Morality is not determined by the church you attend nor the faith you embrace. It is determined by the quality of your character and the positive impact you have on those you meet along your journey
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
Possibly the best religious leader alive today.
Now THAT is the kind of religious figure that even nonbelievers can respect.
I have long had an issue with certain religions referring to themselves as pathways to spirituality when in fact they act as obstacles to true spirituality.
O/T What the hey is Sarah Palin doing up so early and one of the first to attack US in regard to the situations in Egypt and Libya? http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/09/12/palin-if-obama-doesn-t-have-big-stick-carry-maybe-it-s-time-him-grow
This man exemplifies the difference between Buddhism and the three paternalistic religions, and he does it beautifully.
Buddhism puts the emphasis for living a life of grace (for wont of a better word) squarely onto each individual's responsibilities towards him/herself and others. Failure to follow the ideals results in rebirth with an opportunity to rectify previous errors. Whether one follows these traditions or not, I find it easy to see that the ancient teacher, Gautama Buddha, encouraged individual thought processes by which to arrive at the ideals. The ethics of this philosophy are diametrically opposed to the authoritarian religions.
The God-as-Authoritarian Judeo/Christian/Islam paternalistic religions dictate adherence to draconian sets of rules and any variance therefrom is considered punishable for eternity. This prescribed set of eternal reward or punishment does not promote individual thought, but instead demands mindless following by the faithful, and persecution for those who dare to think for themselves. This is why throughout the history of these religions there has been so much gruesome sectarian violence, persecution of heretics, all of which are continuing with mind numbing regularity in this, the 21st century.
From what I have read over the years is that when the Dalai Lama has explained the traditional teachings of Tibetan Buddhism, he has stated the obvious proscriptions which apply to any and all monastic societies, both male and female, which always function in denial of the physical and elevation of the spiritual.
This traditional, celibate monk was sheltered in Dharmsala after escaping the wrath of the Chinese occupiers of Tibet. His rigorous training helped him grow into an international teacher of Buddhism and a diplomat tirelessly working to ease the oppression of the nation of his birth. It seems probable that in the process of this exposure to the world at large, and the diversity of its populations changed him from a traditionalist into a more modern understanding of human nature.
There is an interesting background to my line of thinking: The Tibetan tradition of one monk making a rapid statement about something within the belief, clapping his hands and expecting an equally rapid response from one of the others, who then is challenged by another, and who will clap to invite a rebuttal etc. Talk about a truly lively "circular argument" which ends in smiles all around. It may this tradition of exploration and encouragement of critical thought that permits him to advance into the 21st century as a man revered by many.
“If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview.”
When's the last time you heard the so-called religious "right" in America adopt such a rational and open-minded stance?
My, my, Gryphen...noting spirituality (i.e. belief in a soul or spirit, distinct from the material you) as a virtue and, in accord with the DL, a key to living an ethical life.
This is a (to me, welcome) change. For it suggests the view that organized religions were, at core, about something positive, although, as with everything man does dependent on the skills of the founders and adherence/understanding of the followers, bound to degrade and become less meaningful over time.
Then again, perhaps I'm reading too much into a few lines of text....
It's wish the Dalai Lama would say something regarding the situation in Myanmar/Burma. It seems out of character for him not to say something about the Buddhist monks engaged in violence there.
I admire his wisdom and humility. He speaks to believers and non believers alike, he promotes stewardship of mother earth, animals, the poor and suffering in the world, That things (materialism) don't bring happiness, and world peace begins when we each find inner peace.
O/T
ReplyDeleteWhat the hey is Sarah Palin doing up so early and one of the first to attack US in regard to the situations in Egypt and Libya?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/09/12/palin-if-obama-doesn-t-have-big-stick-carry-maybe-it-s-time-him-grow
Gryphen, I thank you and echo your sentiments.
ReplyDeleteThis man exemplifies the difference between Buddhism and the three paternalistic religions, and he does it beautifully.
Buddhism puts the emphasis for living a life of grace (for wont of a better word) squarely onto each individual's responsibilities towards him/herself and others. Failure to follow the ideals results in rebirth with an opportunity to rectify previous errors. Whether one follows these traditions or not, I find it easy to see that the ancient teacher, Gautama Buddha, encouraged individual thought processes by which to arrive at the ideals. The ethics of this philosophy are diametrically opposed to the
authoritarian religions.
The God-as-Authoritarian Judeo/Christian/Islam paternalistic religions dictate adherence to draconian sets of rules and any variance therefrom is considered punishable for eternity.
This prescribed set of eternal reward or punishment does not promote individual thought, but instead demands mindless following by the faithful, and persecution for those who dare to think for themselves. This is why throughout the history of these religions there has been so much gruesome sectarian violence, persecution of heretics, all of which are continuing with mind numbing regularity in this, the 21st century.
I do admire the Dali Lama, but I was really disappointed to find out about his homophobic teachings and beliefs. Too bad about that part.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I have read over the years is that when the Dalai Lama has explained the traditional teachings of Tibetan Buddhism, he has stated the obvious proscriptions which apply to any and all monastic societies, both male and female, which always function in denial of the physical and elevation of the spiritual.
ReplyDeleteThis traditional, celibate monk was sheltered in Dharmsala after escaping the wrath of the Chinese occupiers of Tibet. His rigorous training helped him grow into an international teacher of Buddhism and a diplomat tirelessly working to ease the oppression of the nation of his birth. It seems probable that in the process of this exposure to the world at large, and the diversity of its populations changed him from a traditionalist into a more modern understanding of human nature.
There is an interesting background to my line of thinking:
The Tibetan tradition of one monk making a rapid statement about something within the belief, clapping his hands and expecting an equally rapid response from one of the others, who then is challenged by another, and who will clap to invite a rebuttal etc. Talk about a truly lively "circular argument" which ends in smiles all around. It may this tradition of exploration and encouragement of critical thought that permits him to advance into the 21st century as a man revered by many.
It was the Dalai Lama who said,
ReplyDelete“If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview.”
When's the last time you heard the so-called religious "right" in America adopt such a rational and open-minded stance?
@anon 10:43...
DeleteI thank you for your Dalai Lame quote!
Of course, the answer to your question is simple:
"They have no such open-minded stance".
Neither do any of the other fanatics of the Troika of religions which sprang from middle eastern origins.
There are times when one wants to despair...
My, my, Gryphen...noting spirituality (i.e. belief in a soul or spirit, distinct from the material you) as a virtue and, in accord with the DL, a key to living an ethical life.
ReplyDeleteThis is a (to me, welcome) change. For it suggests the view that organized religions were, at core, about something positive, although, as with everything man does dependent on the skills of the founders and adherence/understanding of the followers, bound to degrade and become less meaningful over time.
Then again, perhaps I'm reading too much into a few lines of text....
It's wish the Dalai Lama would say something regarding the situation in Myanmar/Burma. It seems out of character for him not to say something about the Buddhist monks engaged in violence there.
ReplyDeleteHere's a link to more of his quotes-
ReplyDeletehttp://tinyurl.com/8ek7vfq
I admire his wisdom and humility. He speaks to believers and non believers alike, he promotes stewardship of mother earth, animals, the poor and suffering in the world, That things (materialism) don't bring happiness, and world peace begins when we each find inner peace.