhist philosophy and cross-cultural interpretation.” OUP 2002.

Reality is emptiness because it is empty of all the extraneous stuff our minds overlay onto the basic sense-impressions which are all we can really know of reality.

rossum

But why can’t reality be fullness, fullness of Christ and his Spirit.

I think that is where we differ alot, do you not agree?

 

[Vouthon]

AdamPeter,

Please tell us a bit about the ordination for a monk of the Dominican order:

How is the ceremony conducted?

What is the rule (vinaya) for monks?

Are Dominican Priests considered to be of a higher rank that must be deferred to or just a different calling?

What will be your duties?

Dear Sister Notself

The Dominicans, like the Franciscans, are friars rather than monks. Unlike monks, who belong to a single house or monastery, a friar can be transferred to any house in any part of the world. Dominicans do not isolate themselves from the world but go out into the world in order to preach and spread the Gospel. This is reflected in their mottoes: “To share with others the fruits of our contemplation” and “Preaching and the salvation of people”.

From Encloepedia Britannica:

Monasticism

Secondary and tertiary orders

The notion of secondary and tertiary orders was developed in the Roman Catholic world, though by analogy it could be extended to non-Christian cultures. The triple division within the Franciscans and the Dominicans epitomizes the following hierarchy: the first order consists of ordained priests and brothers who are not priests; the second consists of contemplative nuns; and the third consists of laymen and laywomen— “tertiaries”—who live under abridged, or “minor,” vows that may include celibacy. **In the Theravada Buddhist world, such tertiaries have parallels in the sangha, which is similar to the first orders of Dominicans and Franciscans. **Whereas the full-fledged Buddhist monk takes more than 200 vows, part-time monks (shramanas) take fewer than one-third that number. In Myanmar, quasi-monastic but unordained practitioners (upasakas) may stay at monasteries and participate in the meditative and congregational activities of the monks for a limited period upon payment of a nominal fee to the bursar of the cloister.

They have had an impact on Western civilisation incomparable to any other order. From pioneering international law and humans rights (the School of Salamanca, Francisco de Vitoria), to fighting for the abolition of slavery and the slave trade (ie Bartolome de Las Casas), to their democratic principles, to their mysticism (Eckhart, Suso, Tauler) etc. etc.

They are the only order I know that has a country named after them - “The Dominican Republic”.

So they are very “active contemplatives”

There are Dominican nuns though, and unlike the friars they live a cloistered monastic life in a single house/monastery. They serve the Order through this monastic form of contemplation.

Brother AdamPeter, I am sure, will explain to you the ceremony and rule for the Dominicans. The order is noted for being governed by a very democratic constitution.

There are four branches of the Dominican Order:

domlife.org/BeingDominican/WhoWeAre/BeingDominicanIndex.htm

Four Branches of the Dominican Order

When Dominic de Guzman (1170-1221) founded the Order of Preachers, or Dominicans, at the beginning of the 13th Century the world he knew was in turmoil. Europe’s agrarian population was shifting to urban centers, creating waves of change that affected of of life, including economic and social relationships, politics and religious. Universities established in these new urban centers were attracting the interest of the new generation and the attention of Dominic as well.

In 1203, Dominic dedicated his life and to a new ministry, through which he would lead many other men and women: preaching. The new order was given the title Order of Preachers and their itinerant style of preaching keeps them on the move. Today, many Dominicans would say that they preach with the Sacred Scripture in one hand and the newspaper in the other. In this way their preaching is to bring the Word of God into dialogue with the complexities and challenges of our world.

The Dominican Family Has Several Branches

In the Dominican Order there are several branches, all focused around a passion for preaching and the same priorities, all living in the same spirit and charism of St. Dominic. And all have produced many recognized saints. They are Friars (brothers, priests), Laity, Nuns, and Sisters.

The Friars, both brothers and priests, profess the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Brothers and priests share in a common life in the spirit and charism of St. Dominic and may be involved in a variety of ministries. Ministries among the Friars include campus ministry, itinerant preaching, parish ministry, teaching in schools and universities, educational administration, religious education, authorship, catechetical formation, social work, psychology, health care, the arts, and household support.

Each Friar, brother or priest, has heard a call to his choice of dedication. A brother is not a potential priest but one called to be a brother. Many follow the preaching path, some are ordained permanent deacons, but they don’t hear a call to priesthood. Some hear the call to quieter apostolates of hospitality and solace for those who seek it, others to very active apostolates. Priests provide for the Sacramental life of the Church as well. Each, brother or priest, serves in the ministry of preaching and follows the path to it: prayer, study, and community.

Sisters are active, vowed religious women who are members of over 25 different congregations in the US. At the basis of all their activity is the primary apostolate of preaching that takes many forms: teaching, social work, missionary work, advocacy for the poor, care of the earth, housing ministries, retreat and spiritual direction, the arts, just to name a few. In common with the other branches of the Family, Sisters pray the Liturgy of the Hours, observe a regular practice of prayer and study, and share community.

Many Dominicans sisters’ congregations enjoy an enriching relationship with Associate members who participate in the congregation’s charism, Dominican spirituality and tradition. In this way, Dominican charism is extended even wider.

Nuns are cloistered Dominican Sisters. Their lives most closely resemble the communities founded by St. Dominic to pray for the success of the holy preaching of the Order. The nuns profess solemn vows and usually enter and remain in the same monastery throughout their lives. Their days are marked by silence, the necessary climate for contemplation and continuous prayer. Nuns are also authors, supporters of the missions, and ministers to the poor. They provide spiritual counsel and their monasteries are power houses of prayer. Many support themselves by producing hosts and vestments for Mass and other religious articles. The Liturgy of the Hours, as well as Mass and devotions such as perpetual adoration are the framework of their days.

Lay Dominicans have a direct role in the preaching mission. Many pursue degrees in theology or liturgy, are engaged in justice ministries and fully participate in St. Dominic’s call to contemplate and share with others the fruits of contemplation… Lay Dominicans preach primarily in wherever our station in life finds us. We preach by our lives and example, and when opportunity arises, with our voices as well. Dominican Lay men and women pursue study, particularly in theology, Scripture, and catechesis in order to preach well when called upon to do so.

The Lay Dominicans make promises to follow The Rule of the Lay Chapters of St. Dominic and the Particular Directory of the Province in which they live. They meet in community regularly and participate with the friars, nuns, and sisters, as well as the Church in general, in praying the Liturgy of the Hours. They engage in active apostolates such as letter-writing on issues of peace and justice, ministry to the poor, liturgical ministries, teaching, authorship, and spiritual counseling

Here are two links to articles on the Domincan USA website which explain some facets of Dominican spirituality:

domlife.org/beingdominican/Spirituality/DominicanSpirituality.htm

domlife.org/beingdominican/Spirituality/contemplationwoods.html

 

[Vouthon]

BTW The Dominicans follow the Rule of St. Augustine

St. Dominic and his disciples had to choose a rule already approved to start the Dominican Order. Humbert of Romans thought that Augustine’s rule was the best choice. Only someone who had authority, wisdom and holiness, could write a fitting rule to lead others to wisdom and holiness, under the right guidance. Furthermore, being a rule adopted by regular canons, St. Dominic himself, had been living under it and knew of its convenience to lead the kind of apostolic life he wanted for his brethren.

And they have a very democratic spirit in their constitutions:

opne.org/history.htm

What are General Chapters in the Dominican Order
Fr. A. D’Amato OP

  The General Chapter, which is the highest authority in the Dominican Order, is an assembly of friars representing the Provinces of the Order, coming together to discuss and define matters pertaining to the good of the entire Order. When necessary it elects the Master of the Order. From the very beginnings of the Dominican Order, one can distinguish two types of General Chapter: Chapters of Provincials and Chapters of Diffinitors. To these is added the General Chapter, comprised both of Provincials and Diffinitors.

  The General Chapter is above all a legislative assembly. A proposal becomes law for the whole Order only after having had the favourable vote of the three successive Chapters. These three Chapters thus constitute, in a certain sense, a unity, since it is in this triad of Chapters that, according to the spirit of the Order, the entire legislative power resides. The mechanism of the three successive Chapters is provided for in Dominican legislation with an aim of: a) stopping a new law from taking effect by way of improvisation or as the expression of a tendency of only one assembly; b) providing time for reflection on the opportuneness of the new law; c) avoiding facile and frequent changes which might create "confusion and bring ridicule upon legislation" (Humbert of Romans).

  The Chapters of Provincials and those of Diffinitors have equal power and equal rights. Each Chapter, independently, has faculties of proposing a law and for approving or not approving a law proposed by the preceding Chapter. The two types of assembly differ only in composition: one is formed of men of government (the Provincials) and the other of representatives from the grass roots (Diffinitors). The Dominican Order is the only one of all religious Orders that enjoys such a "bicameral" rule and the only one that has given full legislative power to an assembly formed entirely of representatives from the grass roots.

  The institution of Chapters formed only of Diffinitors was suggested in order to avoid a situation where men busy with the government of Provinces (the Provincials) would have to undertake long journeys too often and consequently, be too long absent from their proper headquarters. The origins of this institution sprang from the communitarian and democratic spirit of the Order. The Chapter of Diffinitors allows the representatives from the grass roots to participate, in full freedom and autonomy, in the formation of laws of the Order and to bring to it that way of seeing things proper to those not in government. Superior see a norm in quite their own proper way, and people at grass roots level see things in quite their own proper way.

  **The democratic spirit present in all Dominican legislation regarding the General Chapters is also evident in the fact that in the Elective Chapter, for example, for each Provincial elector, there are two or three electors representing the grass roots of each Province. A democratic spirit so clear and advanced as that of the Dominican Order is unique in the history of religious legislation. Humbert of Romans, the fourth successor of St. Dominic in the government of the Order, attributed this to the fact that the Order is formed of educated people**.

 

[Lodro]

But why can’t reality be fullness, fullness of Christ and his Spirit.

I think that is where we differ alot, do you not agree?

It could be. I’m curious what you mean by “full”? In other words, what are the qualities and activities of Christ and Spirit that make up their “fullness”? How is it that that permeates all of reality?

I’m hoping to put together some quotes from the The Mahayana Uttaratantra Shastra introducing the concept of Buddha Nature and it would be interesting to see the distinctions. I’ve already discovered some fascinating parallels in the quotes that Vouthon put together teaching how God may act in time and space while remaining outside of time and space. There is a similar issue in the description of Buddha Nature, though as always I’ll point out from the beginning that that doesn’t imply that they are the same thing.

 

[notself]

The Order was founded by a Spaniard, Dominic de Guzman, and given Papal approval in 1216. The order was founded as a mendicant order, rather than a monastic order. Monastics, like Benedictines, are mainly cloistered and have no restrictions on owning property. Mendicants, such as the Dominicans and Franciscans, owned no property and survived by begging. Unlike monastics, Dominicans move from place to place – they enter the order as a whole, rather than a specific community.

Buddhist monastics are not cloistered. They are mendicants, in fact the title Bhikkhu means beggar. They own no property, cannot handle money, cannot store food, cannot farm or pick fruit. They are totally dependent on laypeople for the necessities of life. Laypeople provide everything from robes to tooth brushes. The vihara, monastery, is owned by a trust with the board made up of laypeople.

Bhikkhus frequently leave the vihara and wander around the countryside, sleeping on the ground under a cleverly constructed mosquito netted umbrella. At the time of the Buddha all monks did this but today urbanization and loss of the forests have limited this type of wandering. The only time monks and nuns are required to stay put is during the monsoon season. They spend this time in monasteries and only go out for alms. After the monsoon season is over, the lay people present the monks with yards of white cloth which the monks dye and sew into robes. The robes are then distributed to the monks who need new robes the most. Old robes are turned into ground cloths and dust rags.

In the USA, monks only wander on monastery grounds which usually cover quite a few acres. They don’t usually wander around the countryside because people don’t understand what is going on and because of vagrancy laws.

 

[Vouthon]

Buddhist monastics are not cloistered. They are mendicants, in fact the title Bhikkhu means beggar. They own no property, cannot handle money, cannot store food, cannot farm or pick fruit. They are totally dependent on laypeople for the necessities of life. Laypeople provide everything from robes to tooth brushes. The vihara, monastery, is owned by a trust with the board made up of laypeople.

Bhikkhus frequently leave the vihara and wander around the countryside, sleeping on the ground under a cleverly constructed mosquito netted umbrella. At the time of the Buddha all monks did this but today urbanization and loss of the forests have limited this type of wandering. The only time monks and nuns are required to stay put is during the monsoon season. They spend this time in monasteries and only go out for alms. After the monsoon season is over, the lay people present the monks with yards of white cloth which the monks dye and sew into robes. The robes are then distributed to the monks who need new robes the most. Old robes are turned into ground cloths and dust rags.

In the USA, monks only wander on monastery grounds which usually cover quite a few acres. They don’t usually wander around the countryside because people don’t understand what is going on and because of vagrancy laws.

Fascinating sister!

So its similarly to the “contemplation/meditation” terminology ie we call the same thing by different words:

For Catholics the term “monk” or “nun” refers to cloistered religious/monastic orders. We call members of mendicant orders “friars” or “brothers” (and in the female sense “sisters”, although they are sometimes confusingly called “nuns” ie mother Teresa’s Sisters of Charity are often called “nuns” even though this isn’t quite right in language terms).

What we call “medicants” (friars and sisters) is in fact what Buddhists call “monks” - in the original language “Bhikkus” or “beggars”, that is a mendicant.

Now I understand why it is said that the Dominicans and Franciscans are the more similar to the Sangha than cloistered orders!

I wonder - is Orthodoxy/Catholicism the only religion that has cloistered monastics (enclosed religious orders) as well as mendicant religious/monastics (open/wandering religious orders)? There surely must be others?

 

[rinnie]

It could be. I’m curious what you mean by “full”? In other words, what are the qualities and activities of Christ and Spirit that make up their “fullness”? How is it that that permeates all of reality?

I’m hoping to put together some quotes from the The Mahayana Uttaratantra Shastra introducing the concept of Buddha Nature and it would be interesting to see the distinctions. I’ve already discovered some fascinating parallels in the quotes that Vouthon put together teaching how God may act in time and space while remaining outside of time and space. There is a similar issue in the description of Buddha Nature, though as always I’ll point out from the beginning that that doesn’t imply that they are the same thing.

Some quotes would be Romans 8:13-14 Those who are led by the Spirit of God are Sons of God.

To be filled with the Holy Spirit of God is to turn you back on sin and the sins of this world, and try to do your best to live your life without the sins of this world.

More or less what that means is, don’t live as this world lives, lived as Christ showed us to live.

Jesus says the lamp of the body is the eye. If your eye is sound, the body will be filled with light, but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be in darkness.

Christ tells us beware of false prophets who come to you in sheeps clothing but underneath are revenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles. Just so every good tree bears good fruit and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit or vice-versa.

Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire so by their fruits you will know them.

I would say if you reject ALL evil, all human sin, and only follow your heart to do what is pleasing to God you could say you are indeed filled with his Holy Spirit.

See when God is in you, he truly does not only lead you to eternal life by his death, but by the deed you do in his name. Its like God can work through us, but only if we choose to let him do so. When you Choose to let him do so, you are indeed filled with the Holy SPirit.

 

[rinnie]

Christ was God in his fullness.

He cured people, Here is something about God that no one else in the world can ever do. Not even the devil. Read ones heart.

Like I could tell you I loved my husband with all of my heart and soul. I could be the perfect wife for all the world to see. But in my heart I could truly not be who I appear to be.

But with God you can’t fool him.

Like many here today say they are here to learn about God and our faith, and share their faith with others. Is that the true reason? No one can tell for sure.

Only God and he has his own way to reveal that truth when and if he wants it revealed.

That is where many get confused with faith and works. If it is true faith, and true works, its works together and God knows.

But Christ cured people, he died for our eternal life. he forgives us, he loves us. He wants us all to be with him and be happy.

God came down to this earth and gave us every single thing possible for us to have eternal life in him.

He left us prayer, a visible Church with all the sacraments. The Sacraments are the most important thing in this world. He left us Priests who are human, who can forgive sins in his name.

 

[notself]

Christ tells us beware of false prophets who come to you in sheeps clothing but underneath are revenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles. Just so every good tree bears good fruit and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit or vice-versa.

Here is something on false prophets from the Buddhist POV.

Which of these venerable brahmans & contemplatives are speaking the truth, and which ones are lying?"

"Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that, ‘These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering’ — then you should abandon them.

 

[Lodro]

In the USA, monks only wander on monastery grounds which usually cover quite a few acres. They don’t usually wander around the countryside because people don’t understand what is going on and because of vagrancy laws.

Some North American Zen students do street retreats; though those are temporary things. See the peacemakers stie.

I wonder - is Orthodoxy/Catholicism the only religion that has cloistered monastics (enclosed religious orders) as well as mendicant religious/monastics (open/wandering religious orders)? There surely must be others?

Well, in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition there are of course the formal monasteries, but there is also a long history of travelling practitioners who might be taken care of by local people. These folks are generally cave dwellers and so on. But the interesting thing about that tradition is that these are very definitely not part of formal orders. That’s sort of the point. This is particularly true in the Kagyu and Niyingma schools, especially as part of the “Crazy Wisdom” tradition. Often siddhas (somewhat akin to saints) and other realized travellers will have a contentious relations with the traditional orders, e.g. kicked out of the monastery for some reason or another, showing up at a monastic ceremony and heckling the teacher, etc… But these relationships go back and forth, so for example the most revered mahasiddha Milarepa spent much of his life living in caves, eating nettles, in extreme poverty, but his main student was the monk Gampopa, who went on founded the Kagyu one of the four main orders or schools in Tibet.

The story of how they met should give you a flavor for the very dynamic relationship between the formal orders and informal wanderers. The most important stories in the lives of lineage holders – the most important thing of all in Tibetan culture, because lineage is how the practice tradition and the genuine Dharma is passed from one generation to the next in an unbroken line – involve describing the relationship between the teacher and the student. And in many many stories there is this playing off of proscribed “holy” monastic rules, and the “realized” yogic tradition against each other:

When Gampopa met Milarepa for the first time, the latter offered this new disciple a bowl of chang (Tibetan beer). Although Gamapopa initially hesitated to drink it because it would be a violation of his monastic vow, he did so anyway, which demonstrated that he would receive the full lineage teachings of mahamudra and tantra from Milarepa.

 

[rinnie]

Here is something on false prophets from the Buddhist POV.

Then where do you guys find truth?

 

[Lodro]

Then where do you guys find truth?

That’s the question! And actually, I think of anything else, this is the major differentiator between Monotheistic approaches and the Non-theistic Buddhist traditions. The ultimate answer is “from your own experience”. You are guided by your teachers in terms of where to look for this truth, but ultimately it is your responsibility. There isn’t going to be “someone else” at any point letting you know whether your decisions were “correct” or not. And yes, that’s kind of a scary thought.

An example of this from the Tibetan Buddhist buddhist teachings is the Lojong teaching: "“Of the Two Witnesses, Hold the Principal One”.

(Edit) I really like what the great Dilgo Khyentse R(name removed by moderator)oche had to say about this:

"Milarepa said ‘My religion is to have nothing to be ashamed of when I die’. But the majority of people do not give any importance to this way of thinking. We pretend to be very calm and subdued and are full of sweet words, so that ordinary people, not knowing our thoughts, say, ‘This is a real Bodhisattva.’ But it is only our outward behavior that they see.

 

[Lodro]

On the same token, I think its good for “Non-Catholic religions” since these Buddhist threads have, in my opinion, changed the dynanmic of “dialogue” on this forum. No longer is it simply Catholics commenting on other religions (whether negatively ie “false, satanic” or positively ie “grains of truth, rays of light, respect the good”) with the odd (name removed by moderator)ut from people of other faiths, and the rolleyes unending stream of “Do Muslims worship the same God as Catholics?” threads, where people like myself come down on the “yes” camp and others come down on the “no” camp - no, no, no - there is actual interfaith dialogue and of a kind that inspires me and gives me hope.

Well I think I can speak for all of us “Buddhists” here (what ever that term means!) when I thank all of you again for being such hospitable and gracious hosts.