Buddhists and Intrigued Non-Buddhist Laymen, CONVERGE HERE

That's likely it, RTL. In terms of why words like sin appear in the translation. Since Buddhism lacks the concept as it understood by westerners. Namely divine sin.

The reverence aspects indeed show in other translations of the text and, I am assuming, the original text. Reverence of elders and the Buddha are very common in the Tipitaka in general. The Buddha in particular receives many glowing descriptions of everything about him including his appearance. While his words were recorded the texts were written by monks who really, really dug him.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

Huh, I guess I can get that. I still can't say I agree with it, seeing as being revered or looked upon with any more adoration than anyone else doesn't really seem like something any Buddha would want or care about, and the idea of rejecting such things is a reason why I got into Buddhism in the first place. Edit: Also, was respecting elders really a big thing? I recall quite a few passages about age not having any effect on how close one is to enlightenment.

edited 10th Jun '12 7:58:46 PM by randomtropeloser

It's mentioned places, yes. However many statements to the effect of "Do not trust whatever you hear solely on hearsay" are brought up as well. So while elders, teachers, texts and such are to be trusted they are to be analyzed, scrutinized, and put to the test. Even the words of those you have learned to be trustworthy and wise are to have their words analyzed. Which includes the Buddha.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

Yes, I can see why that would make sense. The teaching of not immediately accepting what you hear is something I like about Buddhism as well. If I recall correctly, I think it's been said that some of the Buddha's last words were to ask his disciples if there was anything left that they had doubts about. On a side note, it looks like the term "sangha" has been translated as "church." I suppose the two terms sort of co-relate, but they aren't exactly the same thing. The translation I'm reading also seems to use "friar" as opposed to "bhikku." I don't really know enough to say how accurate that is.

Just an update: I haven't done much more research into Buddhism sadly, though I have incorporated some basic teachings into my own philosophy and have been happier for it.

Edit: I do plan to learn more though :D

edited 10th Jun '12 10:51:03 PM by Vyctorian

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

I've read about buddhism a bit and I've found that most of it teaching seems to..hmmm. Right? I guess that's a good word.

But the whole thing seems confusing too. So many sects. Also I am bit afraid that'd get into some weird cult or something...

Buddhism isn't really the kind of religion that inspires many cults. I can think of, like, one maybe.

Yeah, it isn't that hard of a thing to avoid in Buddhism. Usually. If you don't care for the religious aspects, there's always atheistic Theravada.

Just afraid...Of I know not what.

There are indeed a great many sects so it can be a bit daunting. I would suggest research into Buddhism in general and visits to any temples near you, along with brief study into the basics of particular sects. Look around and think about all this and eventually settle on one that fits, if any. You could end up nondenominational.

RTL: The most common translation of bhikkhu is monk. Bhikkhuni getting nun. As is though there are correlations between bhikkhu and friar however. Namely that friars are cloistered members of mendicant orders. They don't own property for the most part, live off the charity of the laity, and spend their time serving the laity and the poor as well as teaching the Gospel. In general that is what a bhikkhu does.

As is I would personally avoid translations such as friar or mendicant as one, those words have a distinctly Christian feel to them and two, they are only rarely used to translate bhikkhu. Which is confusing as hell. We already have enough problems with translation and consistency. Why add another?

Church being the translated form of sangha is...odd. I typically don't translate the term though if I do I refer to it as a monastic order. I suppose it can be somewhat correct, but it just sounds off...

edited 11th Jun '12 9:53:39 AM by Aondeug

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

Um, how to learn to meditate? And how does one know if he's doing it right?

Friars are not cloistered, actually. I don't know much about Buddhist Bhikkhu; but if I had to guess, from what little I have heard here I'd say that they have some similarities with monks and with friars, but are not entirely analogous to either.

This said, I suppose that either term works if we have to pick a translation. Or alternatively, one can keep "Bhikkhu" as is and avoid possible confusion; but it's probably not a big deal in any case.

edited 18th Jun '12 1:37:39 PM by Carciofus

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.

The secret of learning how to meditate is to not worry about whether or not you are doing it right and to have faith in its ability to work as described. Some direction is helpful though especially since there are upteenmillion ways to meditate.

I myself suggest you start with breathing meditation. It's simple enough and can be done anywhere. All you need to do is...sit. And then breath. Don't force a certain rhythm. Just breath. Counts these breaths. Don't count higher than 10 because you may fuck up on numbers or get lost which will break the concentration.

Now.

Do that.

For about half an hour. Daily.

AND THERE IS MEDITATION. Once you get a hang on the practice you can start looking into other styles of meditation and deeper practice and theory behind it. For the beginner though I suggest breathing meditation.

I will also provide one nice tip. Your breaths will eventually reach a point where they are very slight and very slow. You may think that you aren't breathing in fact. And then panic. It's fine. You're still breathing. The breath is just very slight and you are actually thinking about the whole breathing thing now. The breath will come. Don't worry. Count it when it does.

This is a very big problem that many have with breathing meditation. And so...I have brought it up.

But yeah. Just keep it simple and do that for now. We can worry about theory and deeper practice later. For now just do that. Next step isn't a deeper practice, but instead the way to practically use what you gain from meditation anyway.

Now if you want a more formal explanation...Read this post I made.

Carc: Then multiple sources have lied to me. Damn you dictionaries and Wikipedia. I KNEW I COULD NEVER TRUST YOU.

edited 18th Jun '12 4:18:51 PM by Aondeug

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

It seems to me that Wikipedia says that friars are not cloistered:

Essentially, monks are not supposed to get out of the monastery much — nowadays, some orders do, so the difference is not as huge, but still, a monk is supposed to belong to a monastery in a very strong sense.

A friar, on the other hand, is rather more mobile — he cooperates more with laypeople, and generally tends to be more active than contemplative, and is sent by the order whenever he is needed.

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.

Ah I swore to god I read it there. Then where the fuck did I read it? Oh well.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

I finally finished the Dhammapada. Restraint is an even bigger deal than I thought. Also I think the guy who translated it may have been a friar, hence the Bible-like language.

I got a very nice compact copy of it from my temple the other day. It's a lovely thing and I quite like the translation. It's clear to read, consistent in the application of terminology, lacks bizarre translations like "church" and "friar", and overall sounds nice.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

That sounds pretty nice to have. Much better than reading the whole thing on your phone like I did, but one makes due with what they can.

If you can find a Buddhist temple. They may distribute books for free.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

Id love it if I could find one. Also, something I didn't mention earlier but am bringing up now because I thought it was pretty bizarre, the terms "friar" "monk" "mendicant" and, oddly enough, "bhikshu" all appear at some point in the translation. Do you think there may have been a logical reason for not just choosing one term and sticking with it?

Wanting to present multiple terms for it? Honestly that's a horrid way of dealing with it since it's hideously fucking confusing.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

I'd agree there, inconsistency makes for horrible convenience in anything.

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

Some person on fstdt claims that Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso supported slavery, is that true? I couldn't find anything about it on his Wikipedia page, and t doesn't seem like they'd skirt around something that important.

Hedonism and Buddhism are incompatible right? Well they both want to minimize suffering I think, but hedonists want to get as much pleasure out of life as they can also.

I vowed, and so did you: Beyond this wall- we would make it through.

I'm fairly certain the Buddhist stance would be that hedonism would only prolong one's suffering.