The Sanctuary
Society => My God Can Beat The Shit Out Of Your God => Topic started by: Bart the General on September 26, 2014, 02:30:22 am
-
I am not an expert on Buddhism and I won't tell you what path I follow because that's PI but I enjoy talking about the subject and sharing things that have helped me. I'm skeptical that I'd even be here shitpoasting right now instead of incarcerated federally were it not for a book written by a Buddhist that seemed to articulate truths I knew to be self evident but couldn't express on my own to make them tangible. There are a LOT of misconceptions about buddhism but it's basically the God tier religion by having no actual god. The statues the Taliban destroyed are being rebuilt, they recently discovered a buddhist statue that was solid gold and was painted over the hide it, even if you don't dig the old school shit, buddhism is ever evolving and a true, noble path to follow. Buddhism can be shaped to be any number of things to suit you and your immediate surroundings.
Anyways, enough missionary work, discuss all things Buddhism ITT including whatever concepts and ideals you've found especially helpful in your life, perceptions you have about it, people you know who follow it etc.
-
I've always found theistic religions to be at odds with my immediate surroundings, so this is very good news on my end.
-
I've always found theistic religions to be at odds with my immediate surroundings, so this is very good news on my end.
Did you not know that Buddhists have no "God." Some people hold the Buddha to be the true, enlightened and ideal being but Buddha himself didn't think he was enlightened or achieved Nirvana so there's that. Really, if you read a book on Buddhist principles there might be a passing mention of the Buddha in there but it's definitely not a focal point. The only theistic religion whos concept of a Deity made any sense to me is Allah because he's 1, everything and nameless, shapeless, sexless etc.
-
I hear he left his family to wander around as an ascetic. Was this culturally acceptable back then, in India?
-
What would constitute "unwise" livelihood? Is it okay to work for a multinational corporation that poisons their consumers and rapes the environment if you're a janitor who takes pride in making the world better one bathroom stall at a time?
-
If I don't exist, then why am I here and what is my purpose?
-
I don't know anything about his life story really other than sitting under a tree for a while, but it seems more culturally acceptable now as newfag parents tell their overprivilaged kids to "find themselves" in Europe or planting trees or something but the difference is they have cell phones now
-
What would constitute "unwise" livelihood? Is it okay to work for a multinational corporation that poisons their consumers and rapes the environment if you're a janitor who takes pride in making the world better one bathroom stall at a time?
I would say "no." Some Buddhists have a lot of emphasis on repetitive tasks as meditation and obv doing them for the benefit of something detrimental would affect your mental state to an extent if you're practicing mindfulness but I can't really speak for everyone, that's just how I know my path would interpret it.
Think "Do no harm" especially when it comes to your own personal objectives instead of those of a collective
-
Buddhism has been surprisingly good at adapting itself to various different cultures and even religions around the world. How is it that none of the fundamental teachings have been lost?
-
Buddhism has been surprisingly good at adapting itself to various different cultures and even religions around the world. How is it that none of the fundamental teachings have been lost?
I couldn't really tell you, I don't know the history so much but I do know that temples, monks etc. are insular, ancient and have good record keeping so that's probably a few factors. Probably the repetitive task aspect encourages them to create monuments to their faith (the 8 movements of the fundamental Qi gong set are in statue form to preserve their knowledge) and really, just living in a temple in the woods and being EXTREMELY disciplined and mindful all the time, it's pretty likely you'll write some things down. Buddhists also had a form of caligraphy back in the day (a lot of buddhist teachings fall under "if you're gonna do something do it well and go all out" more Chinese than Tibetan though) and also Buddhism is something where the word kind of spreads. Think about Christianity, how is folklore going to travel about people converting to Christianity (apart from crusades)? "Wilfred turned christian and now he doesn't drink" is all that comes to mind. Meanwhile you've got stories of Buddhists surviving crazy temperatures, being the first ninjas, inventing martial art forms, forging gunpowder etc etc etc in that respect its more accessible to an ancient widespread collective audience than many others, hence no "converting the nonbelievers" back in the day
-
I get really depressed sometimes.
What can Buddhism do for me?
-
Also: what does this cost?
-
Try meditating and reading texts I guess. Whenever I went to openmeditations there were always people looking for "self help" (which is really the fundamental core of all religion) and the instructor would tailor it kinda to that. Meditating releases dopamine and serotonin.
You already knew all this though, zek
-
reading texts
What, like the totse archives?
-
No, read that book I told you I'd mail you a copy of but I'm sure you can find it for free online anyway
-
Still not zek.
-
How exactly does reincarnation work (if at all)?
Also please explain karma.
-
Why do some Buddhists practice vegetarianism while others don't? What's so bad about garlic? Are Buddhists vampires?
-
I hear conflicting reports of sexism found in Buddhism. As a specific example, is it true that women are unable to become enlightened without first being reborn as a man?
-
Just what exactly is sexual misconduct in the Buddhist faith? Is it okay to be gay? Is it okay to have threesomes? What do the scriptures say about anal sex, contraception, and BDSM?
-
What's so great about celibacy?
-
Does the precept stating not to drink mean that we shouldn't take any recreational drugs? What if we're prescribed like benzos for anxiety?
-
1. I don't know anything about reincarnation or karma in any non-John Lennon sense
2. Some have different interpretations of "do no harm" but the general modern consensus is it's ok to eat meat for sustenance but killing animals for sport is wrong
3. I don't believe in realized enlightenment on earth, only degrees of it and women can certainly hold esteemed leader positions, some sects are kind of sexist but that's whatever, its just hard having girls around a monastery and not having sex with them
4. Anal sex is unnatural. Sexual misconduct is pretty broad. The Dollar Lambskincondom said gays can't be buddhists back in the early 90's and since people dug up his quotes he had to backtrack. The old texts say gay guys is bad but lesbians are alright. Seriously, they do. That's pretty enlightened and progressive in my book.
5. Celibacy is only for really strict adherents, my path does not follow this as it results in "monks disease" which has caused many a monk to run from the monastery and go straight for the brothel. It's to preserve your Qi but it gets exponentially harder to control with each day that passes without blowing a load.
6. Medicine is cool but the old texts go on about natural remedies, some were groundbreaking at the time, others were poison. It really depends how you use them but since so many people fuck up taking intoxicants there's kind of a "just say no" rule but it depends where you go
-
Where does it say that anal sex is unnatural?
-
Where does it say that anal sex is unnatural?
All over zekster
http://archive.thebuddhadharma.com/issues/2009/summer/sex.php
read this, it's Lamb Chops backpedaling off previous statements of his to explain the context in which the texts his statements were derived from.
-
Why are you still calling me zek? Stop that.
-
ok, do you want me to see if I can find that book online 4 u and in lieu of that mail you a copy?
-
read this, it's Lamb Chops backpedaling off previous statements of his to explain the context in which the texts his statements were derived from.
go the fuck to sleep faggot
-
Are you offering to send me book while at the same time calling me a faggot?
What's wrong with you?
-
I quoted my own jumbled post, faggot
I do really feel an obligation to share that book.
OFFERING 3 COPIES TO SERIOUS INQUIRIES ONLY
I need to know tonight because I'll probably go to buddhamart tomorrow
-
What book are you even talking about?
-
Also don't call me faggot lol.
-
Buddhism is for gays! Unless, you happen to actually be gay and not just an effeminate heterosexual, because most Buddhists don't like fags! Anal sex is unnatural BECAUSE POOP COMES OUT!
-
I already told you about it but Ill PM it to you tomorrow I'm too tired right mow and falimg asleep so I tried to potse ;ole splew wje jes all fucked up on syncans but im too garticulate and good at typing
-
garticulate
;D
-
Also don't call me faggot lol.
Faggot
-
OP why are you being a little bitch and hiding the title of the book? If you want to spread the word so badly why be so stingy?
What is your opinion of the SGI? I know nothing of Zen or the other forms of Buddhism but I've been researching Nichiren Buddhism for quite some time. I have major concern with the credibility of modern Buddhism as the original teachings of the Buddha were not written down for thousands of years after his dead, not only that but even while he was alive and teaching there were doctrinal disputes - even more disputes of the SEVERAL different sects which followed him and now you have groups that do not study the teacher's teachings but the student's interpretations of his teachings (Nichiren) and then you have the student's "student"'s interpretation (Daisaku Ikeda) and this being THOUSANDS of years between each of these. The separation is too great to be reliable. On top of that there is too much esoteric bullshit clogging up the essence of whats trying to be taught. Buddhist DO in fact believe in God's, and heaven / hell like realms. They just replace the word 'God' with 'Universe' as to detach themselves from an ultimate authority. The thing that really makes me want to say fuck it is the fact that you have teachers contradicting not only each other, but themselves and their supposed teachers. The former sutra's did in fact state women cannot attain Buddhahood and later sutras denounce this teaching. Therefore how can you be sure the teachings you have are true and accurate if the former teachings could be overwritten or proven to be false?
-
I have a strict policy not to give my address out to crazy people anyway. So just post the book and see if any short-sighted people feel like giving you theirs.
OP why are you being a little bitch and hiding the title of the book? If you want to spread the word so badly why be so stingy?
What is your opinion of the SGI? I know nothing of Zen or the other forms of Buddhism but I've been researching Nichiren Buddhism for quite some time. I have major concern with the credibility of modern Buddhism as the original teachings of the Buddha were not written down for thousands of years after his dead, not only that but even while he was alive and teaching there were doctrinal disputes - even more disputes of the SEVERAL different sects which followed him and now you have groups that do not study the teacher's teachings but the student's interpretations of his teachings (Nichiren) and then you have the student's "student"'s interpretation (Daisaku Ikeda) and this being THOUSANDS of years between each of these. The separation is too great to be reliable. On top of that there is too much esoteric bullshit clogging up the essence of whats trying to be taught. Buddhist DO in fact believe in God's, and heaven / hell like realms. They just replace the word 'God' with 'Universe' as to detach themselves from an ultimate authority. The thing that really makes me want to say fuck it is the fact that you have teachers contradicting not only each other, but themselves and their supposed teachers. The former sutra's did in fact state women cannot attain Buddhahood and later sutras denounce this teaching. Therefore how can you be sure the teachings you have are true and accurate if the former teachings could be overwritten or proven to be false?
You need to calm down, friend. Buddhists are very varied in their beliefs. I know a few that are staunchly atheistic, and of course there are those into the heaven and hell realms of existence. And yeah there are places (Thailand for one) that don't even like their women becoming bhikkhunis (nuns), but we can't decide to view these cultures with a staunchly Western attitude and expect to understand much of anything about them. There are movements in those places pushing for gender equality among the Buddhist lineages. It's really only a matter of time before women are considered equals in all religion imo.
Religion must evolve to keep up with the changing social tides. Buddhism embraces change as an undeniable fact of life, though it sometimes shows up in ironically discriminatory ways.
-
I hear he left his family to wander around as an ascetic. Was this culturally acceptable back then, in India?
You know, I'm not sure what the cultural climate was like there in the time of the Buddha. Whenever I hear the story though this piece is always mentioned just in passing or expressed as though he was making a big sacrifice in leaving his family because it was a very comfortable life full of loving family and friends.
It's entirely likely that it was normal for men to leave their families at the time. Being able to stick in one place if a person so chooses is kind of a modern convenience, though it was said that he was a prince and likely enjoyed monetary wealth and social status exclusively around where he was. This would be an interesting topic to learn more about.
-
What would constitute "unwise" livelihood? Is it okay to work for a multinational corporation that poisons their consumers and rapes the environment if you're a janitor who takes pride in making the world better one bathroom stall at a time?
Well, this is one of those areas of Buddhism where I feel a person must make a decision on their own. It's unwise to expect everything to be black and white, and cut into small easily-digestible pieces. The world is complex, and there are many right answers.
Personally, I feel that intent is a major factor in this matter. If a person intends to perform acts of goodness and is decidedly harmless in their approach to work, most jobs are okay. The example you gave was an interesting one, but I think it would be fine to perform that work. Making the world a cleaner place, even for people who may be "bad" isn't an unwise act in itself. Could you ever really be contributing to death and destruction if you cleaned bathrooms for a living? I guess some of those chemicals are harmful and could come from unethical sources, but if we worry over every little thing like that then we'd probably end up too paralyzed with concern to do any good at all.
I've known Buddhists who served in the U.S. military, and that is an altogether more difficult question. For me, anyway. It's good you're thinking though. Question everything! :)
-
This is what pisses me off about Buddhism. It's all this opinionated crap that ultimately means nothing. If the law of the universe is that women cannot become Buddha's until they are reincarnated as a man, then that is the law. It should not matter what your culture deems socially acceptable. Your Buddhism is just glorified 'This is what I like or sounds good to me so it is my religion' ism.
Answer my fucking questions, faggot.
-
This is what pisses me off about Buddhism. It's all this opinionated crap that ultimately means nothing. If the law of the universe is that women cannot become Buddha's until they are reincarnated as a man, then that is the law. It should not matter what your culture deems socially acceptable. Your Buddhism is just glorified 'This is what I like or sounds good to me so it is my religion' ism.
Answer my fucking questions, faggot.
You're really asking the wrong people. We're all pseudo-philosophers here, with a poor grasp of these complex topics to boot. Not that you'd get a better answer on a Buddhist themed forum or anything. Those places are surprisingly divided. Most people seem to have their minds made up about these big questions.
What really drew me to Buddhism was that I was told to question it and put it all to the test.
"Don't believe anything just because I'm telling you, as a spiritual teacher. You shouldn't place your faith in me for any petty reason such as that. Question everything I say, and get out there and prove me wrong!"
That probably is not the Buddhism is always taught haha. But it stuck with me.
In all the flavors of Buddhism I've learned about though, the core beliefs were always the same. It's about the cessation of suffering. Some lineages don't seem to even discuss the four noble truths much at all, but it's all there anyway in everything they teach. Saying that women can never attain enlightenment is no small thing, but when compared with the overarching themes is actually kind of is. And those basic teachings haven't really changed since their inception, largely because they're so simple (or not really, but you understand right?).
1. Suffering exists.
2. Suffering exists because of craving, or unhealthy attachment.
3. There is a way to end suffering.
4. This is the way to end suffering: Eightfold Path, wise way of living one's life, etc.
-
Not really delved deep into Buddhism. While strives to teach good sentiments, it's still a system.
The best thing I've plucked from Buddism is the meaning of the laughing Buddha; His eyes are closed because he is looking within, laughing his ass off at his own absurdity.
Not enough people know how to do that. One of the best things about acid induced introspection is the freedom of being able to laugh at say, your day-to-day trivial vexations, and truely realise how insignificant they are.
-
1. Suffering exists.
2. Suffering exists because of craving, or unhealthy attachment.
3. There is a way to end suffering.
4. This is the way to end suffering: Eightfold Path, wise way of living one's life, etc.
[/quote]
Funny thing; The Soka Gakkai branch of Nichren Buddhism teach that desire is necessary and that to strive to eliminate it is futile. They instead try to use their desire as motivation to achieve their goals in life; in order to be happy thus ending suffering...(?)
This really turned me off to Buddhism because I personally feel their philosophy is destructive. The 'take care of yourself first so you can take care of others' thing seems dangerous and feels more like an excuse to be selfish or greedy. The problem with desire is that like greed, it never ceases. At what point does one switch from 'I must acquire and achieve at all costs' to 'ok i've acquired enough or am satisfied with my life condition, time to help others'? There also is little emphasis on building character so an evil person who hears this 'do for yourself... achieve... this method will guarantee you success' will take that and do evil things with it.
As for the 'dont take my word for it try it yourself' thing, that is standard even in Christianity. I heard that the very first time I spoke to at least 5 different instructors. The only good thing about Buddhism that I've gotten is the understanding of PERSPECTIVE. It's everything. The way you see the world determines how happy you are. They just brain wash you into believing their methods (which are actually amount to nothing more than insane persistence) is doing something special and when you fail they teach you to make up an esoteric lesson learned excuse for your failure, and then tell you to move on.
-
Funny thing; The Soka Gakkai branch of Nichren Buddhism teach that desire is necessary and that to strive to eliminate it is futile. They instead try to use their desire as motivation to achieve their goals in life; in order to be happy thus ending suffering...(?)
This really turned me off to Buddhism because I personally feel their philosophy is destructive. The 'take care of yourself first so you can take care of others' thing seems dangerous and feels more like an excuse to be selfish or greedy. The problem with desire is that like greed, it never ceases. At what point does one switch from 'I must acquire and achieve at all costs' to 'ok i've acquired enough or am satisfied with my life condition, time to help others'? There also is little emphasis on building character so an evil person who hears this 'do for yourself... achieve... this method will guarantee you success' will take that and do evil things with it.
As for the 'dont take my word for it try it yourself' thing, that is standard even in Christianity. I heard that the very first time I spoke to at least 5 different instructors. The only good thing about Buddhism that I've gotten is the understanding of PERSPECTIVE. It's everything. The way you see the world determines how happy you are. They just brain wash you into believing their methods (which are actually amount to nothing more than insane persistence) is doing something special and when you fail they teach you to make up an esoteric lesson learned excuse for your failure, and then tell you to move on.
I know nothing of Nichren Buddhism. Can you say more about the desire thing?
As I learned it, desire in and of itself isn't detrimental to those goals of ending suffering. And it is impossible to eliminate. If we lacked all desire we wouldn't even be motivated to do even good things, right? I tried to be careful with my language here, in saying "craving, or unhealthy attachment."
Craving to me is a step beyond desire. It feels like a need, when it really isn't. Holding onto an idea, person, or thing for dear life. Wanting so badly it consumes you. Maybe that line between desire and craving is a little blurred, and I bet it varies from person to person. But I would never (mindfully) say that all desire is unwise.
About the rest, hmm. I learned that focusing on your own individual salvation is an act of kindness to everyone around you, and actually a very important step toward saving the world. If you're calm and of sober mind, doesn't that automatically make you a better friend, and son or daughter? To me it seems like it could go a long way in teaching others about the benefits of such things as equanimity and loving kindness. It's not like improving yourself and helping other people are two mutually exclusive things. Quite the opposite, actually...
Working to become a better person isn't greedy or selfish.
Back to desire... desire doesn't exist. It's not a solid thing we can touch, it's just an idea we invented which exists because we will it to. It's neither good nor bad, and any such extrapolation is just an exercise in delusion. Any philosophy can be destructive if you stare at it long enough. In Buddhism we're supposed to be developing sharp and discerning minds, that allow us to truly understand the human invention of desire and know when and where it is helpful, and when and where it is not.
I have no idea what you mean when you say that Buddhism says nothing about character building. The entire thing is character building.
-
I hear he left his family to wander around as an ascetic. Was this culturally acceptable back then, in India?
You know, I'm not sure what the cultural climate was like there in the time of the Buddha. Whenever I hear the story though this piece is always mentioned just in passing or expressed as though he was making a big sacrifice in leaving his family because it was a very comfortable life full of loving family and friends.
Maybe he was just having a mid-life crisis and left his wife and kids, because they weren't enough.
-
You should look into SGI Nichiren Buddhism. It is all about being what Christians would call 'Worldly'. The reason for your practice is to improve your life state by means of material possession, social status, and other things most religions would qualify as sinful. It is actually considered a cult by Japanese society. These motherfuckers built a 35 BILLION yen (YEN - stronger than the dollar) building in the 1970s(?) off of member donations. and then promptly destroyed it after a dispute with another sect. The leader is worshiped like a God and the whole organization is run similar to what you'd expect of Scientology.
As far as I understand they teach that desires should be encouraged because that is what give people motivation to act but there is never any indication on how or when desire should be put in check. So as their leader (daisaku ikeda) has lived a live as a multi billiionaire off the backs of the members, they see this as ok because 1) hes the dear leader and 2) it is his desire to 'help the organization' and be successful (rich as fuck) himself. They strive for knowledge for knowledge sake but it's all institutionalized knowledge. Coincidentally most members strive to enter into the universities and schools founded by mr money bags as if they're Harvard. I think I got a little off track here... I fucking hate that guy. My friend is totally indoctrinated in his religion and it pisses me off that it's not REAL Buddhism.
What is your opinion on the validity of the Sutras as they were not in a written form for thousands of years after Sidhartha died? (as there was no written form of language back then so i've been told) Does it not bother you that later sutras denounce the teachings of the former sutras? The Lotus sutra claims ALL the former sutra are incomplete and unreliable and that it is the only necessary text to acheive buddahood.
-
Does it not bother you that later sutras denounce the teachings of the former sutras? The Lotus sutra claims ALL the former sutra are incomplete and unreliable and that it is the only necessary text to acheive buddahood.
Lol. If I wrote a religious book, that's what it would say too!
-
I hear he left his family to wander around as an ascetic. Was this culturally acceptable back then, in India?
Yes, this tradition of asceticism was called Sramana and it was a popular (and controversial) religious movement in North East India around the lifetime of the Buddha (500 BCE). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sramana
Can you say more about the desire thing?
Basically, there are some Buddhists (Specifically, Theravada) who say that Desire is Bad because Desire binds a person to continued existence and rebirth in another lifetime (Remember, existence is suffering; therefore, rebirth is bad). Thus, a Buddhist should strive to rid himself of desire by practicing moderation: abstaining from alcohol, drugs, sex; eliminating unnecessary material possessions and relationships; increasing charitable acts and generosity.
However, there are other Buddhists (Specifically, Non-Dualists like Chan, Zen, and Tantric Buddhists) who argue that there is no distinction between good and bad, reality and imagination, enlightenment and non-enlightenment. In other words, there is no such thing as "Desire" and "Non-Desire"; so, it is useless to practice abstinence because "Desire" does not really exist. For example, Zen Buddhists talk about becoming awakened through living a "Natural" life (as opposed to study of the sutras) and Tantric Buddhists practice ritual sex in order to become awakened.
-
You should look into SGI Nichiren Buddhism. It is all about being what Christians would call 'Worldly'. The reason for your practice is to improve your life state by means of material possession, social status, and other things most religions would qualify as sinful. It is actually considered a cult by Japanese society. These motherfuckers built a 35 BILLION yen (YEN - stronger than the dollar) building in the 1970s(?) off of member donations. and then promptly destroyed it after a dispute with another sect. The leader is worshiped like a God and the whole organization is run similar to what you'd expect of Scientology.
As far as I understand they teach that desires should be encouraged because that is what give people motivation to act but there is never any indication on how or when desire should be put in check. So as their leader (daisaku ikeda) has lived a live as a multi billiionaire off the backs of the members, they see this as ok because 1) hes the dear leader and 2) it is his desire to 'help the organization' and be successful (rich as fuck) himself. They strive for knowledge for knowledge sake but it's all institutionalized knowledge. Coincidentally most members strive to enter into the universities and schools founded by mr money bags as if they're Harvard. I think I got a little off track here... I fucking hate that guy. My friend is totally indoctrinated in his religion and it pisses me off that it's not REAL Buddhism.
Wow that sounds pretty silly. Guess if it works for some people that's cool, but honestly it sounds like a perversion of faith...
What is your opinion on the validity of the Sutras as they were not in a written form for thousands of years after Sidhartha died? (as there was no written form of language back then so i've been told) Does it not bother you that later sutras denounce the teachings of the former sutras? The Lotus sutra claims ALL the former sutra are incomplete and unreliable and that it is the only necessary text to acheive buddahood.
This is something I know very little about. Most of what I've learned over the years has come from the Theravada side of things. I've been getting some into the Mahayana, but haven't come across anything claiming the other texts have it all wrong. What really strike me are the similarities found across all the schools.
I've read from more than one author though that it doesn't matter too much how historically accurate any of this stuff is, because the teachings that comprise the core of Buddhist psychology are very simple (and amazingly complex, but yeah...) and they haven't changed since the time of Siddhartha. Several different means to that same timeless map of the human mind, and all of experience. And this is totally something I've seen in the different schools. That focus on gentle and productive introspection (even in Zen, but you've gotta know what you're looking at), learning by firsthand experience, and some language alluding to the cessation of suffering by letting go.
Yes, this tradition of asceticism was called Sramana and it was a popular (and controversial) religious movement in North East India around the lifetime of the Buddha (500 BCE). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sramana
:)
Basically, there are some Buddhists (Specifically, Theravada) who say that Desire is Bad because Desire binds a person to continued existence and rebirth in another lifetime (Remember, existence is suffering; therefore, rebirth is bad). Thus, a Buddhist should strive to rid himself of desire by practicing moderation: abstaining from alcohol, drugs, sex; eliminating unnecessary material possessions and relationships; increasing charitable acts and generosity.
However, there are other Buddhists (Specifically, Non-Dualists like Chan, Zen, and Tantric Buddhists) who argue that there is no distinction between good and bad, reality and imagination, enlightenment and non-enlightenment. In other words, there is no such thing as "Desire" and "Non-Desire"; so, it is useless to practice abstinence because "Desire" does not really exist. For example, Zen Buddhists talk about becoming awakened through living a "Natural" life (as opposed to study of the sutras) and Tantric Buddhists practice ritual sex in order to become awakened.
To me, the non-dualism side of things seems to be strikingly similar to the letting go of desire. Non-dualism is all about not judging things (good/bad) and accepting things as they are in their entirety. In a sense, it's about letting go of all perceived notions and simply being. Compared to the cessation of unwholesome attachment (desire) and developing an equanimous nature, what is the difference?
Dualism is in itself desire. The human desire to name things, and create delusions of separation where none truly exist. Non-dualism is the gentle refusal to attach oneself to said delusion- which is hard to do, because we desire that delusion on some level we rarely consider.
I hope that makes sense.
-
Just what exactly is sexual misconduct in the Buddhist faith? Is it okay to be gay? Is it okay to have threesomes? What do the scriptures say about anal sex, contraception, and BDSM?
That's a good question, equanimity!
The way I've heard it explained by modern (also Western) spiritual leaders/Buddhist authors is that sexual misconduct is when your actions may be harmful to yourself or someone else. So, is it okay to be gay? Of course it is. A person can't help who they're attracted to, and in the event that someone is "hurt" by your sexuality (say, in the case of a very traditional parent) it wouldn't be you hurting them. Rather, their understanding of societal norms and outlook on sexual morality is in direct conflict with reality. Their delusion harms them, and you're unfortunately caught up in all that harmful delusion.
Are threesomes okay? As long as everyone involved is adult enough not to get hurt, and everyone's consenting. Might be best to avoid in many situation because of the possibility of jealousy and such, but if you can make it work then more power to you!
Anal sex? Well, I have no idea what the writings have to say about it. Probably something; there's always sex mixed up in our religions. But again, it should be fine. Same with contraception. Religion needs to adapt to modern life, hopefully without losing sight of its initial vision. Buddhism is attractive partly because it does just that.
Now BDSM is a very interesting piece to this topic. The general rule is that if no one gets hurt everything is just peachy, right? Well BDSM kind of hurts by nature. Does that make it wrong? I'd say no, but there are definitely exceptions. If you find the light pain play pleasurable and hot then that would probably be totally okay. Even the more hardcore stuff. Where I see it potentially becoming an actual problem is when it crosses over into the realm of unhealthy psychological experience. If your partner hurts you and you don't like it but don't want to upset them, you might be doing yourself some harm. If you're into being humiliated and used this could pose a problem, and your self-esteem may suffer. Each case is different and this stuff gets pretty complicated, but you should know if you're being hurt or if you're hurting someone else. Unless you're really well steeped in delusion, these things are generally pretty clear.
Use your head. Make good decisions.
-
Just what exactly is sexual misconduct in the Buddhist faith? Is it okay to be gay? Is it okay to have threesomes? What do the scriptures say about anal sex, contraception, and BDSM?
That's a good question, equanimity!
So, is it okay to be gay? Of course it is.
Shameless self justification.
Don't be gay bro.