An interesting POV: Buddhist and Christian

[TheKhan]

I believe in Christ and the buddha.

Faith is a key component of religion.

I heard somewhere that some Hindu`s believe Christ and the Buddha are one being, and they call him Krishna. I don`t know whether that is true. I don`t know if re-incarnation is present either, but I don`t deny it.

Christians may tell you that Buddhism is not about the one almighty God, yet in Christianity there are many angels and saints. If one didn`t know Christianity, it`d look like they were worshiping multiple idols, gods and God.

In Buddhism you will find many priests(in Japan) who party like it was 1999 rather than spend time on missions(at least they don`t hide it). Probably because Buddhism is about 800 years older, they are more corrupt. Christians definately spend more time spreading the word and faith, I call it better marketing practices. The one common thing that I think I can observe is that religions that sacrifice things started dying out when Christianity and Buddhism started appearing on earth. I place significance on that, and a major similarity.

In Christianity the 10 commandments, "thou shall not murder(people)". One of the staunch beliefs of Buddhism is "thou shall not kill(anything)". There is a major difference there and an important similarity. Christians should kill less people, and Buddhist should start to learn that if you don`t fight, families may die.

I like Buddhism and the teachings of Christ. But I do not like religious organizations, as any organization unless a real religious person is running it is bound to have bureaucracy and rules geared somewhat towards our basic tendencies (like greed, wanting to dominate, politics etc..), its like a house of rules like what Jesus criticized of the old Jews in his time.

The reasons why you don`t find many people converting to Christianity in Buddhist communities are probably for numerous reasons. Besides faith that has been lost, there`s not much that a Christian can teach a Buddhist that the Buddha didn`t already say besides the history of Christ and how the Romans and Jews were upon his execution(Christian version of the story). In the worst case scenario Christianity is just a brainwashing technique through history lessons about Europe, as originally Christians intended it to be that way(propaganda from) hundreds of years ago. You will rarely find real Buddhism in non-Buddhist territories unless you find a real temple, which is rare but they`re around. There is much that a Christian can learn from Buddhism probably because Christ didn`t allocate much time to write books.

Another key reason is that I don`t know why, but Buddhists are required to almost denounce their Buddhist ancestry upon conversion, meaning lost spritual linkage with their ancestors. You can`t be whole without knowing where you`re from, and this kind of practice opens people up to brainwashing.

Again the Buddha(original human buddha) lived to a ripe old age and thus what is left are many books, which I think many Christians are reading as we speak. The Buddhist readings could be considered as part of PHD of any religion I think.

I personally believe that Christ knew about Buddhism, although anything from the middle eastern region would deny having anything to do with Buddhism and India. In fact Buddhism has been systematically destroyed from the western hemisphere, just look at our history and the maps. Yet every language is from Sanskrit(India).

What gangsters and people do, you`d be surprised the kind of environment, values and practices the chimps live on. Territory etc..

At the end of the day, I think we should all live for living people, rather than have our actions dictated from respect of words from dead people.
The general goal of religion is ACCEPTANCE. Anything else is just a political group.

I don`t know what your decision will be, I`d prefer people to be open-minded, and not histerical(crucifix) and not talk about satan(over-rated) all day, and to make the right decisions to life and family values, without locking themselves up in a cave in some unknown mountain.

Personally only two important rules that I`ve observed. I might be wrong but everything else doesn`t really matter that much to us humans.
1. Don`t threaten the environment that little kids live in.
2. Don`t ruin a providers ability to put food on the table.

Personally I`d like to add another rule, but this is irrelavant.
Personal restriction rule towards Christianity #3. Don`t interfere with other peoples sex lifes as it is perverted, like to strike that into some Churches. And I`d also like to kick some professional Buddhist ass so that they`d finally come out and start teaching things instead of keeping it to themselves.

Christians have a fantastic system to understand faith, but people from Christian territories kill way too many people. It`s about time they try to abide by "thou shall not kill ANYTHING and not just people" or maybe even show the other cheek. If Christians truly abided by Christs teachings, I don`t think there`s much that Buddhism has to offer, besides history lessons and in-depth knowledge of our environment.

After the third generation, a lot of things go wrong.
I`m sure Mohamed was nothing like the orthodox Muslims we see today.

Get a good job and a nice girlfriend, religion is next. Unless you wanna go pro.

 

[juantoo3]

I took the liberty of splitting the preceding post from the Introductions board and placing it here for the benefit of discussion.

I would also like to take this opportunity to welcome our new member TheKhan to Interfaith.

 

[seattlegal]

Greetings, TheKhan, and welcome to Interfaith.org.

You've covered quite a bit of territory (quite well, I might add,) in your first post. The one point that I am most impressed with is this one:

1. Don`t threaten the environment that little kids live in.

It's seems like such a simple thing, but you rarely hear it spoken of as the general term. Mothers everywhere live by it, but express it as hundreds of "specific rules,' rather than stating application of this general principle. Therefore, the general concept seems to be subconscious in action: it is vague, and hard to pin down, as it is rarely consciously addressed and spoken as a general maxim. Being mostly unconscious in action, when this concept is violated, many people get really upset and emotional, because the underlying rule has been violated, but it is difficult to pin down.

Most of the specific and nonspecific rules/maxims based on this principle are grouped under the rather vague heading of "Family Values," and can become a point of political/moral contention because the general underlying principle is rarely spoken as succinctly as you have put it. Thank you for the consciousness-raising phrase.

I don`t know what your decision will be, I`d prefer people to be open-minded, and not histerical(crucifix) and not talk about satan(over-rated) all day, and to make the right decisions to life and family values, without locking themselves up in a cave in some unknown mountain.

Personally only two important rules that I`ve observed. I might be wrong but everything else doesn`t really matter that much to us humans.
1. Don`t threaten the environment that little kids live in.
2. Don`t ruin a providers ability to put food on the table.

These two general principles can raise consciousness from the hysterical to the rational, in many areas where hysteria is now widespread.

Personally I`d like to add another rule, but this is irrelavant.
Personal restriction rule towards Christianity #3. Don`t interfere with other peoples sex lifes as it is perverted, like to strike that into some Churches.

We have a recent thread relating to this sort of thing in the Christianity forum:
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/homosexuality-9989.html

I was trying to understand the reasoning behind the Old Testament condemnation of male homosexuality. (There really isn't anything specific regarding female sexuality in it.) I think that the objections are based upon the (mostly subconscious) principle you stated above:

1. Don`t threaten the environment that little kids live in. ​

Even today, you don't have to worry about taking your young child into a women's public restroom, because you'll rarely find lesbians having sex there, or any other public place where children might be found. However, the same cannot be said about male homosexuals and men's public restrooms, or other public places. (Not all male homosexuals violate the "don't threaten the environment where children might be found" maxim, but a sizable number of them have made a culture of doing so.)

And I`d also like to kick some professional Buddhist ass so that they`d finally come out and start teaching things instead of keeping it to themselves.

I once complained to a Sufi about how getting information about Buddhism from a Buddhist is like pulling teeth. He replied, "Buddhism is like pulling teeth."
It took me a while to figure out what he meant, but it really rings true. Not many people like to go into detail about their trips to the dentist.
Everyone has their own unique "dental problems" that hinder their ability to produce a "beautiful smile," so to speak. Therefore, there cannot be one set formula that will produce a "beautiful smile" in each and every individual. Setting a "standardized procedure" of pulling all your teeth as a preventative measure also makes it very difficult to chew and digest your food properly.
Therefore, adapting different techniques for different individuals is the way to go. Having a one-size-fits-all standard procedure also severely dampers an individual's ability to develop spontaneous ways of adapting. Developing this spontaneity is the primary focus of Zen, one type of Buddhism. Other forms of Buddhism emphasize different things, suited for different individuals.
There is a Buddhist saying that there are 84,000 dharma doors. (Probably equal to the number of individual hang-ups that have been experienced by humans.) Finding a specific dharma door on request given limited information can therefore be a rather daunting task, so I suspect that might be another reason why getting information out of a Buddhist can be rather difficult...

Once again, welcome to IO, TheKhan. I look forward to reading more of your posts.

 

[Dream]

Is it OK if we just call you TK ?

 

[Snoopy]

Christians definately spend more time spreading the word and faith, I call it better marketing practices.

Hi TheKhan. Welcome to IO. Ever tried decaf?

Perhaps the marketing depends on which "group". Can't remember much marketing from any quakers. Regarding Buddhism, NKT and SGI are pretty keen.

Buddhist should start to learn that if you don`t fight, families may die.

I think people die whether they fight or not. But I don't think the Buddha was big on fighting. He said if you retaliate if you're being chopped to bits by evil folk then you're dissing his dharma.

You will rarely find real Buddhism in non-Buddhist territories unless you find a real temple, which is rare but they`re around.

What is real Buddhism? Buddhism in "non-Buddhist territories" is at least actively chosen. Buddhism in a "Buddhist territory" is what one is born into; no positive choice needs making.

Another key reason is that I don`t know why, but Buddhists are required to almost denounce their Buddhist ancestry upon conversion, meaning lost spritual linkage with their ancestors.

Don't know what you mean here I'm afraid. Lineage (if that's what you mean?) can be a very important consideration; it is meant to be an emblem of authenticity.

Again the Buddha(original human buddha) lived to a ripe old age and thus what is left are many books, which I think many Christians are reading as we speak.

Do you mean many years meant much to put down in later centuries? No books were written during the Buddha's lifetime; it was an oral tradition.

In fact Buddhism has been systematically destroyed from the western hemisphere, just look at our history and the maps.

Not from where I'm looking.

What gangsters and people do, you`d be surprised the kind of environment, values and practices the chimps live on. Territory etc..

I think we're back to the decaf issue again.

And I`d also like to kick some professional Buddhist ass so that they`d finally come out and start teaching things instead of keeping it to themselves.

It's out there if you want it...depending on where you live...and the NKT and SGI sure can market.

Get a good job and a nice girlfriend, religion is next. Unless you wanna go pro.

Nice boyfriend? What's going pro then?

Snoopy.

 

[TheKhan]

Thanks y`all.

I have no objection to being called TK.

I have a lot of things to say, and likely to have my ups and downs in terms of how people will feel towards what I may comment. The reason why I chose TheKhan is because it kind of reflects how I look and the kinds of things I might have to say. I come from a Samurai Shinto-Buddhist family, I was raised Protestant in Europe and I have a Roman Catholic godmother in the United States. So without restrictions, I do come out swinging sometimes, I ask to be excused in advance.

As a side fact, Gengis Khan believed in one God, but I probably won`t mention much about this. I do wish that what he believed in was available but it was all lost supposedly because his descendants burnt it down to the ground. He was too strict and his descendants probably found it impossible to abide by the laws he setup. After that his descendants split into Muslim and Buddhist factions, and later those factions split into Communist regions as well. Some of his Muslim descendants have caused quite an uproar going west(possibly origin of crusades) and east as well.

Basically I wanted to point out and am in the process of confirming, but the more I research I feel that without knowing the history of the Mongols in detail which is pretty recent history, it may be hard to understand the big picture of whats happening and has happened. I may be wrong though, but I kind of always objected to the old Mongols taught to us as being sheer barbarians when they had advanced tactical war strategies. Vikings were not plain barbarians either, they combed their hair, and another interesting fact, a buddhist statue(just one) was recently found at a viking burial site.

Shows how large our trading routes were even in ancient times, there will probably be more facts that will be found that will prove to us that we were more interconnected than we previously thought.

More supposed facts, Roman artifacts were found in Koreas first emperors burial site, and Marco Polo enabled the Mongols to defeat China which is a really big deal when you think about it. Maps of Asia were top secret in Europe back then, of which I think Marco Polo also played a big role. After the silk roads ended the East and West briefly lost contact with each other.

I think we have seen facts being twisted and hidden, some of the more recent largest form of this practice is I think, in the late 1800`s we found out that our language was all connected to sanskrit from India. What is very vague is the relations of India and the middle east(something is not right). From the middle-east the Greeks learnt, the Romans learnt from the Greeks and thus Europe happened. In Asia it is a fact that India is the origin of all Asian civilization. And if the middle-easterners got their civilization from India, India is the cradle of modern civilization without contest as it is evident in our language. I think we saw a group of people trying to take over the world claiming this theory as their own pretty recently called the Nazi`s.

But what if what they said, the history link part was true, besides the blue eye, blonde hair DNA superiority mumbo jumbo that the Indian-Aryans completely deny. The point being, either we have one origin to modern civilization, or we have two, possibly twin-like origins (India and Middle-East). I`d personally like it to be one origin, it makes History lessons much easier, spares a lot of people from being proud creating friction.

I don`t know much about the Middle-East, besides what I know about the old testament, and I have a theory that the gods the buddhists call the Assura gods (war gods) are named after Assyria, I think the ancient buddhists(Indians) thought that the people from the Assyria(middle-east) region rather liked to fight, and thus created a section in Buddhism for war gods. And claiming history from the middle-east, thus Europe is a region of the Assura gods from a Buddhist perspective, and Europe and the middle-east has been warring for ages, possibly from the start of time.

My point with the Assura gods,Assyria and Europe as a fact could all be rubbish, but I just wanted to make a suggestion that if we could all agree including the Judaic people that we got our civilization from India, and if that is a fact which we probably proved in the late 1800`s I think that would be one step towards one big happy family.

I think Nazism is similar, but with racism playing a major role like a lot of things from the middle-east and Europe, ultimately it all completely opposes this one big family from India thought. And the middle-easterners and probably die-hard Jewish people are stubborn as hell rooted in religion when it comes to this portion of history.

Someday we should shine some light, making it clear of the kinds of associations between ancient India and the middle-east.

 

[TheKhan]

Snoopy,

I don`t spend much time drinking coffee, maybe once or twice a month.

I kind of understand what you`re saying. When I say something I never mean in absolute terms, its everyone`s choice unless it terribly effects my life.

Chimp, Territory etc.. "I think we're back to the decaf issue again. "
With regards to how you feel about this, you are absolutely wrong.

Besides all the things I wrote, my personal reasons to why I am posting here, is I have no interest in current Christian or Buddhist organizations, and I am not about to go in-depth into why. And like Judaism and Christianity standing together, I would somehow like to find something that can enable me to be a Christian and Buddhist as I already am. I don`t see why that`s not possible when there`s shinto-buddhism and judai-christianity, yet it is impossible according to the institutions that I know.

One area I may differ from a lot of true religious people is that when it comes down to the end, I would like to be the one doing all the chopping if necessary, I think I`d be pretty good at that too, than an intelligent religious stale-mate debate.

p.s. the original human buddha destroyed all the religious groups(Zoroaster?) that tried to destroy him, I don`t know the details. And I could care less if something was in a book or oral. But if it was oral, that probably means things could have got screwed up even faster.

 

[Netti-Netti]

I was trying to understand the reasoning behind the Old Testament condemnation of male homosexuality. (There really isn't anything specific regarding female sexuality in it.) I think that the objections are based upon the (mostly subconscious) principle you stated above: Don`t threaten the environment that little kids live in.

There are numerous books on the subject and the general consensus appears to be that Leviticus was intended to dissuade Jews from taking part in ritual sex at Pagan temples and to limit sex to procreation in order to increase their number. See page 113:

Sex in the Bible: A New Consideration - Google Book Search

Even today, you don't have to worry about taking your young child into a women's public restroom, because you'll rarely find lesbians having sex there, or any other public place where children might be found. However, the same cannot be said about male homosexuals and men's public restrooms, or other public places.

I looked up news stories on bathroom encounters in the Seattle area and only found a story about a hetero episode.

I think what parents model in terms of moral rectitude or moral threats is the single most important component in the child's environment. Not sure what they would make of homophobia.

 

[seattlegal]

I looked up news stories on bathroom encounters in the Seattle area and only found a story about a hetero episode.

With the number of complaints I hear from many of the men I talk to, it would hardly be a newsworthy event.

(I don't frequent men's public restrooms, so I have to rely on what the guys tell me. I have no reason to doubt their reports.)

 

[wil]

Namaste TK,

nice stuff....

Read any Thich Nhat Hanh?

 

[TheKhan]

Namaste TK,

nice stuff....

Read any Thich Nhat Hanh?

Thanks wil,
Thanks for teaching me "Namaste".

Thich Nhat Hanh? Sounds Thai. Let me look it up.

 

[seattlegal]

Thich Nhat Hanh? Sounds Thai. Let me look it up.

He's a Vietnamese Zen Buddhist monk. One book of his that ties in with this thread that I'd recommend is Living Buddha, Living Christ.

 

[TheKhan]

Seattlegal, you are right on the mark as far as understanding what I was trying to communicate. I almost have nothing to say besides sending you smiles.

To add to your reasons of addressing individual needs which I feel completely makes sense, my reasons why I might not stick my nose into other peoples business is because of something like karma. This in plain English is aftermath, reaction or consequences of one`s actions (for people who don`t know karma). Sowing the field with seeds etc.. Like if one chooses to help someone, there maybe consequences. Heck, Jesus got crucified didn`t he, that terrifies me. Loving or hating takes up a lot of energy, its exhausting and sometimes stressfull things can happen. But I don`t think that is the sole reason why a professional buddhist would not share his traditions with the general public.

If they are trained(born into a temple, going to buddhist college for professionals, as well as educated, and trained as a child) to be professional, they have technical things that they think is irrelavant to what a non-professional buddhist should know. A childhood friend of mine who was born into a temple told me one of the things that surprised him when he got to college. That really surprised me too but I can understand why they think it might be irrelavant and mostly they won`t find the time to talk about it anyway during work.

What is real Buddhism?

Snoopy, to be trained rigorously in the Buddhist arts is what I meant by real Buddhism, of which it is my assumption that it lacks in the west, but now that you`ve pointed it out I do not think I used the right terms. But you`ve gotta understand that the kind of Buddhism I am used to which is everywhere where I am from, it seems to me that it rarely exists in the west, although there are temples here and there. When you put it in words, there`s probably no such thing as a "real" buddhism, but I clearly have some sort of personal acknowledgment of what I think is buddhism. If you see a buddhist monk pour gasoline on himself and light a match in order to protest, I would view that person as a real buddhist but that is just my personal opinion.

Don't know what you mean here I'm afraid. Lineage (if that's what you mean?) can be a very important consideration; it is meant to be an emblem of authenticity.

I am faced with the dilema that if I join a Christian faith, starting from my direct family, my descendants will not be buried at my ancestral burial grounds, or at least I won`t be buried there. That`s not a big deal and any first Christian in a family might have had to face that, but I love where I am from, and if I ever happen to have kids, I want them to know that they came from Shinto-Buddhist traditions and exactly where they are from. If I had my way I`d move my entire ancestral burial grounds somewhere else and convert the entire proceedings to Christianity, but I don`t want any more of my family ancestry information lost, or I don`t want to feel that I`ve had to abandon my lineage. I`ll just wine about this until I find a solution.

Do you mean many years meant much to put down in later centuries? No books were written during the Buddha's lifetime; it was an oral tradition.

Hmm.. You might be right, but I was under the impression that Buddhism is mountains of books, and considering how long he lived I always assumed that he said the most. You probably won`t find literature about how to walk on water in the bible, or how to resurect yourself, although there`s a good chance that in a buddhist text, buddha might have talked about it. Actually you`d probably be able to find a lot of people other than the Buddha who talked about many things, but if one is looking for a one stop get all the information you like library, I`d put my money on Buddhist literature.

Not from where I'm looking.

I first didn`t realize your avatar pic, so I thought you were commenting from the otherside. Currently there are about 3 countries of which the majority religion is Buddhism right. At one time or another, everything east of India and possibly as far back into Pakistan was Buddhist country. I read somewhere that there was a Buddhist school in Alexandria but that is not confirmed, but if its true its not a surprise considering how Alexandria was at one time. OK, when a religion that could have possibly consumed the entire continent of Eurasia, unless the Asians were so proned to be Buddhists, what did the middle-easterners do to prevent the Buddhist missionaries from settling in the middle-east and Europe. Its hard to imagine that Buddhist missionaries wouldn`t go West of India as well. And based on the violence I see now in the middle-east, I can only come to one conclusion, but this again is an assumption of mine. Maybe no Buddhist missions went west of Afghanistan(doubt it).

It's out there if you want it...depending on where you live...and the NKT and SGI sure can market.

I mean no disrespect but it is not like what I know it to be, in the United States or Europe. You might get 2 major brands of Japanese beer or sake at best in the United States.
You might want to check how many kinds of beers or sake we have. We also have hundreds of Japanese gin called shouchu. And thats just one country.

Nice boyfriend? What's going pro then?.

OK, this is just my definition of a religious pro. It actually has not much to do with money, but let me just clarify what I meant. And I originally addressed my first post to a specific individual, so that might explain why my first post might be a little off.

If you care more about GOD than how you`re gonna pay for your next meal, you are definately thinking hard about religion. If you are willing to really die for your religious beliefs you`re a pro. If you`d rather read religious literature than spend time with your boyfriend or girlfriend, you are close. If you dumped your girlfriend or boyfriend because you wanted to pursue a faith and haven`t looked back for a decade or so maybe, you are a pro. If you live up in the moutains to live like a hermit, because you want to pursue your faith and have become sick of dealing with practical people, you`re a pro. That`s what I meant, the way I wrote it could confuse some people I guess. You know what I mean, everyone does.



In order to relieve myself of causing any mis-understandings, by all means do I not believe that Buddhism is superior on anything that really matters if I sounded that way, in fact I believe Christianity is more suited for our modern times in every region of the world. In my case I wish I could be a Christian while being a Shinto-Buddhist.

I am against religious organizations getting heavily involved in politics.
And most people would be really happy if they ever got to see their great grand children or something like that, based on my observation, religious or not.

 

[TheKhan]

He's a Vietnamese Zen Buddhist monk. One book of his that ties in with this thread that I'd recommend is Living Buddha, Living Christ.

Thanks for the info. I didn`t know there were Zen Buddhist monks in places besides Japan...

 

[wil]

Thanks for the info. I didn`t know there were Zen Buddhist monks in places besides Japan...

ah then for anyone who travels to San Fransisco, call a year ahead and get reservations at greens

 

[Netti-Netti]

Don`t threaten the environment that little kids live in.

In more than one study church attendance has been associated with lower levels of domestic violence. One might deduce that going to church can help to reduce domestic violence. That would be a leap, though. Another possible explanation is that folks who attend church are possessed of positive adaptive traits that predict better conflict management and more skilled problem solving.

As we've discussed elsewhere, homophobia seems to be an indicator of very rigid and traditional notion of masculinity, which in turn is an aspect of authoritarian ideology, which also has a conservative religion component. I would expect that conservative, authoritarian religious men are most likely to be perpetrators of domestic violence, especially if they are married to women who have a less rigid views than their husbands. That is in fact what the research findings show.

So what we have here is the paradoxical combination of men who want save the world from homosexual boogymen who are themselves profoundly dysfunctional and predisposed - with very little insight into their own behavior - to create a pathological family environment that can adversely affect the emotional well being of the kids as well as the spouse. I expect kids who turn out to be gay who grow up in such dysfunctional families often internalize the father's homophobia and develop internal conflicts that have a long term impact on the kids' functioning.

A Jungian would say that these religious batterers are in denial of their own issues and projecting them onto others. From the outside, this looks like phoniness and hypocrisy. What it really is, I believe, is mental confusion about values - and the importance of compassion in particular - combined with an unwillingness to confront their own imperfections and unable to see how they are threatening the environment kids live in by their unhelpful/destructive attitudes and actions.

 

[seattlegal]

In more than one study church attendance has been associated with lower levels of domestic violence. One might deduce that going to church can help to reduce domestic violence. That would be a leap, though. Another possible explanation is that folks who attend church are possessed of positive adaptive traits that predict better conflict management and more skilled problem solving.

As we've discussed elsewhere, homophobia seems to be an indicator of very rigid and traditional notion of masculinity, which in turn is an aspect of authoritarian ideology, which also has a conservative religion component. I would expect that conservative, authoritarian religious men are most likely to be perpetrators of domestic violence, especially if they are married to women who have a less rigid views than their husbands. That is in fact what the research findings show.

So what we have here is the paradoxical combination of men who want save the world from homosexual boogymen who are themselves profoundly dysfunctional and predisposed - with very little insight into their own behavior - to create a pathological family environment that can adversely affect the emotional well being of the kids as well as the spouse. I expect kids who turn out to be gay who grow up in such dysfunctional families often internalize the father's homophobia and develop internal conflicts that have a long term impact on the kids' functioning.

A Jungian would say that these religious batterers are in denial of their own issues and projecting them onto others. From the outside, this looks like phoniness and hypocrisy. What it really is, I believe, is mental confusion about values - and the importance of compassion in particular - combined with an unwillingness to confront their own imperfections and unable to see how they are threatening the environment kids live in by their unhelpful/destructive attitudes and actions.

Don't get me wrong, Netti-Netti. I'm not homophobic. I'm not against homosexual couples forming a family and adopting children. They are not a problem. It's the segment that has made a culture out of having anonymous sex in public places that I have a problem with. Not a good example or environment for children.

 

[Dream]

...I don`t know why, but Buddhists are required to almost denounce their Buddhist ancestry upon conversion, meaning lost spiritual linkage with their ancestors...

I honestly don't understand what you mean by 'Denouncing ancestry' or 'lost spiritual linkage to ancestors'. I think most Christians would not understand what you are talking about. Conversion to Christianity requires eschewing idolotry, and that's probably what people are concerned about. I don't even know much about my ancestors. What is the big deal? ?

 

[Snoopy]

Chimp, Territory etc.. "I think we're back to the decaf issue again. "
With regards to how you feel about this, you are absolutely wrong.

I just meant that what you said didn’t seem to make sense, at least not to me!

And I could care less if something was in a book or oral. But if it was oral, that probably means things could have got screwed up even faster.

I think the method of oral transmission by the monks was well established and fairly rigorous. Different kinds of problems occur with the written word. E.g. translation, interpretation, physical damage and loss…

s.

 

[TheKhan]

ah then for anyone who travels to San Fransisco, call a year ahead and get reservations at greens

very interesting!!! I was aware of practitioners of Zen in Boston, but I didn`t really view him as a monk, maybe he was though. I think I asked him when one should ever resort to violence, and I think he told me that it should be the very last resort after exhausting all options to get away from that situation. It would have made little difference if he had told me to never resort to violence, that statement has actually been a pretty major cornerstone in my thinking.

I`ve never really checked into Zen besides knowing that Michael Jordan knew something about Zen. greens seems they have it down!! I`m starting to get the feeling that maybe I should check into it now.

But call me barbarian, currently I couldn`t imagine a life without cheese or beef. I could live without bacon or chicken, and cigarettes, alchohol now, but beef, no cheeseburgers... that would be one of my worst nightmares.. I sometimes dream of owning at least one McDonalds, and living in one.

I do enjoy very large bowls of salads though, ideally with just a little bit of meat. A pinch of meat is just fine for me nowadays. I lose a lot of weight when I go on a vegetarian diet, too much maybe.