The Mahayana perspective on social and ecological ethics is based on the high ideals of symbiosis, harmony, and cooperation.
In the old times there were wandering monks who did not work and lived on alms - in return they shared the nectar of Dharma. They were no parasites. And if some of them were, Buddha encouraged the householders to be selective in ...
In a nut shell Buddhism revolves around the 3 trainings:
Living a life of morality so we do no create misery for one self and others
Developing mastery over the mind so we do not react but be proactive so we can be at peace with our selves and other
Developing wisdom of your cognitive process to identify how misery is generated so we can come out of misery
1) It's hard to summarize Buddhism in brief without resorting to one of sometimes inaccurate or misleading summaries. A summary that starts with the Hindu-style cosmology, imho, misses the point. Also depends on the audience, i.e. do they see other religions as being different kinds of Christianity or essentially Christian heresy or as superstition. The ...
In addition to my comments, I quote Ajahn Brahm from his book "Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond"
The Highest Happiness
The Buddha said, “Nibbāna is the highest happiness” (Dhp 203, 204). This is, perhaps, the most helpful
description of enlightenment. Not only is it straightforward and
lacking in gibberish, it is also very appealing. It reveals why ...
As my teacher explained, the reason we are needy and clingy is because we have not discovered how to be our own source of "energy". We are like babies depending on mothers' tits for nutrition, in this case emotional/psychosomatic nutrition.
In order to become independent, we must learn to obtain energy by ourselves. The entire Buddhist path can be seen as a ...
Where does one draw the line for which forms of life are ok to destroy, and which ones are not?
That (i.e. "which forms of life?") might be not the right question.
If you're describing the situation based on a premise of violence versus non-violence, then another way to look at it might be aggression versus non-aggression, and/or aggression versus ...
Buddha did not experience suffering(mental). He experienced pain due to poor health during his final days. Enlightened beings do not create new Karmas. Also, they have removed the potential of all their past Karmas to give future births. But they can still face the consequences while they live.
The truth about the Buddha, as far as I can see, was that he was disinclined to do much of anything after his enlightenment:
'With great pains have I acquired it. Enough! why should I now proclaim it?
This doctrine will not be easy to understand to beings that are lost in lust and hatred.
'Given to lust, surrounded with thick darkness, they will not ...
The first noble truth is actually amazingly relatable for the most part, as in no reasonable person could find fault with it. Since it doesn't appear to have been mentioned, I will post a full literal translation of the first noble truth from the Dhammacakkappavattanasutta:
Birth is dukkha
Old age is dukkha
I would suggest that Buddhism does not promote the importance of being a contented person, especially by suppressing any feelings, perceptions or other parts of experience. Instead, by learning to know dissatisfaction (suffering, dukkha) very well, we notice that the discontentment is separate from the experience (i.e. pain is pain, sickness is sickness, it'...
The real answer is that one cannot - it is the caring that causes the suffering:
Seek no intimacy with the beloved and also not with the unloved, for not to see the beloved and to see the unloved, both are painful.
Therefore hold nothing dear, for separation from the dear is painful. There are no bonds for those who have nothing beloved or unloved.
Buddhists meet all the same problems as other beings. If not these problems, there would be no need in Buddhism.
So the question is: what do you have to do to solve them?
If our view on the world leans to aversion, it means our thoughts were focused mainly on unpleasant things.
To explain that Buddha used to speak about six realms of samsara:
I don't know of any example where the Buddha actually said "life is suffering".
The first noble truth is simply "This is the truth of suffering." Nowhere in the enumeration of what is suffering does it refer to life.
"Life is suffering" isn't listed in fakebuddhaquotes; but it is the first item in a ...
A Buddha would never ever weep while in his days of Enlightenment. It is because of the quality Akampita. It means unshaken; calm; resolute; that which does not tremble; not to be shaken.
The opposite of it is Kampita meaning shaken; agitated; quivering; caused to tremble. All these the Buddha was not. A Buddha is always impartial, treating all rivals or ...
No, the Buddha did not wait for people to ask for help. Only at the beginning, after attaining the Buddhahood, he waited for the invitation of the Maha Brahma, to preach the Dhamma to the world. That is customary to all the Buddhas.
The issue with making it a rule to wait for people to ask for help is that people rarely realize that they need help. Even ...
Theravada Buddhist Answer.
Whichever way you spin it, killing(intentionally) is bad Karma which you will have to pay for at some point in Samsara unless it becomes defunct. You can draw the line anywhere you like, but Karma is Karma. If the tapeworm can be removed without killing, you won't break the precept. Otherwise, you can use it to becomes ...
What helped me tremendously distance myself is this:
Contemplate the various advantages and disadvantages of having a girlfriend--particularly the one that you think you would get--not the dream-woman-that-you-have-to-be-on-a-certain-level-you-are-not-at-to-get.
For example, here is a personal list of benefits of celibacy:
Jing retention for transmutation ...
It's possible to be a Buddhist who is striving not to be overcome by misanthropic thoughts. Misanthropy is a product of aversion. Thinking to destroy human kind or wishing harm to even one person is simply hate.
If Metta meditation fails, try to see the world in terms of momentary experiences, not in terms of entities or individuals.
I don't know your situation and haven't suffered anything like it, so any advice I have may mean nothing to you, but I will say these things:
Karma is the fruit of past action. Don't concern yourself with what's past, and focus on the actions you do in the present. The Buddha said that speculating about the workings of karma is a waste of time, because it ...
According to my present (non-sectarian) teacher, the way the Three Marks are to be used is not simply as dogma to be mindful of, but rather as a tool for enquiry into our psyche -- our attachments, or preconceptions.
The way to use Three Marks for enquiry into preconceptions is to try accepting one Mark at a time and see what resistance it causes.
Unfortunately (because it doesn't answer your question), I'd guess it's better to find "practical solutions to everyday suffering" that don't contradict Buddhism.
When my father died, there's a couple of things people did for my mum which she appreciated (i.e. these are stories which she retold, of examples of how to help people who are grieving ...