Dalai Lama: Conflicting Philosophies of World Religions

reply to post by ManjushriPrajna


Do you refer to everyone as "Their Holiness" or just the Dalai Lama? He may be spiritually advanced but he is no more holy than you are.

The Buddha is not an idol. He's a teacher, the self awakened one. Most Buddhists are not theistic Buddhists and don't worship Buddha. In Mahayana especially, we seek to become Yamantaka, depicted as dancing on the bodies of the gods and even the Buddha himself. We learn, revere him as a teacher, but are careful not to descend into deity worship.

And I refer to him as His Holiness because that's his title. We call Barack Obama president and Benedictus pope, so we call the Daila Lama His Holiness.

reply to post by ManjushriPrajna

Barack Obama is the President, Joseph Ratzinger is Pope Benedict, and Tenzin Gyatso is the Dalai Lama. Those are their names and titles.

His Holiness is an honorific used in Tibetan Buddhism for the Dalai Lama. Much like Catholic Bishops are referred to as "Your Excellency."

Originally posted by ManjushriPrajna
The Buddha is not an idol. He's a teacher, the self awakened one. Most Buddhists are not theistic Buddhists and don't worship Buddha. In Mahayana especially, we seek to become Yamantaka, depicted as dancing on the bodies of the gods and even the Buddha himself. We learn, revere him as a teacher, but are careful not to descend into deity worship.

And I refer to him as His Holiness because that's his title. We call Barack Obama president and Benedictus pope, so we call the Daila Lama His Holiness.

This is perfect example of what i meant by indirect idolizing.

Best thing to do is just stick your head in the sand and hope it goes away . But anybody can see how much idolization goes on with buddha , his statue and the dalai .

i know deny deny deny and it might feel like truth , but reality doesn't work that way

indirectly idolization at its finest.

I'm guessing when you see art depicting gods having sex in Hindu temples, you must automatically assume they're all a bunch of perverts?

Originally posted by ManjushriPrajna
I'm guessing when you see art depicting gods having sex in Hindu temples, you must automatically assume they're all a bunch of perverts?

"gods" is your first mistake . I believe there is a source of the universe. Some call it big bang , some call it membrane universes , some call it jesus , some god .

I call it the source , and i believe there is one . not multiple "gods"

we can conclude the images having sex in hindu temples are not gods , but figments of man's imagination .

I don't believe they are perverts. I believe i walked into a temple of kamasutra and i'm ready to get my freak on with my wife in that temple, to celebrate ! Nothing perverted there . But idolozing those gods and brining in statues to your home , is clearly idolization directly and indirectly

reply to post by ManjushriPrajna


This is why despite hating all religions, I've been trying to take the best parts about all religions to create my own philosophy to live by.

Less brainwashing by masses who are already indoctrinated into hating by default then.

reply to post by seedofchucky


Then I'm afraid you've missed the point entirely of why there are images of gods in their temples, engaged in sex or any other activity. Gods, like the bodhisattva, are not literal cosmic egos floating around doing things. They are the embodiment of characteristics we seek for ourselves (in the case of bodhisattva) or the functions of the universe. Gods engaging in sex is the symbolic representation of the dance of the universe.

Ask somebody who practices Thelema about the prayers, rituals, and sacrifices made to, say, Greek gods, and why they do them.

We don't worship. All outward actions express an effort to change something inside ourselves. Manjushri, for instance, is the bodhisattva of supreme wisdom. We want to cultivate becoming wise, therefore, we meditate upon the image of Manjushri, or Avalokiteshvara, who is the bodhisattva of compassion.

Being a western minded individual, I don't blame you for misunderstanding what this means. It's sort of an alien idea in the west, a very abstract one that would be hard to get one's head around. It would be as if a Christian said, "I don't worship Jesus, but I pray and give offerings to Jesus so that I may cultivate the kind of potential Jesus had within him."

Please don't confuse all the shiny bobbles and big statues of Buddha in temples as being god or idol worship. Then you won't understanding WHY we do what you see us doing.

reply to post by ManjushriPrajna

Gods, like the bodhisattva, are not literal cosmic egos floating around doing things. They are the embodiment of characteristics we seek for ourselves

Right but still they take statues of bodhisatta and put them in various places to worship right. I see something in my self but have a false impression of its inspiration right?NOPE>

(in the case of bodhisattva) or the functions of the universe. Gods engaging in sex is the symbolic representation of the dance of the universe.

again , going to the word god . Why not , figment of my imagination wrapped around a philosophical belief ? Everything is symbolic when you are accused of being idolizer and go into defence mode

Ask somebody who practices Thelema about the prayers, rituals, and sacrifices made to, say, Greek gods, and why they do them.

They would give me same sugar coated answers just like you , ignorance is bliss sometimes .

We don't worship. All outward actions express an effort to change something inside ourselves.

you indirectly worship and idolize. You can't see it because of how you rationlized it to your self.

Same goes with christians and jesus . They don't see how they idolize jesus , Same with muslims and mohammad , they say we don't idolize him .

But actions speak louder then words

christians , muslims , hindu's , buddists etc..

Being a western minded individual, I don't blame you for misunderstanding what this means.

and being in denial i don't blame you for not understanding what you indirectly worship and idolize -)

It's sort of an alien idea in the west, a very abstract one that would be hard to get one's head around

not really i could teach your kids in 20 min.

Please don't confuse all the shiny bobbles and big statues of Buddha in temples as being god or idol worship. Then you won't understanding WHY we do what you see us doing.

clearly your the confused one by justifing idol worship indirectly .

if its not god , nor is it used for idolization , why not get rid of it ? So there is no confusion ? Less destraction . followed by a more clear mind to do meditation

without the pictures and visions of those statues in your head , that you see on a daily basis...

again direct and indirect idol worship at its finest. your denial doesn't help champ

Basicly some people will worship people or idols, but not everybody of any religion will worship people or idols.

reply to post by seedofchucky


Oh. I get it. You're trying to troll.

I suggest reading some Hindu literature, particularly about Hindu cosmology. Other than that, I obviously can't change your opinion that "statues must mean idols." So I'm not going to bother. Read, or don't. It's your choice to become educated about the practices of non-Abrahamic religions.

Have a blessed day.

reply to post by seedofchucky


Buddha said: "I consider the positions of kings and rulers as that of dust motes. I observe treasures of gold and gems as so many bricks and pebbles. I look upon the finest silken robes as tattered rags. I see myriad worlds of the universe as small seeds of fruit, and the greatest lake in India as a drop of oil on my foot. I perceive the teachings of the world to be the illusion of magicians. I discern the highest conception of emancipation as a golden brocade in a dream, and view the holy path of the illuminated ones as flowers appearing in one's eyes. I see meditation as a pillar of a mountain, Nirvana as a nightmare of daytime. I look upon the judgment of right and wrong as the serpentine dance of a dragon, and the rise and fall of beliefs as but traces left by the four seasons."

I'm not trying to pick a fight or be a smarty pants at all here, I'm just trying to point out that perhaps where you see a conflicting opinion here there is in fact a unity underlying what you are all saying.

'People dedicate their lives to reach enlightenment only to fail , then on their dying beds , they say "well maybe i didn't try hard enough " ' It's just so damn ironic. I simply cannot describe it, but I'll try and look like a idiot. Say you are completely non-religious, and non-spiritual. On your death bed you simply die, and then there is 'nothing'. In doing so, you've pretty much reached the state you say is impossible to achieve in life, and maybe it is, but will you not achieve it through dieing? This is going to sound stupider and stupider now. Is this state of nothingness not the 'emptiness' and such that is the cosmic source? is this not the state the buddha claimed was possible to achieve during life? Whether it is possible or not to achieve in life, whether it is a worthless pursuit because we all ultimately die and return to nothing, at the very least, the mind can be stilled to some degree, and a great deal of insight can be gained, including the acceptance of death itself... my idiotic explanation is over

It saddens me to see constant bickering between religions, or non-religious people attacking religion.

The thread was opened by these words, and yet several have come with insult, assault, sarcasm, and attack.

________________________________



reply to post by clemo

Originally posted by clemo
The Dalai Lama sounds like the name of a newspaper to me and he's about as significant in my life as said paper. Religion is how YOU want to live life

"Religion" is actually the antipode to living life how YOU want. Religion stems from the Latin 'religare,' which means to tie or tie down, to bind, or to fasten. True freedom is the understanding of one's Self.


_______________________________




reply to post by theubermensch

Originally posted by theubermensch
I wish the Dalai Lama would shut the hell up.

If you understand the power and responsibility of your own Free Will, you would have made the Dalai Lama shut up in your relative-subjective reality by never clicking on this thread. By clicking this thread, you gave the Dalai Lama your awareness. Do you know this, or do you always forfeit your Free Will, are you always unmindful of your awareness?

reply to post by ManjushriPrajna

Oh. I get it. You're trying to troll.

Clearly you don't get it , accusing me of trolling is just the easy way out . Come on don't tell me your ready to throw in the towel just yet...

I suggest reading some Hindu literature

"Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures."
[Bhagavad Gita 7:20]


"Ekam evadvitiyam"
"He is One only without a second."
[Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1]

"Na casya kascij janita na cadhipah."
"Of Him there are neither parents nor lord."
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 6:9]

"Na tasya pratima asti"
"There is no likeness of Him."
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:19]3

"Na samdrse tisthati rupam asya, na caksusa pasyati kas canainam."

"His form is not to be seen; no one sees Him with the eye."
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:20]4


"na tasya pratima asti
"There is no image of Him."
[Yajurveda 32:3]

"shudhama poapvidham"
"He is bodyless and pure."
[Yajurveda 40:8]6

It's your choice to become educated about the practices of non-Abrahamic religions.

actually abrahamic and non abrahamic religions i critize the same way .

Your in denial just like them about idol worship . You have dark clouds in your mind , that doesn't let you see clear .

Practice what you preach .



This guy is not as lost as you .

reply to post by seedofchucky


reply to post by crankyoldman


What are you even talking about?

The opening post is talking about celebrating the diversity of religious and philosophical thought through understanding and acceptance.

The video in the opening post is the Dalai Lama talking about his experiences of Christian and Catholic pilgrimage places as he calls for mutual respect between the different religions. He described Jesus as a man that has inspired hope throughout centuries to hundreds of thousands of people. He described Mary as a woman who favors forgiveness and compassion.

In the opening post or the op video I did not see any call to worship or deify Buddha nor the Dalai Lama.


Got a complaint, disagreement, or conspiracy about Buddha, Buddhism, or the Dalai Lama? Then go make your own thread about it. The OP and the OP video are ONLY discussing acceptance of our religious and philosophical differences. This is such a wonderful movement that we all are working towards. Different walks of life trying to build peace with our fellow man NO MATTER HOW DIFFERENT WE ALL ARE.


Thread de-railing much? Stay on topic or go make your own thread.

reply to post by Sahabi


the dalai lama is part of the problem . You would know that if you bothered to read the posts leading up to this page .

Try that before you go rant mode.

Dalai lama own philosophies are conflicting , then it turned into why buddism is on the same boat. Don't tell me where to complain to , i'm well aware.

I would advice you to hit the alert button if really want some attention

reply to post by seedofchucky


It is GREAT to debate opposing sides in an attempt to discover truth. But there is a proper time and a proper place for everything. As mindfully conscious beings, we do not need to just lift a leg or pop a squat at nature's first whim.

Your attacks against Buddha, Buddhism, and the Dalai Lama may or may not be sufficiently factual, but this is the wrong time to make a poopy in front of everyone. The OP and OP video are strictly talking about acceptance of our religious and philosophical diversity. Please stop peeing on the lawn.

reply to post by Sahabi

Your attacks against Buddha, Buddhism, and the Dalai Lama may or may not be sufficiently factual,

Actually it was also about christians , muslims , hindus , jews etc.

The reason we have conflicting philosophies is because they all went off track , with idolization . Including buddism . That was the point of the posts made .

The reason we have conflicting ideologies is because of religious leaders like the dalia lama , then have the audacity who like to sugar coat there beliefs as being high and mighty , by talking about tolerance for others.

Its these religious leaders that keep straying there followers that we even have this problem. in the world today. The masses to lazy and ignorant to do their own homework , So people like dalai come along and toot there horn and sucker in more people.

shaame.

reply to post by Sahabi

Actually, if you think of it, his right to be angry, contrarion, and to "pee and poop" in a thread about religious diversity and tollerance, that freedom of expression, as the great gift of life and what some believe is it's foundation (freedom to express one's self in an exchange of mutual sharing), is in itself beautiful and magnificent, as ironic and paradoxical as that may seem at first glance or on initial inspection of the poopy.

So I, who am Christian say, let him speak and say what he wants, and if it's offensive, discard it, but sometimes you might unearth a diamond in the strangest of places.

The whole idea of master teachers, and of enlightened masters, could very well be an offence to the universal principal of Liberty, when you really think about it, and those who point to them might very well be setting up traps of a sort.

Maybe even Buddha, by being such a big nothing of himself, to himself, wasn't really king # after all, because what does it profit a man to gain the whole world (one with everything), but lose his own soul (character, charm, passion).

Indeed he has every right. I also have the right to ignore his negativity, and in this thread I will no longer try to discuss with him why my mind isn't so "clouded" as he makes it out to be.

Back to the topic at hand. I think we (the world) are making great steps towards an understanding that, despite these philosophies and philosophies within philosophies concerning religion, that those good people in all religions want the same thing: Happiness, happiness for all.