I'm curious if any Buddhists hang out here. I think it's a very interesting religion because, from my understanding anyway, Buddhists don't believe in a creator god. They do believe in reincarnation and some believe in other realms where gods and demons exist. However here is a quote from the Buddha that shows that Buddhism is so very undogmatic.



I find it fascinating that a religion can have a "dogma" that is to not trust any dogma but instead trust one's own experience. That raises the question, what does it mean to be a Buddhist? I'm in a situation right now where I've been profoundly impacted by meditation but I don't believe in reincarnation and I don't believe in realms of demigods and demons (not that I totally rule it out, I just think that no one can give any good evidence that they are real).

I have reached a state of mind during meditation that was VERY profound though. It was like I realized that I was only a part of something much bigger and that the whole was one of pure compassion. It moved me to tears. It was profound enough that after I came out of that state of mind I was like: "What the **** was that?" I don't know if this is just a physiological state of mind that is possible through meditation but doesn't have any real ontological significance, or if individuality really is an illusion and that there is some consciousness that is greater that what we possess alone.

Anyway I'd love to hear from anyone who considers themselves a Buddhist and if you could share your experiences and thoughts I would be very much grateful.

It's generally accepted that Buddha believed in a god (this is india we're talking about).

Meditation is the ****. Keep it up.



I believe in Buddhist philosophy, and can greatly appreciate some aspects of, say the Dalai Llama's world view. But Buddhism can be as weird and dogmatic and faith-based as any other religion.



Buddhist philosophy? A+

Buddhist religion? Best of the worst

At the higher levels of the teachings that are the roots of Buddhism the 'creator god' or 'creator gods' become synonymous with real people, foreign deitys, god, cosmic objects (sun moon etc). This doesn't compute with our Judaic/Christian minds, so it seems to us they see some certain personic type god that is separate from 'us' or 'me'. So to say they don't believe in a creator good is too much of a paraphrase imo.

These realms too are general paraphrase the destroys the true meanings and understands of 'realms'. When we see time for what it is (total time, without the separation of past present and future) then when can start to understand 'realm'

Buddhism has the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path, so truly it is dogmatic. This eventually becomes somewhat of a paradox.

I find it fascinating that a religion can have a "dogma" that is to not trust any dogma but instead trust one's own experience. [/QUOTE] What you describe here is the teaching of Jiddhu Krishnamurti, to be a light to oneself. It is the philosophy bruce lee built his art on, no way as way. It is what Jesus taught but Christians taint it by following Jesus and not themselves. In this way buddhists often taint buddhism Same thing it means to be Christian imo.

They are real but you are given a misinterpretation of what those writings are pointing to. Here is an example that might bridge the idea for you that the talk of realms and gods might have scientific purpose:



This is almost straight out of Lees notes (so are the buddhism 4 noble truths, and 8 fold path), where is describes an experience like yours as beeing alive and free, but when you look back on it as a memory it becomes dead. If you understand the importance of those two states then you will have in most peoples minds 'become enlightened' but in Buddhas mind you will have finally 'begun' the journeyless journey So hopefully you see the difference between experiences the moment without reflection and reflect on that same moment as a past experience. When we no longer reflect, or at least give any validity to the past experiences, we begin to see the past present and future are religous constructs, and that certain teachings like buddha is not dogma but undogma. then we might understand that 'how can we time travel' is like 'what happens when you drive off the edge of the world.

In this we can see that true mediation needs no posture, no mantras, no certain thoughts, no exercise, no dogma. It can be done anytime and anywhere. And we begin to see that meditation the way our society sees it is really just practice for the REAL meditation, which is essentially to live our entire lives in this state. But of course for the person 'doing' it, this will have a profound change and can't be described any longer as a 'person' 'doing' 'it'.

In this state we may understand the relationship and words of samsara and nirvana, where samsara is born from time (or vice versa), the psychological kind that meditation seeks to disolve, which includes the karmaic cycles of life and death and rebirth. Where nirvana is the cesation of using the mind in this way. And we might understand how we are already in or at nirvana but we suppress that truth.

If you understand all this you might go back to any teachings and re read them and understand them instantly in a crystal clear way. Science cannot believe this but the teachings all have duel meaning as someone who doesn't understand 'time' or 'ego' (after all the are interchangeable) will read the teachings one way, and someone like buddha will read them another way, both being correct and important for the student and the ascended.

Off the top of my head my understanding is buddha was trained and taught and studied the teachings of the vedas. He eventually got fed up and threw all the dogmas away after sitting under a tree for a period of time. The importance of it all is that it creates conflict, argument, and different branches of religions coming from his life. One can argue he was dogmatic and one can argue he wasn't. But if you really understand the teachings its clear what he was about.


the cliff notes for Buddhism is that it is a preparation of the mind to receive truth. If you clutch Buddhism and won't let go of it, it becomes the very thing that blocks you from truth.

edit:
[QUOTE]

I'd like to enquire about that word conducive, as buddha likely wrote in sanskrit as did his peers, it seems to me that word is out of place. If we understand that. we can see none of buddhas word can be experienced directly without interpretation from the past. Whether purposefully tainted or not, we have to read these things with a grain of salt.

Newguy, would you consider Buddhism a religion? It seems to me that it is so radically different from the Abrahamic religions that it's not really a fair label.

Its obviously different.

I'm not looking down on your question, I am agreeing with you in our societies and sciences' inability to see something how it is, without a box.

The root of Buddhism, the very root, will untrain us from the habit of categorizing, dissecting, and analyzing, and ultimately separating these things.
In this we might not just see Buddhism for what it really is, but all religions for what they really are.

In other words we would question the one thing we have always avoided questioning, where as all religions refuse to validate this question.

But then if a Buddhist holds onto his dogma and won't enact the same inquiry, then they too become religious and not just spiritual.

I'm not sure I fit the label of "buddhist" but I started a regular meditation practice several months ago and it has been the most valuable thing I have done so far in my life.

Would love to see more discussion on buddhism. I do see it as more of a philosophy and a practice than a "religion" however. Religion to me implies some sort of ingestion of a particular dogma while the "point" of buddhism (as I currently see it) is to arrive at a greater subjective knowledge and understanding of ourselves and the world, theoretically ultimately culminating in enlightenment. Buddhist practice serves as the grounds of this path and as a vessel to find answers within ourselves instead of postulating that such knowledge is objective, universal, and can be found in the form of a holy text or by the means of other conventional "religious" methodology.

Great points CI. I cosign on the value of meditation.

In this Jesus and Buddha understood and taught the same thing, where as Buddhism, and Christianity are perverted, dead, and corrupt systems that can eventually block us from 'truth'

Since buddhism is the closest many can get to this 'truth' we can say it is a preperation of the mind for the REAL truth, that is formless, shapeless, dogmaless, timeless etc.

Also buddha studied the vedas, and they are not religious in nature in the way we think of religion

I think this is an important point to remember. That even though buddhism lays out certain tenets it is because that is the only way our untrained minds can currently understand and they are not meant to be be inherently valuable. In the end we have to realize that all our conceptualizations, even including "buddhism" and all that entails, are meaningless. This is the "truth" that I think newguy is addressing and it transcends all else including the path we took to get there. But it is not a destination either. Verbal language kind of fails here. As perhaps it should.

From my own personal experience with meditation, one very big obstacle I've had to meet is making peace with my own efforts to meditate. As in, I've had the most "success" meditating when I am able to let go of "trying to meditate." That doesn't mean I get up and walk away, it just means I don't get swept away in those thoughts and the meanings I have verbally and logically derived from them. Nor does it mean I am no longer trying to meditate.

I assume buddhism works like this too. It is something that eventually must be let go of in order to become whole or to serve it's "purpose."

Yes its all agreeable.

We might also get stuck on the idea of letting go of letting go.

When we say 'meditation' and trace the root and origin of the word and its meaning we might find something different that the concepts we are used to. We might see that meditation is when the mind no longer acts upon itself or validates itself. In this we can 'meditate' at any moment in any such posture. In this meditation can be all day long, or eternal and therefore transcending time.

Lots of new-age hippy nonsense in this thread.

i just dont see how you can mediate. I mean sitting cross legged and thinking about **** and going ohmmmmmm puts you at peace? I don't have the mind for that, id start thinking about poker, degenerate things, weed, friends, wtf im doing with my life etc etc etc. After 30seconds of trying, i feel like a ******ed.

Idk how you can mediate for like 15minutes straight and somehow "be at peace" while doing so, wtf do you think about?

I have a lot of problems in my life right now, I wish i had the brainpower to mediate and have it actually work for me.

Well, a buddhist would say you are suffering from your attachment to things -- weed, friends, wtf doing with life, poker, -- so meditation is an opportunity to push all that **** away and, yes, be at peace.

Meditation is like letting all the silt fall to the bottom of a lake, when you are still you are able to see more clearly.

So you sit, focus on your breathing, and more than anything when any of the bull**** from your life pops into your head you really focus on it, focus on how its making you feel, and how this random chaos in your life, that is really only in your head, is affecting you (for the worse, probably, or you wouldn't be meditating).

When you do that for a while, the next time you have some stupid urge like "**** that stupid bitch why did she break up with me??!" or, "man I really want a new car my life would be so much better blah blah blah...", you are able to see what kind of bull**** it all is and your life will be better.

Also, practicing focusing on things has practical applications in your life which will improve things as well.

Yes the western mind rejects these things without understanding them, it attempts to dissect the things that cannot be dissected and when it fails it runs from them.

This is of course the ego protecting itself.

When the mind plays with buddism or a zen koan etc, its attitude or awareness begins to soften and change, in that we can understand the use for Buddhism and its non use when its done its job of unconditioning us is finished.

Then we might see how religion (all religions) is simply just the egos answer to what should be asked or security blanket for something that isn't needed and is itself (the ego) the root of our insecurity.

thanks a lot!

Great post

u describe the western perception of meditation and i don't think it is correct.

The question you ask are valid but cannot be answered by science because science is too limited. The only way to really understand these things is to do it yourself in order to observe your own process of understanding

And meditation won't fix or solve your problems, but it might help you realize the meaninglessness of them.

In other words, you should let meditation be the one time of the day where you let your mind do what it wants, whether think thoughts or not, bad thoughts or good, there are no rules so if you want to make rules than thats ok too, its all fine. In this your mind gets a rest from all the conditioning and control it receives all day long.

Later you might learn to extend this state beyond your daily 15 min meditation

Also when talking about hippy nonsense, we should understand that it wasn't science that showed the world is round any more than it is religion that partially ended it hundreds of years of suppression of true knowledge. And we should be reminded this is obvious when we follow the roots of Buddhism to the vedas that clearly talk about the shape of they earth and its path in the stars. In this science seems more like religious conditioning and the most ancient writings seem to directly deal with tangible truths and evidence.

Yes, this is normal, every meditator has to go through this phase. A novice usually has a "monkey-mind", i.e. he is constantly thinking, even if the thinking is completely unnecessary. It is recommended that he first learns concentration.

He can start out with counting the breath from 1 to 10 and if he gets lost in thought then he resets the count. Once he gets good at this he then can drop the counting and just follow the breath. There are many variations of this concentration-practise. The point is that one picks a specific object and focuses the mind on it, that thoughts lose their dominance and that one is content with doing something without expectations.

Then when concentration is strong one can drop the object and just practise being aware. In zen it's called shikantaza/zazen (just sitting). It's sort of like you're in the jungle at night and there are all kinds of dangerous animals hiding around you... then you stop and drop everything that's on your mind, you become very silent, the breath becomes flat so that one can't hear it, the body becomes alert and all sluggishness drops. You get a sort of global awareness where you hear/see/feel/smell everything at the same time and without attachment to a particular content... thoughts may arise but you're not getting lost in them because there is no interest whatsoever in getting lost in thoughts... sensations just come and go and one is aware of every detail but without attachment.

I have noticed that Buddhists are extremely competitive about being Buddhists.

I don't know if this is true for people who were raised as Buddhists.

What do you mean by this? How are they competitive?

As I see it, meditation is above all "quiet time." I think a lot of people see it as some sort of mystical voodoo. You don't have to chant, you don't have to sit cross legged. For me it's about taking a break from mental activity. In order to do this you must first cultivate an awareness of that mental activity so you can see it. You currently lack this which is why you are having trouble.

If you sit and all you think about is weed, poker, and friends, just notice that. Then gently return to focus on your breathing. When it happens again, notice that and return. If you start to feel like a ******, notice that and return. If you start to get angry or frustrated because you are struggling to focus on your breath, or you aren't becoming at "peace," notice that and return. That's all it is. Just seeing what is happening without being an active participant. I sort of think of it as the difference between being in the middle of the street directing mental "traffic" ("OK, this thought goes here, then this one follows it") versus pulling up a chair and watching it pass. Personally, I got "results" much faster than I expected.

I'll add the disclaimer that I'm no expert on any of this but I hope I can be helpful.

I'm not sure what you're referring to?

this kind of makes sense to me. i think some people may become attached to spirituality as a sort of identity which is why it may become threatening if somebody else is "more buddhist." pretty ironic though.

Well, I also think this is a general trait. We want to prove our mettle for our new group and we want to belong to the group.

It is an interesting concept. Especially if we consider extremist groups.