Morality of stockholding

Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Malcolm »

PuerAzaelis wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:55 pm
tingdzin wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:31 am Well, the term is so watered down now, it has become meaningless, just a way for people to feel trendy and "in" about what they're doing.
Kind of like "Buddhism" too. I don't see may "fake Guru Rinpoche quotes" on the internet.
Well, Dzogchen will never be trendy since it cannot be practiced without a guru, unlike mindfulness or what passes for it these days.
tingdzin
Posts: 1948
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:19 am

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by tingdzin »

Simon E. wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:41 pm Dzogchen is not a 'method' although there is a process.
Yeah, Dzogchen is not a method. And originally, it referred strictly to the end state, not to a method, a philosophy, or even
Malcolm wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:07 pm
Well, Dzogchen will never be trendy since it cannot be practiced without a guru, unlike mindfulness or what passes for it these days.
an approach.

Real Dzogchen can obviously never be put into practice by the masses, as eventually it requires hands-on face-to-face interaction with someone who is a genuine master. "Dzogchen", on the other hand, seems wildly popular now, with people claiming the word like Humpty-Dumpty did, to mean just what they intend it to mean, which usually implies some b.s. recycled hippie nonsense, or just mindfulness by another (more impressive-sounding) name.
User avatar
Josef
Posts: 2611
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Josef »

tingdzin wrote: Wed Nov 29, 2017 7:45 am
Simon E. wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:41 pm Dzogchen is not a 'method' although there is a process.
Yeah, Dzogchen is not a method. And originally, it referred strictly to the end state, not to a method, a philosophy, or even
Malcolm wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:07 pm
Well, Dzogchen will never be trendy since it cannot be practiced without a guru, unlike mindfulness or what passes for it these days.
an approach.

Real Dzogchen can obviously never be put into practice by the masses, as eventually it requires hands-on face-to-face interaction with someone who is a genuine master. "Dzogchen", on the other hand, seems wildly popular now, with people claiming the word like Humpty-Dumpty did, to mean just what they intend it to mean, which usually implies some b.s. recycled hippie nonsense, or just mindfulness by another (more impressive-sounding) name.
Dzogchen is popular?
Maybe in some other world system.
"All phenomena of samsara depend on the mind, so when the essence of mind is purified, samsara is purified. Since the phenomena of nirvana depend on the pristine consciousness of vidyā, because one remains in the immediacy of vidyā, buddhahood arises on its own. All critical points are summarized with those two." - Longchenpa
tingdzin
Posts: 1948
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:19 am

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by tingdzin »

Josef wrote: Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:20 am Dzogchen is popular?
Maybe in some other world system.
Interesting response; where do you live? I don't mean popular like Elvis or the Beatles were, I just mean among "spiritual" people. Among that subset of the population, it seems you can't swing a dead cat these days without hitting a "Dzogchen" practitioner.
User avatar
Harimoo
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 6:57 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Harimoo »

The largest Dzogchen community seems to be Norbu Namkhai Rinpoche's one.
How many are they in the world ?
10 000 ?
20 000 at best ?
Ricky
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:39 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Ricky »

There is nothing immoral about owning stocks as long as they have nothing to do with guns or alcohol.
User avatar
Josef
Posts: 2611
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Josef »

tingdzin wrote: Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:41 am
Josef wrote: Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:20 am Dzogchen is popular?
Maybe in some other world system.
Interesting response; where do you live? I don't mean popular like Elvis or the Beatles were, I just mean among "spiritual" people. Among that subset of the population, it seems you can't swing a dead cat these days without hitting a "Dzogchen" practitioner.
I live in the United States.
There aren’t enough dead cats to swing here to hit a Dzogchen practitioner.
"All phenomena of samsara depend on the mind, so when the essence of mind is purified, samsara is purified. Since the phenomena of nirvana depend on the pristine consciousness of vidyā, because one remains in the immediacy of vidyā, buddhahood arises on its own. All critical points are summarized with those two." - Longchenpa
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Malcolm »

Is it just me, or has this thread gone massively :offtopic:
Ricky
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:39 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Ricky »

Ricky wrote: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:48 pm There is nothing immoral about owning stocks as long as they have nothing to do with guns or alcohol.
Or meat for that matter.
User avatar
Inge
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:52 am

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Inge »

Inge wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:35 pm Do you think is it immoral to own shares in a company that makes profits from its employees?
I suppose it is no worse than having money, as money is like having shares in the totality of the economy.
User avatar
Josef
Posts: 2611
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Josef »

Ricky wrote: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:48 pm There is nothing immoral about owning stocks as long as they have nothing to do with guns or alcohol.
Owning shares of energy companies is wildly unethical and immoral in my opinion.
"All phenomena of samsara depend on the mind, so when the essence of mind is purified, samsara is purified. Since the phenomena of nirvana depend on the pristine consciousness of vidyā, because one remains in the immediacy of vidyā, buddhahood arises on its own. All critical points are summarized with those two." - Longchenpa
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Malcolm »

Josef wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:50 pm
Ricky wrote: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:48 pm There is nothing immoral about owning stocks as long as they have nothing to do with guns or alcohol.
Owning shares of energy companies is wildly unethical and immoral in my opinion.
You mean oil and gas companies. Solar and wind, not unethical at all.
Ricky
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:39 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Ricky »

Josef wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:50 pm
Ricky wrote: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:48 pm There is nothing immoral about owning stocks as long as they have nothing to do with guns or alcohol.
Owning shares of energy companies is wildly unethical and immoral in my opinion.
According to buddhist morality:

"A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

— AN 5.177

There's nothing about gas or oil.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Malcolm »

Ricky wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:19 pm
Josef wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:50 pm
Ricky wrote: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:48 pm There is nothing immoral about owning stocks as long as they have nothing to do with guns or alcohol.
Owning shares of energy companies is wildly unethical and immoral in my opinion.
According to buddhist morality:

"A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

— AN 5.177

There's nothing about gas or oil.
It's here:
business in poison
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Simon E. »

Ricky wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:19 pm
Josef wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:50 pm
Ricky wrote: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:48 pm There is nothing immoral about owning stocks as long as they have nothing to do with guns or alcohol.
Owning shares of energy companies is wildly unethical and immoral in my opinion.
According to buddhist morality:

"A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

— AN 5.177

There's nothing about gas or oil.
Damn!
You mean I might have to stop shooting the ducks I feed to the people I traffic?
And next time I do a deal in chemical weapons I can't offer the Crystal as a sweetener?
Seems a bit extreme if you ask me.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Ricky
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:39 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Ricky »

Malcolm wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:25 pm
Ricky wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:19 pm
Josef wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:50 pm

Owning shares of energy companies is wildly unethical and immoral in my opinion.
According to buddhist morality:

"A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

— AN 5.177

There's nothing about gas or oil.
It's here:
business in poison
It could be interpreted that way but probably not the original meaning.
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 4844
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Location: Uni-verse

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Virgo »

Ricky wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:08 am
Malcolm wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:25 pm
Ricky wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:19 pm
According to buddhist morality:

"A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

— AN 5.177

There's nothing about gas or oil.
It's here:
business in poison
It could be interpreted that way but probably not the original meaning.
It can definitely be interpreted that way, and originally the situation was different. We did not face the environmental crises we do now, and forms of energy we have now were unkown at that time.

kevin
User avatar
Josef
Posts: 2611
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Josef »

Malcolm wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:25 pm
Ricky wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:19 pm
Josef wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:50 pm

Owning shares of energy companies is wildly unethical and immoral in my opinion.
According to buddhist morality:

"A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

— AN 5.177

There's nothing about gas or oil.
It's here:
business in poison
And considering that energy business promotes violence, massive dying off of species, and human trafficking I'd say it includes many of the prohibited practices.
"All phenomena of samsara depend on the mind, so when the essence of mind is purified, samsara is purified. Since the phenomena of nirvana depend on the pristine consciousness of vidyā, because one remains in the immediacy of vidyā, buddhahood arises on its own. All critical points are summarized with those two." - Longchenpa
Ricky
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:39 pm

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Ricky »

Virgo wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:13 am
Ricky wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:08 am
Malcolm wrote: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:25 pm

It's here:

It could be interpreted that way but probably not the original meaning.
It can definitely be interpreted that way, and originally the situation was different. We did not face the environmental crises we do now, and forms of energy we have now were unkown at that time.

kevin
True, we should look after the environment.
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 4844
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Location: Uni-verse

Re: Morality of stockholding

Post by Virgo »

Ricky wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:31 am
True, we should look after the environment.
That's a good point. I agree. Also, since Buddhism is about individuals, individuals who experience sufferings, so by protecting a balanced healthy state of our environment we can help all of those individuals around. This allows us also to accumulate merit, or force, towards complete omnsicience, the final goal to which we aspire, as well. So therefore, we can move ahead and protect the enviroment and therefore all beings. It's a way of collecting merit that works naturally. The good result of which is human birth and so on and the ability to hear the teachings, like now. So our situation is tied to our merit, this is like going beyond just refraining from doing harm, but also engaging in that which is wholesome, or that which is source of future happiness, abilities, and so on. This dimension is very special and when we protect it, we do something that is nothing short of profound.

Kevin
Post Reply

Return to “Dzogchen”