Grigoris wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 03, 2018 9:07 am
Stefos wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 03, 2018 3:17 am
And now, my friend, perhaps you understand why I've always said "modern Buddhism" and I've raised such a "fuss" about what I perceive is happening in Buddhadharma today...
So you believe that the only proper Buddhist approach is your approach. You want some sort of centralised dogmatism and not intelligent and informed discussion about how things fit into a Buddhist framework. You don't want "modern Buddhism" you want "catholic Buddhism", with a central and infallible "Buddhist pope" dictating what is or is not Buddhism. You want a Buddhism that is an institution, rather than a journey.
For me, A fundamental RE-understanding what the Buddha came to do and what he actually taught FIRST is the foundation.
And who's "first" is the actual first?
Beyond that, these discussions about Mahayana, Vajrayana, etc. along with peoples personal feelings about SMP need to be stopped.
And you are going to stop them? Not around here you are not.
Opinions matter little if the actual Buddhadharma is not being nailed down insofar as fundamentals are concerned according to the most ancient sutras available FIRST then we can discuss Mahayana, Vajrayana, etc.
The most ancient? The oldest physically existing Mahayana text is as old as the oldest physically existing Theravada text. What does that tell you?
...from the Theravada and Gandharan texts along with the Chinese texts...
Who died and made you the authority around here regarding text validity? This is "A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism", that's what the title at the top of the page says. If you don't like it...
1. If we can't define WHAT Lord Buddha Shakyamuni actually taught my friend.....this whole forum is a waste of time....FACT not fiction
The "institution" is the Sangha and Lord Buddha Shakyamuni said to take to his teachings after his death.....Right? or Wrong?
The journey is that which the above "institution" should have been teaching all along......There is a LOT of flexibility there which covers things.
I am advocating an understanding about Buddhadharma which places the first teachings of the LBS first...
There were other ancient schools besides the Theras which are now extinct......Do they not matter because they are extinct?
They existed concurrently with the Theras ancestor sect.
2. Insofar as me "stopping" them.....I was speaking metaphorically as it seems to me a fundamental, basic understanding of what proper sexual behavior is is missing in this thread EN TOTO.
3. No one ever made me any authority on any text
I am simply stating that IF Mahayana & Vajrayana are built on what the Lord Buddha FIRST taught.......Find out what he FIRST taught.
I'm not interested in what the current sects say in regards to sexuality unless we first what LBS taught as foundational...
Your statement that the oldest Theravada text and old Mahayana texts were concurrent time wise doesn't answer what the Tathagata taught the ancient Sangha, not Greg & Steve's Dharmic experience(s) today...it merely tells me that those texts are concurrent not necessarily the first complete impartation to the Sangha.
So, Who says what the Lord Buddha taught first then? The most ancient schools/sects existed right after the death of Lord Buddha.
In history it's called the 18 or 24 school period.....If you want to push the Theravada/Mahayana issue, we can push it back to that time period and then discuss.
4. Truly in matters of Buddhadharma, what the opinions of a person are really irrelevant. Opinions are for "My favorite fruit is ___ and why"
It's not your opinion or mine that matter first.........our opinions come after we understand Buddhadharma first.
Opinions are common to everyone my friend...........They are like elbows....Very, extremely common.