Author Topic: Amida is a real Buddha?  (Read 4406 times)

Offline LetGo

  • Member
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2017, 07:18:37 pm »
You are still not letting go.
Letting go? Of what? Buddha Dharma? Not going to happen

Such anger, ignorance and greed in your rhetoric. Let me help you through this. I will address each of the seven points you made.
You need to quit projecting your own limitations upon me. Your personal attacks have already been reported to the moderators.

1. Yes, Vishnu has a lot to do with The Pure Land concepts of Amitabha. In fact, most statues of Avolkiteshvara are Vishnu statues with different hand ornaments. The lotus pond is the causal sea. The idea of a Pure Land was borrowed from the Hindu concept of Loka. Amitabha wears a swastika on his chest from both the Jain and Hindu traditions and the list goes on and on.
Blatant fabrication. Amitabha has nothing to do with Loka, nothing to do with Vishnu. These are your own ideas, you have absolutely no evidence for this statement. Avalokitesvara is said in a sutra to appear as Vishnu for those who refuse the BuddhaDharma and choose to only be led by heterodox deities, but he is not Vishnu, nor does Pure Land doctrine depend on Vishnu.

As far as Veganism and Pure Land Sutras are concerned, I suggest you re-read the Shurangama Sutra and visit a Chinese Pure Land temple for instruction on this Sutra and a vegan lifestyle change. I also suggest you re-read both my comment and my footnote.
The Shurangama sutra is not a primary sutra for Pure Land. There are also questions of whether or not it is a Chinese fabrication. Again, you would do well to do more research into actual Pure Land doctrine.

2. Buddha teaches us to rise above right and wrong.
The Buddha is very explicit when it comes to misrepresenting his teachings.

3. Read the footnote I have added. Your foolishness dispermits you to see anything but nonsense. I am trying to help you make sense of this to break your bonds of ignorance.
Your footnote looks like nothing but perennialist/traditionalist syncretic assertions based on absolutely no evidence.

4. I espoused right view and explained how it is such. Your anger, Ignorance and greed to own the Buddha Dharma on your terms is not right view!
No, you assert stuff that is contrary to the sutras and is heterodox doctrine as Buddha Dharma. I've said nothing that departs from Pure Land sutras. Again, disparaging the Buddha Dharma (by misrepresentation) is serious business, explicitly explained in the Sutras and you're doing it big time in this thread.

5. Your slam towards lineage does not involve anything worth addressing. Instead of insulting my lineage, you now insult all lineages.
"Secret pronunciation" sounds like a con. It's in no way consistent with Pure Land teachings, which are a sutra teaching. Your statements are not consistent with the sutras.

6. I did not present Puranic Hinduism as Buddhism. You have a tainted view. Try re-reading what I have written.
That's precisely what you've done with your perennialist/traditionalist view that tries to syncretize Puranic Hinduism with Pure Land teachings. It's counterfeit Buddha Dharma. I've exposed it as such. I am not tainted, I'm presenting authentic Buddha Dharma, something that you would do well to learn about.

7. So, why are you misrepresenting the Buddha Dharma through such racist, angry eyes?
I'm pointing out a misrepresentation as misrepresentation. I've said nothing of race. You're projecting your own anger onto me. Both are a form of ad hominem. Were this a formal debate, you just lost.

For the sake of trying to save this thread with some accurate information, instead of made-up perennialism:
Amitabha (Shorter Sukhavativyuha) Sutra
Amitayus (Larger Sukhavativyuha) Sutra
Amitayurdhyana (Visualization) Sutra
Vasubandhu's commentary on the Amitayus Sutra

Offline francis

  • Member
  • Posts: 1454
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #16 on: April 18, 2017, 02:31:02 am »
Hi there Ficus religiosa,

I don’t see how anyone is misinterpreting your views to win an argument.  All I see is someone defending their understanding of Pure Land against blatant fabrications and heterodox views.




« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 02:40:01 am by francis, Reason: Went a bit over the top »
"Enlightenment, for a wave in the ocean, is the moment the wave realises it is water." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Offline Solodris

  • Member
  • Posts: 366
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #17 on: April 18, 2017, 06:19:06 am »
Ficus Religiosa, yes, I suppose we're all humbled to speechlessness with your gracious ability to completely derail a thread with self-validating sectarianism.

Do you have any more teachings on Right View and Right Speech to expound?

Offline Solodris

  • Member
  • Posts: 366
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #18 on: April 18, 2017, 12:58:20 pm »
You didn't even touch the topic of Right View and Right Speech in the foundational sense of The Eightfold Path. If the majority in here are in disagreement with you; how far, in a "verb"-sense as you describe it, along a practical Path towards genuine Dharma-practice harmonizing with the environment, would you say you are?

Offline zafrogzen

  • Member
  • Posts: 314
  • I've been practicing and studying meditation since
    • View Profile
    • zafrogzen
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2017, 01:04:09 pm »
Ficus,

I agree with your screed against the mistreatment of animals. Causing suffering should always be avoided. But get real. You used the word "vegan “ in almost every sentence. It’s apparently of paramount importance to you. However, you must know the historical Buddha was not a vegan and is reported to have died from ingesting spoiled pork at a ripe old age.

We are all impermanent and destined for dissolution, coming and going. Every one of us, animal, vegetable or mineral, is part of the larger web of life. I think many Buddhists are meat eaters because they see clearly into the illusory nature of birth and death.
My first formal meditation training was with Shunryu Suzuki in the 60's and later with Kobun, Robert Aitken and many other teachers (mainly zen). However, I've spent the most time practicing on my own, which is all I do now. I'm living in a rather isolated area so I miss connecting with other practitioners. Despite my interest in zen I've made an effort to remain secular. You can visit my website at http://www.frogzen.com

Offline francis

  • Member
  • Posts: 1454
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #20 on: April 18, 2017, 06:58:15 pm »
Solodris-

The Eightfold path concepts of Right View and Right Speech were discussed more than in terms of verb tense. Of course, more can be said. Perhaps I will write more after I address Zafrogzen.

Zafrogzen-

The Buddha did not die as you suggest. The Chinese Mahayanists explain well how he died from poisonous mushrooms when the Sutras are correctly translated. The Hindu Buddhists who were there say that the Sutras are wrong and that he died from contaminated water. The Hindu Buddhists offer direct evidence from eye witnesses so their account is probably most accurate.

The Buddha was vegan.

The normal diet for human's to obtain best health is a vegan diet as supported by the AMA.

The best diet for the ecology is a vegan diet.

It is not just that it is important to me, an idea you have espoused which tries to locate a self nature within this one which I assure you does not exist, but it is important for the animals, for society, for the ecology, for the mass of suffering as you have well noticed and as well for Karma.

I did not overstate the word vegan in my writing, if anything it was understated. Only meat eaters find it offensive.

I notice from your dis-compassionate view of life and death that you somehow find justification in eating the tortured and executed remains of animal corpses, justifying it with libertine flair and a mention of some spider web of darkness you suggest is life.

Buddhism is not about doing what is easy. The first precept is a vow to be vegan for life. One may not eat any flesh if one is to be a proper precept holder. That first precept states:


NO KILLING!

this includes not involving one's self in any activity that cuts short any life.

Hi Ficus religiosa,

No one knows for sure what killed the Buddha, some say pork others mushrooms. I’ve never heard the contaminated water story before.

The Buddha was not vegan because he and his followers accepted what was put into their bowls, which sometimes included meat.

That first precept states, ‘I undertake the rule of training which consists in abstention from killing living beings’. It doesn’t say I vow to be vegan for life. It doesn’t say I will not eat any flesh if one is to be a proper precept holder.  It does mean that as long as the animals are not killed by or for you, then it is acceptable to eat meat. Hence, the Buddha’s acceptance of meat when it was put into his bowl during rounds.

Many Buddhist would agree with you on non-violence against animals, however if you want to argue for vegan/vegetarianism I suggest you join one of the many, many vegetarian threads on this site, instead of derailing this one.

By the way, there are Hindus and there are Buddhists, but there are no Hindu Buddhists as their beliefs are incompatible. For example, Hindus practice killing, animals for sacrifice, which as you have pointed out many times killing goes against the first precept. 
"Enlightenment, for a wave in the ocean, is the moment the wave realises it is water." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Offline francis

  • Member
  • Posts: 1454
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2017, 08:07:04 pm »
Yet Ficus religiosa, history tells us vegetarianism in India begins after the introduction of Buddhism and Jainism in the sixth century BCE. So, at the time of the Buddha most of the population would have been meat eaters as animals were major a source of food at the time.

I heard in the sutras that ‘Sujata had a thousand cows, and she fed them with sweet creepers called valmee so that the cow’s milk was sweet. She milked these thousand cows and fed that milk to five hundred cows, and then fed their milk to two hundred and fifty cows and so on until she fed only eight cows. She did this to get the sweetest and most nourishing milk, to make delicious milk-rice, and this is what she offered to the Buddha’.

And, you haven’t explained the oxymoron Hindu Buddhist. That is, how can Hindus who practice killing animals for sacrifice, breaking the first precept, be considered Buddhists? Perhaps you mean Indian Buddhists. 

Ok, I have a couple of more questions. Who are you, to suggest you cannot spend all evening correcting such outlandishness? And who is your teacher?
"Enlightenment, for a wave in the ocean, is the moment the wave realises it is water." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Offline francis

  • Member
  • Posts: 1454
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #22 on: April 18, 2017, 09:52:25 pm »
Buddha is viewed as an Avatar of Vishnu, the tenth Avatar.


So Ficus religiosa, you are not really a Buddhist. 

Suggest you join a Sanatana Dharma forum if you want to preach Hinduism (modern context), because there are important differences between Buddhism and Hinduism, like you haven't really explained those animal sacrifices yet.

However, if you want to learn about Buddhism, Jhana and Vipassana meditation stick around.

:namaste:



« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 11:12:59 pm by francis »
"Enlightenment, for a wave in the ocean, is the moment the wave realises it is water." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Offline francis

  • Member
  • Posts: 1454
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #23 on: April 18, 2017, 10:41:17 pm »
So Francis,

You do not determine who is nor who is not Buddhist. You are very comedic though.

By the way, why don't you go back to the Theravada section and waste your time there, this is for PureLand people. It is doubtful you have anything to teach, but the egoism of your last statement certainly shows what you contemplate. In fact, based on your last statement, you are not really even a fellow student.

Nice try.

PS. who is preaching? Not to discredit you, but I have politely answered your questions and yet you have remained foolish.

 :teehee:

Hi Ficus religiosa,

Buddhists follow the teachings of the Buddha, it's pretty simple. 

I'm a secular Buddhist, who is happy to learn about all traditions. Though, I draw the distinction between Buddhism and Hinduism, and it is true I'm not a student of Hinduism. 

As for wasting time with Pure Land people, all you have done is insult other members when they tried to defending their understanding of Pure Land against you blatant fabrications and heterodox views, totally derailing the thread. You might want to consider apologising for that.

[EDIT] Sorry, I missed you post on animal sacrifices, while I was posting. All you are doing by following Kali Yuga is confirming you follow Hinduism and not Buddhism. 
« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 11:22:28 pm by francis, Reason: Missed post, while posting. »
"Enlightenment, for a wave in the ocean, is the moment the wave realises it is water." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Offline francis

  • Member
  • Posts: 1454
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #24 on: April 19, 2017, 02:35:44 am »
Hi Ficus religiosa,

There are major difference between Buddhism and Hinduism.  So yes, I do get a bit fed up when people insist the Buddha is just an avatar of Vishnu.

You might find more traction for your views at the Hindu Dharma Forums.

In the meantime, people are still waiting for your apology for derailing this topic with your blatant fabrications and heterodox views.

Good night.
"Enlightenment, for a wave in the ocean, is the moment the wave realises it is water." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Offline IdleChater

  • Member
  • Posts: 752
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #25 on: April 19, 2017, 07:44:02 am »
Hi Ficus religiosa,

There are major difference between Buddhism and Hinduism.  So yes, I do get a bit fed up when people insist the Buddha is just an avatar of Vishnu.

You should not take the attitude of being fed up.  There are a lot of Hindus who see Shakyamuni Buddha as an Avatar of Vishnu, and they are entitled to their belief.

Quote
You might find more traction for your views at the Hindu Dharma Forums.

In the meantime, people are still waiting for your apology for derailing this topic with your blatant fabrications and heterodox views.

Fig's view may be hetrodox, but the same could be said for Secular Buddhist views as well.  The moral of the story, being, becarefull what names you assign to others.

As far as Fig's views go, I am not an apologist, in much the same way I offer no apology for Secular Buddhism.  I can't. I disagree.

Fig isn't so much heterodox as he is trying to add a thing of two (or three?) and then attempts to foist this upon us as some kind of twisted orthodoxy

And where did he get that mantra?  I did 108 recitations and became constipated.  Not really.  I haven't even done a single recitation in the context of practice.  Sorry.  But I do wonder if if he will offer us a Sandhana to practice along with the mantra.  After all, what is a mantra without it's accompanying Sadhana?  The Sadhana of Vegan Buddha.  Perhaps Fig is a terton?  :om: :jinsyx: :lmfao:

« Last Edit: April 19, 2017, 08:07:41 am by IdleChater »

Offline zafrogzen

  • Member
  • Posts: 314
  • I've been practicing and studying meditation since
    • View Profile
    • zafrogzen
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #26 on: April 19, 2017, 11:52:33 am »
Hey, Holy Fig (tree),

I'm impressed with how many balls you can keep in the air.

You wrote regarding my earlier comment
Quote
I notice from your dis-compassionate view of life and death that you somehow find justification in eating the tortured and executed remains of animal corpses, justifying it with libertine flair and a mention of some spider web of darkness you suggest is life.

The "web of darkness" is this life as it's being lived by beings who have evolved through killing and eating one another. Your view is very idealistic and apart from the reality of life. Even though I might not be as holy as you, you're wrong when you say I'm not compassionate. I'm also grateful for this life of both darkness and light.

My first formal meditation training was with Shunryu Suzuki in the 60's and later with Kobun, Robert Aitken and many other teachers (mainly zen). However, I've spent the most time practicing on my own, which is all I do now. I'm living in a rather isolated area so I miss connecting with other practitioners. Despite my interest in zen I've made an effort to remain secular. You can visit my website at http://www.frogzen.com

Offline IdleChater

  • Member
  • Posts: 752
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #27 on: April 19, 2017, 12:57:16 pm »
Idle Chater

I really am thankful for your comment. I felt all alone, locked in interrogation by Francis and his heterodoxic tribunal.

Your gratitude may be misplaced.  I don't support what you're saying.

Quote
I agree there should be a practice associated with this Mantra, and there is. There is an entire Tantra, a new Yana of Buddhism associated with it and a plethora of other Mantras and practices, indeed a even a truer Buddhist cosmology for this new Yana.

I find this laughable at best.  A new Yana? 



Quote
It is very difficult to offer these wondrous things in a chat room. A simple Mantra to assist the Pure Land group was offered to clarify their path while they suffered through their inadequate yanas based upon racial division, regionalism, language barriers and incorrect view.

Prior to my submissions in this chat room, no one had conveyed the link between veganism and Buddhism, Hinduism and Buddhism, Jain Dharma and Buddhism, correct historic analysis of Buddhism and the correct use of Sanskrit for Buddhism. I did not plan to take on such a mission, it just sort of fell upon me and now I am in the middle of it.

Maybe you should abandon this direction and seek a qualified teacher to work with you.

Quote
Your message was a glimmer of hope, a ray of light that certainly has reached my heart. Thank you.

You're welcome, but I did not intend for you to take any hope from it.  I don't think your a Terton.  I don't put any importance on what you're saying.  In fact it's painfully common on the 'Net for people with crackpot ideas about Buddhism to try to establish themselves via forums like this.

This whole Vegan Buddha thing is heterodox nonsense.

Offline IdleChater

  • Member
  • Posts: 752
    • View Profile
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #28 on: April 19, 2017, 07:20:27 pm »
Idle Chatter


Yes, a new Yana.

Something that may involve many lives for you to grasp.

No worries.  I'm  in it for the long haul.

Offline zafrogzen

  • Member
  • Posts: 314
  • I've been practicing and studying meditation since
    • View Profile
    • zafrogzen
Re: Amida is a real Buddha?
« Reply #29 on: April 19, 2017, 07:48:56 pm »
Ficus,

Actually I was feeling some compassion for you, since you seem sort of lonely up there.

The image of the Net of Indra appears often in Hua-yen Buddhism. It apparently refers to co-dependent origination, where the whole is each part, each part is the whole and even the smallest particle contains the whole universe. I've never heard it mentioned in connection with being vegan.

I agree that vegan is a very righteous lifestyle. When I'm cooking for myself I prefer beans and rice with veggies, over meat. But I don't think it's nearly as important as you would have it. Everything is being born and dying moment by moment. If everyone went vegan it wouldn't change that fact of life -- although the planet and most people might be somewhat healthier. But I don't agree that it has much to do with whether one experiences meditative insight or not.

For someone who espouses the "unobtainable" you certainly appear to be attached to various external attributes and methods, as well a personal opinions regarding Buddhism.
My first formal meditation training was with Shunryu Suzuki in the 60's and later with Kobun, Robert Aitken and many other teachers (mainly zen). However, I've spent the most time practicing on my own, which is all I do now. I'm living in a rather isolated area so I miss connecting with other practitioners. Despite my interest in zen I've made an effort to remain secular. You can visit my website at http://www.frogzen.com

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal