Can other religions/philosophies/practises complement Buddhadharma?

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
Locked
Malcolm
Posts: 32813
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Can other religions/philosophies/practises complement Buddhadharma?

Post by Malcolm »

[Note: Split from here. This topic cuts a fine line. Although DW doesn't allow discussion of other paths per se, a general discussion about complementing Buddhist practice with non-Buddhist practices, views, etc should be ok. At least let's give it a try.]

fuki wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 2:39 pm To me many religions/philosophies/practises can compliment each other but most on forums will not agree. So be ready for that.
Among those who do not agree, the Buddha.
User avatar
fuki
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:51 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hello All

Post by fuki »

Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 4:32 pm
Among those who do not agree, the Buddha.
Sit a while with case 32 of the gateless gate ;)
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/
Malcolm
Posts: 32813
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Malcolm »

fuki wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 5:12 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 4:32 pm
Among those who do not agree, the Buddha.
Sit a while with case 32 of the gateless gate ;)
This didactic story does not contradict what the Buddha has clearly stated in many sutras: to whit, outside of his Dharma and Discipline there are no realized person, no stream entrants, once-returners, never-returners, nor arhats. This means there are no realized people at all outside of Buddhadharma. As much as we may be fond of and recognize the value of some nonbuddhist masters, the height of their wisdom and words do not even reach the bottom slopes of the Buddha's incomparable wisdom.
User avatar
fuki
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:51 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hello All

Post by fuki »

Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 6:14 pmThis means there are no realized people at all outside of Buddhadharma.
You might have not met them, just like the Buddha might have not in his time locally. Also it would defy the use of religion (sadly) if sutras would indicate that it would be otherwise, it's just politics. Also there is zero proof that is what the Buddha actually said neither of us can know this, it's an assumption. My interest in sutras is those who are conductive to awakening, not about notions if there are realized ppl outside of Buddhadharma. It isn't conducive to awakening to dwell upon not prattle about whether it is so or not, I remain open minded.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/
Malcolm
Posts: 32813
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Malcolm »

fuki wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 6:37 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 6:14 pmThis means there are no realized people at all outside of Buddhadharma.
Also there is zero proof that is what the Buddha actually said neither of us can know this, it's an assumption.
This is not at all the case. This is like claiming there is zero proof the Rig Veda survived intact as a oral text in more or less its present form for the past 3500 years.

The methods used by Buddhist monks during the time of the Buddha to memorize and then transmit what he said were very precise and specific, and frankly, their memories were trained to an amazingly high degree. There is too much agreement between what we have in the Agamas and the Pali Canon to imagine that the Buddha's words were not faithfully preserved. This does not mean there was no variation, or that no distortions crept in. But this particular assertion of the Buddha is so wide spread in so many different sūtras and suttas, that it cannot be ignored in the facile manner you have attempted to do so here.

No one who seriously studies these things refuses to acknowledge that the Agamas and the Pali Canon are a good record of what the Buddha taught his students in person.
User avatar
fuki
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:51 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hello All

Post by fuki »

Even if that is so Malcolm (I'm not asserting or denying historical accuracy at all) then what is recorded is clearly words depended on condition and circumstances of the time when the Buddha was alive, afterall the dharma is fluid, not fixed. I also know realized Buddhist masters today who will not say that it is not possible that there are realized ppl "outside" of Buddhadharma which I cannot ignore just because it is recorded in ancient texts. But really for me it doesnt matter if it is recorded in sutras whether there are realized ppl outside of buddhadharma or not, but I wont say its impossible only because it says so according to a sutra. But again it makes no difference to me, it doesnt affect practise. So I'm not in negation to what you claim, I also wouldnt assert it.

I made my reply to No Mind according to observed patterns I witnessed on the interweb, I rejoice in anyone who seeks to realize original nature, I'm just "afraid" his interest in Buddhism gets distracted from the usual trolling of ppl of demotivating him due to blindly locking him up in a mental "Hindu" picture. I hope I'm wrong.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/
Malcolm
Posts: 32813
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Malcolm »

fuki wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:20 pm Even if that is so Malcolm (I'm not asserting or denying historical accuracy at all) then what is recorded is clearly words depended on condition and circumstances of the time when the Buddha was alive, afterall the dharma is fluid, not fixed. I also know realized Buddhist masters today who will not say that it is not possible that there are realized ppl "outside" of Buddhadharma which I cannot ignore just because it is recorded in ancient texts. But really for me it doesnt matter if it is recorded in sutras whether there are realized ppl outside of buddhadharma or not, but I wont say its impossible only because it says so according to a sutra. But again it makes no difference to me, it doesnt affect practise. So I'm not in negation to what you claim, I also wouldnt assert it.

I made my reply to No Mind according to observed patterns I witnessed on the interweb, I rejoice in anyone who seeks to realize original nature, I'm just "afraid" his interest in Buddhism gets distracted from the usual trolling of ppl of demotivating him due to blindly locking him up in a mental "Hindu" picture. I hope I'm wrong.
The Buddha was pretty clear what Dharma and Discipline would contain awakened people, a Dharma and Discipline that contained the eightfold path. That path starts from right view.

Now, it is possible that someone, in isolation, based on having meditated Buddhist instructions in a past life, may in this life, for example, recall those and based on this attain awakening, a so-called pratyekabuddha. But they do not teach.

Now, as far as I am concerned, if one's practice of the path is not grounded on the view of dependent origination, one will not be able to understand reality properly, and one will not be able to wake up. Dependent origination is the "original nature" of everything and there is no "original nature" apart from dependent origination.
User avatar
fuki
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:51 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hello All

Post by fuki »

Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:28 pm Now, as far as I am concerned, if one's practice of the path is not grounded on the view of dependent origination, one will not be able to understand reality properly, and one will not be able to wake up. Dependent origination is the "original nature" of everything and there is no "original nature" apart from dependent origination.
I agree, but again practise in other paths are not excluded from seeing DO and I've personally known an advaita teacher who taught this, sure it might be the exception to the rule, but just our other talk (don't know/non-dwelling/net neti) we seem to agree about many points but also speak past each other. DO teachings might appear in buddhadharma but its not an exclusive to buddhadharma since there is no division in reality, so its nonsensical to say that outside of buddhadharma ppl cant awaken or are never grounded in DO, you might have not met them but ok. DO has no trademark it might be recorded as we know in Buddhism but depended origination is realized in daily life not by effort of the intellect. Again I agree it is an exception to the "rule" but the claim that there are no realized ppl outside of buddhadharma I could not make, Im sure I can find ancient books where the earth was still flat, or better that it couldnt possibly ever be round.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Simon E. »

The TOS says quite clearly that 'this is a forum for the discussion of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism' and also 'this is not a comparative religion site'
I think we should respect that.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Malcolm
Posts: 32813
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Malcolm »

fuki wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:49 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:28 pm Now, as far as I am concerned, if one's practice of the path is not grounded on the view of dependent origination, one will not be able to understand reality properly, and one will not be able to wake up. Dependent origination is the "original nature" of everything and there is no "original nature" apart from dependent origination.
I agree, but again practise in other paths are not excluded from seeing DO and I've personally known an advaita teacher who taught this, sure it might be the exception to the rule, but just our other talk (don't know/non-dwelling/net neti) we seem to agree about many points but also speak past each other. DO teachings might appear in buddhadharma but its not an exclusive to buddhadharma since there is no division in reality, so its nonsensical to say that outside of buddhadharma ppl cant awaken or are never grounded in DO, you might have not met them but ok. DO has no trademark it might be recorded as we know in Buddhism but depended origination is realized in daily life not by effort of the intellect. Again I agree it is an exception to the "rule" but the claim that there are no realized ppl outside of buddhadharma I could not make, Im sure I can find ancient books where the earth was still flat, or better that it couldnt possibly ever be round.
There is no teaching of dependent origination outside Buddhadharma. It is the Buddha's unique teaching, and does not exist in other traditons, and is in fact explicitly rejected in the source texts of Advaita and so on, fiercely rejected by Shankaracarya, etc.

I really cannot know what this person you refer to taught. But if they taught there was some truly existent ultimate reality then they were not teaching from the view point of dependent origination. No one who accepts and teaches dependent origination accepts there is such a reality.

The Samkhya teachings, which are the underlying structure for Hindu teachings in general, have something which might seem to be dependent origination, but it isn't.
Malcolm
Posts: 32813
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Malcolm »

Simon E. wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:02 pm The TOS says quite clearly that 'this is a forum for the discussion of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism' and also 'this is not a comparative religion site'
I think we should respect that.
Just riding the fence, Simon, making sure no cattle rustlers were stealing from the herd.
User avatar
fuki
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:51 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hello All

Post by fuki »

Malcolm like our last interaction Im not speaking from the viewpoint of scripture but from personal experience, there might not be DO outside of Buddhist scripture but that doesnt mean it is not taught. I assume your relationship and practise with teachers isnt based on sutra study alone.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Simon E. »

My remarks were aimed at 'fuki' Malcolm. :smile:

I'm not sure what people who voluntarily sign up to a forum which clearly identifies itself as being "A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism" expect to find... :shrug:

Its not as though the internet is lacking in sites for the discussion of other paths.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
User avatar
fuki
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:51 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hello All

Post by fuki »

Simon E. wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:12 pm My remarks were aimed at 'fuki' Malcolm. :smile:

I'm not sure what people who voluntarily sign up to a forum which clearly identifies itself as being "A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism" expect to find... :shrug:

Its not as though the internet is lacking in sites for the discussion of other paths.
I wasnt discussing other paths at all, Sir Malcolm and I got talking due to his comment "Among those who do not agree, the Buddha." It was just my way of welcoming No Mind I had no interest in comparing paths but since it arised I accepted Malcoms conversation. Not sure how you think your comment is of additional value.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/
User avatar
Mantrik
Former staff member
Posts: 2230
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Hello All

Post by Mantrik »

Simon E. wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:12 pm My remarks were aimed at 'fuki' Malcolm. :smile:

I'm not sure what people who voluntarily sign up to a forum which clearly identifies itself as being "A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism" expect to find... :shrug:

Its not as though the internet is lacking in sites for the discussion of other paths.
Indeed :)

https://dharmapaths.com/
http://www.khyung.com ཁྲོཾ

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Simon E. »

fuki wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:18 pm
Simon E. wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:12 pm My remarks were aimed at 'fuki' Malcolm. :smile:

I'm not sure what people who voluntarily sign up to a forum which clearly identifies itself as being "A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism" expect to find... :shrug:

Its not as though the internet is lacking in sites for the discussion of other paths.
I wasnt discussing other paths at all, Sir Malcolm and I got talking due to his comment "Among those who do not agree, the Buddha." It was just my way of welcoming No Mind I had no interest in comparing paths but since it arised I accepted Malcoms conversation. Not sure how you think your comment is of additional value.
It wasn't intended to add value to your referral to material which is not Buddhadharma. It was intended as a reminder that this is a forum for the discussion of Buddhadharma in its Mahayana and Vajrayana
expressions. As Mantrik says there are whole forums dedicated to non Buddhist traditions. One is a sister of this forum.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
User avatar
明安 Myoan
Former staff member
Posts: 2527
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am

Re: Hello All

Post by 明安 Myoan »

fuki wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:08 pm Malcolm like our last interaction Im not speaking from the viewpoint of scripture but from personal experience, there might not be DO outside of Buddhist scripture but that doesnt mean it is not taught. I assume your relationship and practise with teachers isnt based on sutra study alone.
I'm confused. What is your personal experience? That there is DO outside of Buddhism?
If so, aren't "might not be DO outside of Buddhist scripture" and "doesn't mean it is not taught" i.e. "it is taught" contradictory? It can't simultaneously not be taught and be taught.
With a heart wandering in ignorance down this path and that, to guide me I simply say Namu-Amida-Butsu. -- Ippen

Reciting the Nembutsu and believing in birth in the Pure Land naturally give rise to the Three Minds and the Four Modes of Practice. -- Master Hōnen
User avatar
No_Mind
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 5:37 pm
Location: India

Re: Hello All

Post by No_Mind »

Not with intention to ruffle any more feathers ..

I personally think there is no inherent contradiction between believing in DO (to understand punarbhava) and Buddha's teachings and also believing in "the underlying natural order of the Universe whose ultimate essence is difficult to circumscribe due to it being non conceptual yet evident" and/or "single binding unity behind diversity in all that exists in the universe."

I have little knowledge and maybe wrong. But I am strong believer in ehipassiko and I believe Buddha disliked blind faith (even blind faith in his teachings). Shouting from rooftops, "I believe in DO" at top of my voice will not make me a better or greater Buddhist .. following the path will.

It is nice to be part of this forum. Thank you all for the warm and noisy welcome :smile:

:namaste:
Fortyeightvows
Posts: 2948
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2014 2:37 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Fortyeightvows »

Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:28 pmThat path starts from right view.
please define right view
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Hello All

Post by Simon E. »

Fortyeightvows wrote: Sun Feb 04, 2018 8:21 am
Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:28 pmThat path starts from right view.
please define right view
I know this is asked of Malcolm, but I will be out all day when he answers, so if I may I'll start?

According to the Buddha, right view starts with seeing that there is no Enlightenment outside his Dharma.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Locked

Return to “Lounge”