Question about politics when only philosophers existed

Aupmanyav said:
I would not consider them Buddhist if they do.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by that though?
I'm often hearing Christians saying one group of Christians is "not really Christian"
What are the fundamental requirements for an individual, or a school of thought, to be considered "truly" Buddhist?
Who determines that?

And did you see my post referring to the movie Along with the Gods?
It is my understanding that this movie reflects a Buddhist worldview (for lack of a better term) and theory of the afterlife from a Korean Buddhist perspective. Is that not so?
 
A member of Sangha has to beg alms from house-holders. A Bhikkhu cannot survive without a society. Rules of society are always necessary.
To give alms to Bhikkhus (charity) is also a rule of the society.
 
Aupmanyav said:
I do not know about schools of Buddhist thought. I am a direct disciple of Buddha.
There is no evidence for Gods. Kesamutti Sutta will not accept Gods.
Also one must have total belief in 'anatta' and 'anicca'.
Click to expand...
Books are no teacher, and without relation, it's improper to call one a disciple. Cherrypicker would be more proper.
 
Aupmanyav said:
A member of Sangha has to beg alms from house-holders. A Bhikkhu cannot survive without a society. Rules of society are always necessary.
To give alms to Bhikkhus (charity) is also a rule of the society.
Click to expand...
It's an obligation for Upasaka, Upasika, yet aside it's total free to do merits or not, and depends on wisdom to take on such. In no way does common society have any obligation or a rule to do such, unless maybe a wise King ordered such.

Bhikkhus are also open to receive alms food at their dwelling, although alms going is more praised by the Sublime Buddha, helpful for the practice and a blessing for those who might take on a possibility if such arises.
 
TheLightWithin said:
What are the fundamental requirements for an individual, or a school of thought, to be considered "truly" Buddhist?
Click to expand...
Somebody having taken the Sublime Buddha, the good Dhamma, the monastic community of monks as his refuge, is recognized as Upasaka, Upasika ("by-sitter", eg. lay follower). A person who as gained the stream, eg. seen the Dhamma, endowed with virtue, conductive for the path, pleasing to the Noble Ones, by it, is called a "true disciple", Sekha-puggala, as he has gained the first stage of "Sainthood", an Ariya-puggala, no more able to fall back, headed toward liberation, within, if long, seven more existences, either in heavens or birth in good family, goid householder.
 
Aupmanyav said:
I do not know about schools of Buddhist thought. I am a direct disciple of Buddha.
There is no evidence for Gods. Kesamutti Sutta will not accept Gods.
Also one must have total belief in 'anatta' and 'anicca'.
Click to expand...
What a nonsensical assuming... but as told, books and especially wiki are even endurances to never gain relation to the Gems.
 
Aupmanyav said:
From many. I have learnt from Buddhism (anatta and anicca) as well as from monotheist religions (God sends prophets/sons/messengers/manifestations/mahdis. It is criminal not to submit to the messenger of your informer after you have heard the 'Good News').
Click to expand...

Aupmanyav said:
From many. I have learnt from Buddhism (anatta and anicca) as well as from monotheist religions (God sends prophets/sons/messengers/manifestations/mahdis. It is criminal not to submit to the messenger of your informer after you have heard the 'Good News').
Click to expand...
What do you mean with submit? Is it not mistaken from mention the name of your teacher?
 
Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu said:
It's an obligation for Upasaka, Upasika, yet aside it's total free to do merits or not, and depends on wisdom to take on such. In no way does common society have any obligation or a rule to do such, unless maybe a wise King ordered such.

Bhikkhus are also open to receive alms food at their dwelling, although alms going is more praised by the Sublime Buddha, helpful for the practice and a blessing for those who might take on a possibility if such arises.
Click to expand...
Who will give the alms - house-holders, members of a society.
'Dhamma' (rules of the society) order us to give in charity to the needful. No order from a king is required.
 
Aupmanyav said:
I have learnt from people and I have learnt more from books. Yes, I pick cherries and reject what I do not like. Buddha said so 'Kalamas ..".
Click to expand...
The Sublime Buddha also told, those who had gone for refuge, that own ideas and preference as the lowest judges. Certain bad translations, of strangely just in revolutionary societies known, serves consume well, like other cheeries good householder picked out and steady slander the Juwels by his ideas.
 
spiritualbee said:
What do you mean with submit? Is it not mistaken from mention the name of your teacher?
Click to expand...
Name your gurus, no problem. One must not submit even to the teacher - "nor upon the consideration 'The monk is our teacher (samano no garū)'" (Kesamutti Sutta). Keep your brain around you.
in Hindu mythology, Yajnavalkya was a pupil of Vaishampayana, but he differed from the teachings of his guru. The angry guru asked him to abandon his teachings which Yajnavalkya did (the story goes that he vomited the teachings of Vaishampayana), and went on to write Shukla YajurVeda.
 
Aupmanyav said:
:D Well, I stand by them. That is what I am.
Click to expand...
Yes, and if good householder would have gotten the teachings on anatta right, he wouldn't cherish mental sankhars, seeing them as anicca, no refuge, a cancer, not worth to regard them as own. It's called ditthi-anusaya: Obsesssion; underlying tendency, "laying down" with certain views, not being right view.
 
TheLightWithin said:
Who determines that?
Click to expand...
The Sublime Buddha, of course (and in further his Sangha of monks):

Candala Sutta: The Outcaste

"Endowed with these five qualities, a lay follower is an outcaste of a lay follower, a stain of a lay follower, a dregs of a lay follower. Which five? He/she does not have conviction [in the Buddha's Awakening]; is unvirtuous; is eager for protective charms & ceremonies; trusts protective charms & ceremonies, not kamma; and searches for recipients of his/her offerings outside [of the Sangha], and gives offerings there first. Endowed with these five qualities, a lay follower is an outcaste of a lay follower, a stain of a lay follower, a dregs of a lay follower.

"Endowed with these five qualities, a lay follower is a jewel of a lay follower, a lotus of a lay follower, a fine flower of a lay follower. Which five? He/she has conviction; is virtuous; is not eager for protective charms & ceremonies; trusts kamma, not protective charms & ceremonies; does not search for recipients of his/her offerings outside [of the Sangha], and gives offerings here first. Endowed with these five qualities, a lay follower is a jewel of a lay follower, a lotus of a lay follower, a fine flower of a lay follower."
Click to expand...
 
Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu said:
Yes, and if good householder would have gotten the teachings on anatta right, he wouldn't cherish mental sankhars, seeing them as anicca, no refuge, a cancer, not worth to regard them as own. It's called ditthi-anusaya: Obsesssion; underlying tendency, "laying down" with certain views, not being right view.
Click to expand...
Of course, I am 'anatta' and 'anicca', not more than a bubble in the sea. And I have already lived most of my life (82). I do not resent it, I accept it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top