My lovely girlfriend recently went on a retreat in Nepal and came back with a bunch of books about Buddhism. Now I am no big fan of organised religion, but from what little I know, Buddhism seems OK. I have been reading some of these books and a few quotes from one book in particular grabbed my attention enough to share. 1st, on 'money': "...money is not a thing but a process. Perhaps it is best understood as an energy that is not really mine or yours. Those who understand that it is an empty, socially constructed symbol can use it wisely and compassionately to reduce the world's suffering. Those who use it to become more real end up being used by it, their alienated sense of self clutching a blank cheque - a promissory note that can never be cashed." 2nd, on gold: "Our fascination with gold has much to do with the fact that unlike silver, it doesn't even tarnish. It is, in effect, immortal. This is quite attractive in a word haunted by impermanence and death." So what do you think of the above? I agree on the 'emptiness' of money as theydescribe it, but I am not so sure that the immortal nature of gold is a massive contributing factor to the human fascination with the metal. If you are interested, the book is: Money, Sex, War, Karma: Notes for a budhist Revolution. It deals mainly with reconciling traditional Buddhist teaching in the modern world and helping them find their place.
Buddhism teaches celibacy amongst the monks - but quite a few are secretly married. Imbibing in alcohol for monks is forbidden - but quite a few get drunk regularly. Just for the record, my daughter in law and her family used to be buddhist, and I write this from their personal experiences. They constantly laugh at how the 'west' perceives what is taught/happening vs the reality.
Having lived in Thailand for a few years now, I am well aware that monks are not saints and that Buddhism has as many problems as any other religion. It has also exposed me to some of the good points as well. As far as saying that it is OK as a religion, I don't necessarily mean the organised component of it (which is actually at odds to the original teachings in many respects) it is just that some of the ideas backing it do resonate. In fact of you want to be pedantic, Buddhism is technically a belief system and not a religion, as the Buddha is not a 'god'. I wasn't looking to have a debate on the merits of Buddhism, I simply wished to discuss this particular perspective on money, which I thought some people may be interested in. Silly me for thinking you guys could look past the 'religion' red flag. @boston: In Japan, monks can legally marry. In fact Buddhism is as split as Catholicism, with different slants on the original teachings being predominant in different countries. Been quite a few scandals in Thailand (which is Theravada Buddhist, following the King of Thailand as the head of the religions rather than the Dalai Lama) involving monks in the past year.
I wouldn't call it a process, I think of it more as a tool. But when they say energy I somewhat agree. It is, loosely, I think, an abstract form of energy (after all everything is either matter or energy). Can be used to reduce the world's suffering? Certainly. It facillitates the division of labour process which has enabled so much prosperity in the world. Unfortunately, it has been abused by governments and their crony banks throughout history. What do they mean by becoming "more real"? EDIT: to digress briefly into religion, I find that pretty much all religions have good parts and bad parts, both truths and falsehoods. And that's why none of them ultimately interest me. I just want a basic set of guidelines that I can leverage into figuring out what is right and what is wrong in pretty much any situation. The only thing is some generally well-regarded institutions and traditions end up on the wrong side when you use that philosophy. :lol:
From what I understand after reading the chapter on money, they are basically hitting out at people who become consumed by the pursuit of money. The authors opinion on this is that such people are trying to define themselves by their wealth, hence using money to become 'real'. I probably did an awful job of explaining it, but that is what I understood from the book... Definitely. Not one single religion interests me enough for me to identify with it, but I still like to know a it more than the basics about each one. Like it or not, religion is a powerful force in this world and I think that you need to understand religion)s) to understand most of what goes on. And of course, small bits of each religion have little standalone pearls of wisdom to offer.
Right. That's what I kind of assumed from the context but thought I'd clarify anyway since the wording was unfamiliar. Money won't make you happy but it does bring a certain level of physical comfort. It does seem to me to be a bit "money is the root of all evil" ish? Would you agree? Absolutely. Religion and religious thinking has defined pretty much the entirety of human history and continues to have a strong, though slowly declining, influence today. It was very important for me to try and get a handle on what that was all about and where it came from and why people continue to follow them.
I was talking with the "walking monk" (google him) previously and he was against the current popular buddhism as, as with every single religion that has churches/monasteries etc, power plays develop and those in the church/monastery get the better food, belongings etc while those outside become second rate. The religion becomes corrupted. Look at every religion and you will see this as fact. Very George Orwell's Animal Farm. I read about buddhism a lot when at uni and consider it a way of life rather than a religion. I'd ask the monk about precious metals when I see him again but I know that his form of buddhism would not be intertested as he has few belongings that are restricted to his bowl, cotton sarong and belt, a wool sarong and belt and a cloth bag to carry the bowl and spare sarong. That is it. "The forest is a peculiar organism, giving shade and comfort to all, even the axemen who cut it down." Buddha.
Buddhism is a nontheistic religion that encompasses a variety of traditions, beliefs and practices largely based on teachings attributed to Siddhartha Gautama, who is commonly known as the Buddha, meaning "the awakened one". -Wikipedia
Religion has a very broad meaning. Buddhism definitely fits into it. I simply do not like the idea of a belief that divides us. It unnecessarily creates factions and groups, that inevitably results in conflict, because of human nature. I say use religious interpretations like this to better your life, but don't submit to the division mentality.
Buddhism bdz()m/ noun noun: Buddhism a widespread Asian religion or philosophy, founded by Siddartha Gautama in NE India in the 5th century BC.
Agreed on what point? That buddhism is religion or that religion is devisive and thus detrimental to a stable society?
Buddhism preach non violence now, but they don't have a clean history. Far from it. They slaughtered Shaman leaders of other beliefs for a millennia. It's easy to switch to a peaceful persona after you wipe out all competing sects. By definition all current, but ancient religions have had violent aggressive pasts. They just would not be around today if they hadn't. Religion does not require worship of a deity.
