Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
121
Buddhisme dengan Agama, Kepercayaan, Tradisi dan Filsafat Lain / Re: Kelenteng: Dijadikan Rebutan?
« on: 26 October 2011, 11:44:29 PM »
[at] Purnama:
Oohh berarti memang kebanyakan / mayoritas seperti yang bro. andry bilang... uang dan siapa yang berkuasa mengurus / memimpin yang menentukan kelenteng mau dibawa ke arah mana? Hmm... mmg sangat berpotensi membangkitkan konflik, karena tidak dilatarbelakangi pemahaman ajaran dan dasar pendirian satu kelenteng dengan jelas, maka jadilah kerancuan di antara Tridharma, Tao, Khonghucu dan Buddha.
Maksudnya jumlah kelenteng lebih banyak dari Vihara? hhmm dulu mungkin iya, sekarang mah lebih banyak vihara jauh.
Yap konsep seatap ini dikemukakan oleh banyak bhiksu Buddhis dan rohaniwan Taois pada masa itu, namun yang terjadi adalah penyimpangan yaitu sinkretisasi, bukan lagi seatap, tp "gado-gado". Ini yang dikritik oleh guru yang tercerahkan YA Dogen Zenji sebagai "ketololan".
Wah banyak..... saya tahu jelas ada satu kelenteng ternama yang jelas" pihak KHC dr kelenteng tsb berusaha memblokir unsur" Buddha yang akan masuk ke kelenteng tersebut dengan cara-cara yang menurut saya agak aneh dan menyebalkan.
The Siddha Wanderer
Oohh berarti memang kebanyakan / mayoritas seperti yang bro. andry bilang... uang dan siapa yang berkuasa mengurus / memimpin yang menentukan kelenteng mau dibawa ke arah mana? Hmm... mmg sangat berpotensi membangkitkan konflik, karena tidak dilatarbelakangi pemahaman ajaran dan dasar pendirian satu kelenteng dengan jelas, maka jadilah kerancuan di antara Tridharma, Tao, Khonghucu dan Buddha.
Maksudnya jumlah kelenteng lebih banyak dari Vihara? hhmm dulu mungkin iya, sekarang mah lebih banyak vihara jauh.
Yap konsep seatap ini dikemukakan oleh banyak bhiksu Buddhis dan rohaniwan Taois pada masa itu, namun yang terjadi adalah penyimpangan yaitu sinkretisasi, bukan lagi seatap, tp "gado-gado". Ini yang dikritik oleh guru yang tercerahkan YA Dogen Zenji sebagai "ketololan".
Quote
=>Didepak seperti apa ?
Wah banyak..... saya tahu jelas ada satu kelenteng ternama yang jelas" pihak KHC dr kelenteng tsb berusaha memblokir unsur" Buddha yang akan masuk ke kelenteng tersebut dengan cara-cara yang menurut saya agak aneh dan menyebalkan.
The Siddha Wanderer
122
Buddhisme dengan Agama, Kepercayaan, Tradisi dan Filsafat Lain / Re: Kelenteng: Dijadikan Rebutan?
« on: 26 October 2011, 11:33:57 PM »Quote
sekarang gini mas gandalp....
katakanlah
anda dan saya serta beberapa rekan di sini, sibuk membahas masalah ini, dan tibalah pada 1 kesimpulan
lalu apa mau di kata?
bisa menyelesaikan konflik yg ada?
toh dii sini cuma untuk share2 saja, cuap2 doang, pepesan kosong.
menghabiskan waktu dan energi, kecuali anda bawa tuh orang2 yg ribut kemari, suruh diskusi + bawa tuh depag, baru ada guna nya.
gt loh mas
kecuali anda seorang creator, yg bisa memanipulasi apapun sesuai kehendak anda,
Ooo saya cm pingin tau pandangan rekan" gimana dan menunjukkan ttg peristiwa sosial yang terjadi sekarang... siapa tahu bisa digunakan dalam sikap kehidupan sehari" hahahaha dan ide" pembuatan wacana yang berkompeten di majalah atau media massa lainnya....
tdk berniat untuk menyelesaikan masalah / konflik secara langsung, emang kita siapa-nya mereka lage? hahahaha
saya hanya mengharapkan pertukaran pandangan sehingga setidak"nya secara tidak langsung mengurangi konflik yg ada beserta potensi-potensinya.The Siddha Wanderer
123
Buddhisme dengan Agama, Kepercayaan, Tradisi dan Filsafat Lain / Re: Kelenteng: Dijadikan Rebutan?
« on: 25 October 2011, 09:00:48 PM »
Hahah... tp apa mau dibiarin ky gt? klo dibiarin... gak selesai" dah konfliknya... lama" pengikut KHC, Tao dan Buddha yang rukun-rukun aja lama-lama bisa "musuhan"....
The Siddha Wanderer
lama" pengikut KHC, Tao dan Buddha yang rukun-rukun aja lama-lama bisa "musuhan"....The Siddha Wanderer
124
Buddhisme dengan Agama, Kepercayaan, Tradisi dan Filsafat Lain / Re: Pandangan Nasrani pada Buddhisme
« on: 25 October 2011, 08:29:36 PM »
Hahah... kalau mau lihat kritik Nasrani terhadap Buddhisme yg paling kompeten ya Paul Williams. Kalau yang lain si ya banyak "fitnah"nya.... termasuk si Ravi...hahaha
Tapi Ravi tu mending la..... ga seperti Pendeta David Yonggi Cho, yang merupakan "penggerak" beberapa gereja Karismatik Megachurch di Indonesia sini... mengatakan bahwa Soka Gakkai yang salah satu aliran Buddhisme dianggap mampu mengakses kekuatan dimensi keempat (supranatural, mukjizat), namun sayangnya dikuasai Iblis...walahh.....cuma di Krsitiani ajah yang dimensi keempatnya (supranatural, mukjizat) diberkati Tuhan, yang lainnya Iblis!
Beberapa ahli menganggap Yonggi Cho iri sama Soka Gakkai, yang jumlah pengikutnya di Korea Selatan sebanding dengan jumlah pengikut si Yonggi Cho itu yang dikenal sebagai gereja terbesar di Korsel dan Asia, FGC.
The Siddha Wanderer
Tapi Ravi tu mending la..... ga seperti Pendeta David Yonggi Cho, yang merupakan "penggerak" beberapa gereja Karismatik Megachurch di Indonesia sini... mengatakan bahwa Soka Gakkai yang salah satu aliran Buddhisme dianggap mampu mengakses kekuatan dimensi keempat (supranatural, mukjizat), namun sayangnya dikuasai Iblis...walahh.....cuma di Krsitiani ajah yang dimensi keempatnya (supranatural, mukjizat) diberkati Tuhan, yang lainnya Iblis!
Beberapa ahli menganggap Yonggi Cho iri sama Soka Gakkai, yang jumlah pengikutnya di Korea Selatan sebanding dengan jumlah pengikut si Yonggi Cho itu yang dikenal sebagai gereja terbesar di Korsel dan Asia, FGC.
The Siddha Wanderer
125
Buddhisme dengan Agama, Kepercayaan, Tradisi dan Filsafat Lain / Kelenteng: Dijadikan Rebutan?
« on: 25 October 2011, 08:17:46 PM »
Barusan baca diskusi tentang sebuah kasus yang menimpa sebuah kelenteng di Pekalongan sampai ke ranah pengadilan segala. Intinya ada pertentangan di antara TITD (Tridharma) / WALUBI dan MAKIN (Konghucu). Saya sih merasa konyol saja ya. Intinya kelenteng dijadikan rebutan. Umat Khonghucu bilang kelenteng punya Khonghucu, orang Tridharma bilang kelenteng itu sinkretis Tridharma dan tampaknya lbh berpihak pada agama Buddha?. Ada juga berbagai pengalaman lain yang saya dapet:
1. Satu orang bhiksu Vajrayana dulu lewat Buddhist Festival di Surabaya pernah bilang... setelah kelenteng diakui pemerintah, eh agama Buddhanya "didepak" keluar dari kelenteng. Ya memang benar juga, beberapa kesannya begitu.
Saya pernah pergi ke Tay Kak Sie Semarang yang notabene merupakan kelenteng Buddhis yang dulunya vihara Tionghoa, di sana malah kegiatan Khonghucu-nya yang menonjol. Nah lho? Ya saya kurang tahu tp kegiatan organisasinya gimana. Lalu juga Eng An Kiong Malang, sangat banyak unsur Buddhis-nya di sana.... altar utama kedua bersifat Buddhis, juga terdapat dua Dharmasala Buddha, tetapi kok malah Khonghucu juga yang menonjol di sana? (kalau diliat" lagi altar"nya kebanyakan Dewa Tao dan Bodhisattva Buddhis).
2. Dari pihak temen" Taois dalam forumnya menyatakan bahwa kelenteng adalah tempat ibadah umat Tao. Ya memang benar, la dewa dewi seperti Ma Zu dan Guangze Zunwang adalah dewa Tao, tapi beberapa tempat ibadah mereka malah dijadikan pusat agama Khonghucu?
Sejujur-jujurnya, sebagian besar kelenteng di Indonesia adalah Taoist Temple alias Kuil Agama Tao. Orang-orang di Singapore aja melabeli semua kelenteng yang berlatar utama dewa Taois sebagai "Taoist Temple" Kok di Indonesia saja yang bisa jadi tempat ibadah umat Khonghucu? Aneh.
Bagaimana tanggapan teman-teman terhadap hal ini?
Kalau menurut saya aperlu ada kalsifikasi jelas dan objektif mana kelenteng Buddha, mana kelenteng Tao dan mana yang bener" Wen Miao alias kelenteng Konghucu. Selain itu perlu ditata ulang konsep Tridharma yang sudah salah kaprah dipahami sebagai suatu sinkretisme.
Bhiksu Daoyuan (Dogen Zenji) saja pada zaman dahulu mengatakan bahwa sinkretisme Tridharma adalah hal yang sangat tolol, suatu sinkretisme seperti itu menunjukkan ketidakhormatan pada ajaran Buddha, Laozi, dan Khonghucu sendiri.
The Siddha Wanderer
1. Satu orang bhiksu Vajrayana dulu lewat Buddhist Festival di Surabaya pernah bilang... setelah kelenteng diakui pemerintah, eh agama Buddhanya "didepak" keluar dari kelenteng. Ya memang benar juga, beberapa kesannya begitu.
Saya pernah pergi ke Tay Kak Sie Semarang yang notabene merupakan kelenteng Buddhis yang dulunya vihara Tionghoa, di sana malah kegiatan Khonghucu-nya yang menonjol. Nah lho? Ya saya kurang tahu tp kegiatan organisasinya gimana. Lalu juga Eng An Kiong Malang, sangat banyak unsur Buddhis-nya di sana.... altar utama kedua bersifat Buddhis, juga terdapat dua Dharmasala Buddha, tetapi kok malah Khonghucu juga yang menonjol di sana? (kalau diliat" lagi altar"nya kebanyakan Dewa Tao dan Bodhisattva Buddhis).
2. Dari pihak temen" Taois dalam forumnya menyatakan bahwa kelenteng adalah tempat ibadah umat Tao. Ya memang benar, la dewa dewi seperti Ma Zu dan Guangze Zunwang adalah dewa Tao, tapi beberapa tempat ibadah mereka malah dijadikan pusat agama Khonghucu?
Sejujur-jujurnya, sebagian besar kelenteng di Indonesia adalah Taoist Temple alias Kuil Agama Tao. Orang-orang di Singapore aja melabeli semua kelenteng yang berlatar utama dewa Taois sebagai "Taoist Temple" Kok di Indonesia saja yang bisa jadi tempat ibadah umat Khonghucu? Aneh.
Bagaimana tanggapan teman-teman terhadap hal ini?
Kalau menurut saya aperlu ada kalsifikasi jelas dan objektif mana kelenteng Buddha, mana kelenteng Tao dan mana yang bener" Wen Miao alias kelenteng Konghucu. Selain itu perlu ditata ulang konsep Tridharma yang sudah salah kaprah dipahami sebagai suatu sinkretisme.
Bhiksu Daoyuan (Dogen Zenji) saja pada zaman dahulu mengatakan bahwa sinkretisme Tridharma adalah hal yang sangat tolol, suatu sinkretisme seperti itu menunjukkan ketidakhormatan pada ajaran Buddha, Laozi, dan Khonghucu sendiri.
The Siddha Wanderer
126
Buddhisme dengan Agama, Kepercayaan, Tradisi dan Filsafat Lain / Re: Lukisan-Lukisan Maut Dari Neraka
« on: 19 October 2011, 08:10:15 PM »Quote
de el el... panjang klo dato' tulis semua, inti nya semua lukisan adalah imajinasi bunga mimpi dr si evangelish seniman yg mencari sensasi... dan lucu nya, kenapa setiap ada cerita2 jalan2 ke neraka n surga pasti selalu ketika tidur/bermimpi ? sesekali dunk minta brewok ajak dato' ke surga n neraka saat siang hari, ketika dato' lg istirahat minum kopi di starbuck
Atau jalan" ke neraka/surga pas meditasi?
The Siddha Wanderer
127
Informasi dan Pengumuman Kegiatan Buddhis / Re: [EVENT] BLIA YAD Indonesia Visudhi Trisarana dan Upasaka/Upasika
« on: 19 October 2011, 07:13:28 PM »
Bro. Wei, anggota BLIA YAD di Medan saya lihat sekitar umur belasan sampai 20-an, maka targetnya mmg hanya mencakup sekitar umur segitu =)... organisasi muda mudi targetnya yah muda mudi....hahahah... anw BLIA YAD is one of the best Buddhist youth organizations at Indonesia... really =) .. Saya kenal dgn banyak muda mudinya, mereka sangat berdedikasi, seumuran saya banyak yg udah bisa Dharmadesana.
Fo Guang Shan berperan besar dalam revitalisasi pentahbisan bhikkhuni Theravada, dan menjadi tujuan utama para samaneri Theravada menjaid bhikkhuni. Salah satunya juga Ayya Santini. Fo Guang Shan juga dikenal sebagai tempat para bhiksu Mahayana menjalankan Vinaya dengan disiplin dan menjadi salah satu pusat pembelajaran Mahayana yang terkemuka.
Vinaya Shravakayana aliran lain (klo g salah Sarvastivada, Dharmagupta dan Mahisasaka), memang dengan jelas membolehkan mengubah peraturan-peraturan minor sesuai dengan kondisi masyarakat yang bersangkutan (atas anjuran Sang Buddha sendiri!), jadi memang berbeda pandangan dengan Vinaya Theravada Mahaviharavasin.
Sebegitunyakah?? hooo... i see then...
The Siddha Wanderer
Fo Guang Shan berperan besar dalam revitalisasi pentahbisan bhikkhuni Theravada, dan menjadi tujuan utama para samaneri Theravada menjaid bhikkhuni. Salah satunya juga Ayya Santini. Fo Guang Shan juga dikenal sebagai tempat para bhiksu Mahayana menjalankan Vinaya dengan disiplin dan menjadi salah satu pusat pembelajaran Mahayana yang terkemuka.
Vinaya Shravakayana aliran lain (klo g salah Sarvastivada, Dharmagupta dan Mahisasaka), memang dengan jelas membolehkan mengubah peraturan-peraturan minor sesuai dengan kondisi masyarakat yang bersangkutan (atas anjuran Sang Buddha sendiri!), jadi memang berbeda pandangan dengan Vinaya Theravada Mahaviharavasin.
Quote
hahaha... kejadian "ganti" jubah juga banyak terjadi di Pa Auk center, mawlamyine.
pada saat pindapatta barisan mahatera mahayana berada dibelakang samanera paling junior !!!
Sebegitunyakah?? hooo... i see then...
The Siddha Wanderer
128
Diskusi Umum / Re: 49 hari setelah kematian
« on: 15 October 2011, 11:04:13 AM »
Dalam Mahayana, dikatakan 49 hari adalah batas waktu maksimal kesadaran berkelana di antarabhava (kaya keadaan sebelum kelahiran kembali, zona antara). Tapi tidak mesti 49 hari, bisa langsung, 1, 5, 7 hari dsb sesuai dengan dorongan karma-nya.
Bisa saja adik anda sudah terlahir kembali atau masih belum, masih di antarabhava. Pelimpahan jasa tetep jalan aja...hehehehe...
kalau sis familiar dengan tradisi Theravada, baca paritta aja. Kalau familiar dengan Mahayana mungkin bisa mealafkan mantra Wangsheng Zhou (Amiduo Fo Xin Zhou) dan pelafalan nama Amitabha, lalu dilimpahkan pada pihak yang bersangkutan (adik anda).
The Siddha Wanderer
Bisa saja adik anda sudah terlahir kembali atau masih belum, masih di antarabhava. Pelimpahan jasa tetep jalan aja...hehehehe...
kalau sis familiar dengan tradisi Theravada, baca paritta aja. Kalau familiar dengan Mahayana mungkin bisa mealafkan mantra Wangsheng Zhou (Amiduo Fo Xin Zhou) dan pelafalan nama Amitabha, lalu dilimpahkan pada pihak yang bersangkutan (adik anda).
The Siddha Wanderer
129
Diskusi Umum / Re: Asal Muasal Manusia
« on: 12 October 2011, 07:53:13 PM »Quote
uu nya pasti UPAYA KAUSALYA
Salah. UU-nya: Bodhicitta
The Siddha Wanderer
130
Buddhisme dengan Agama, Kepercayaan, Tradisi dan Filsafat Lain / Re: Anak angkat Dewi Kwan Im
« on: 12 October 2011, 07:32:04 PM »
Hahahaha ponakan saya juga dijadiin anak angkat Guanyin Pusa. Saya dulu dijadikan anak angkat dewa Tao Guangze Zunwang. Istilahnya Guo Fang (Hok: Kwee Pang).
Yah itu cuman tradisi... kaya sekarang di vihara berbagai aliran ada baby atau children blessing.. atau "Buddhist 'baptism' for child" yang beda dengan Trisarana yang dilakuin sendiri ketika dewasa. Yah bagi saya itu cuman blessing aja, tidak ada hubungan khusus anak angkat segala.
Justru harusnya semua itu dilakukan sendiri, yaitu ketika anda Trisarana atas keyakinan sendiri, itu artinya anda adalah Anak atau Putra Buddha. Kalau ini, bukan hanya sakit deh, kesialan pun dapat and ahadapai kalau sudah berlindung pada Triratna.
Dewa" banyak yang menjadi murid Avalokitesvara, mungkin saja yang "masuk" adalah para dewa yang banyak mendengar wejangan Dharma Avalokitesvara dan menjadi murid beliau, kemudian turun ke dunia dan dengan upaya terampilnya dewa itu membuat umat" kelenteng yang masih tradisi mengangkatkan anaknya pada Avalokitesvara, which is his Dharma teacher.
Mungkin juga para makhluk alam hantu yang ingin berbuat bajik, dengan saja berusaha agar si umat yang sakit"an menjalin jodoh dengan Avalokitesvara. Kemudian si dewa atau hantu itu membantu memberikan kesembuhan.
Tapi yang pasti: YANG MASUK sudah pasti BUKAN Avalokitesvara. Ga mungkin Lok Thung bisa kemasukan Bodhisattva bhumi 10... ngaco banget dah.. dalam khazanah Vajrayana, dalam ritual avesa atau oracle resmi Tibetan, yang "masuk" biasanya adalah para Dewa Pelindung Dharma, bukan Bodhisattva Mahasattva. Demikian juga di Jepang, para pendeta wanita Shinto yaitu para miko sering menjadi medium para Dewa Dharmapala untuk berbincang dengan para bhiksu Sangha, memberitahukan mereka sesuatu yang penting.
MUSTAHIL kalau Guanyin Pusa yang masuk.
The Siddha Wanderer
Yah itu cuman tradisi... kaya sekarang di vihara berbagai aliran ada baby atau children blessing.. atau "Buddhist 'baptism' for child" yang beda dengan Trisarana yang dilakuin sendiri ketika dewasa. Yah bagi saya itu cuman blessing aja, tidak ada hubungan khusus anak angkat segala.
Justru harusnya semua itu dilakukan sendiri, yaitu ketika anda Trisarana atas keyakinan sendiri, itu artinya anda adalah Anak atau Putra Buddha. Kalau ini, bukan hanya sakit deh, kesialan pun dapat and ahadapai kalau sudah berlindung pada Triratna.
Dewa" banyak yang menjadi murid Avalokitesvara, mungkin saja yang "masuk" adalah para dewa yang banyak mendengar wejangan Dharma Avalokitesvara dan menjadi murid beliau, kemudian turun ke dunia dan dengan upaya terampilnya dewa itu membuat umat" kelenteng yang masih tradisi mengangkatkan anaknya pada Avalokitesvara, which is his Dharma teacher.
Mungkin juga para makhluk alam hantu yang ingin berbuat bajik, dengan saja berusaha agar si umat yang sakit"an menjalin jodoh dengan Avalokitesvara. Kemudian si dewa atau hantu itu membantu memberikan kesembuhan.
Tapi yang pasti: YANG MASUK sudah pasti BUKAN Avalokitesvara. Ga mungkin Lok Thung bisa kemasukan Bodhisattva bhumi 10... ngaco banget dah.. dalam khazanah Vajrayana, dalam ritual avesa atau oracle resmi Tibetan, yang "masuk" biasanya adalah para Dewa Pelindung Dharma, bukan Bodhisattva Mahasattva. Demikian juga di Jepang, para pendeta wanita Shinto yaitu para miko sering menjadi medium para Dewa Dharmapala untuk berbincang dengan para bhiksu Sangha, memberitahukan mereka sesuatu yang penting.
MUSTAHIL kalau Guanyin Pusa yang masuk.
The Siddha Wanderer
131
Diskusi Umum / Re: Asal Muasal Manusia
« on: 12 October 2011, 07:12:22 PM »Quote
bodhisatva kagak apa ? yang saya mengerti, bodhisatva itu masih dipenuhi dengan terminologi mau menolong semua makhluk yang pada dasarnya bahwa semua makhluk itu hanya bisa menolong diri-nya sendiri... makanya bodhisatva itu dikatakan masih belum mencapai ke-BUDDHA-an (sadar)... karena gak sadar-sadar emangnya SIAPA yang bisa ditolong ?
“If you cannot even cure your own illness, how can you cure the illness of others?”
from MAHAYANA Vimalakirti Sutra
Itulah esensi sikap dan realisasi Bodhisattva.
Quote
Kalo dalam Mahayana kan Bodhisattva itu sebenarnya uda jadi Buddha cuman karena melihat penderitaan di sekeliling maka dia beraspirasi untuk menolong semua makhluk. Hal ini bukanlah kemelekatan melainkan bodhicitta. Jadi, Buddha adalah pencerahannya dan bodhisattva adalah aktivitasnya
Hampir tepat.
Bodhisattva bhumi kesepuluh Dharmamegha disebut sebagai Buddha. Samyaksmabuddha akan emmandang Bodhisattva bhumi 10 sebagai Bodhisattva, para bodhisattva bhumi yang lebih rendah akan memandang Bodhisattva bhumi 10 sebagai Buddha. Bhumi ke 10 ini hampir sebanding dengan Samyaksambuddha, mereka mampu memanifestasikan Dharmakaya dan Tanah Suci, serta mampu mewujudkan diri mereka sebagai Buddha, walau pada kenyataannya mereka belum sepenuhnya Samyaksambuddha.
Namun secara realisasi pencerahan, bhumi 10 dan Samyaksambuddha sangat hampir sebanding.
Contoh bodhisattva bhumi 10: Avalokitesvara, Manjusri, Maitreya, dll semua 8 Mahabodhisattva yang merupakan para "Putra Terdekat" Buddha Shakyamuni semuanya adalah bodhisattva bhumi 10.
The Siddha Wanderer
132
Diskusi Umum / Re: Asal Muasal Manusia
« on: 12 October 2011, 07:05:33 PM »Quote
ente dapet bayangan si Mao bawa sutta buddhist kemana2 itu darimana? dikasih tao Manjusri? dari mimpi? ato dikasih tao Mak Erot?...
source please...jangan ngasal ber-teori ria aja...
oh, 1 more thing, dari kata2 loe diatas, berarti Mr.Mao itu Buddhist sejati dan Dalai Lama itu menggunakan Buddhism sebagai politik makane dia diusir??? <---wow awesome!
ente gila?
Makanya... baca Sinar Dharma! Donlot pdfnya di Dhammacitta... kan ntar anda nemu sumbernya... dasar males nyari sumber! wakakakkakaka
Aahhh itu kan isi pikiran anda aja...
Quote
ok, so Dalai Lama yg berjasa...
Jasa Boddhisatva apa yak dalam ini semua?
Wakakakkaka... apa tohh... para praktisi Mahayana sejati semuanya adalah para Bodhisattva, dan para bhiksu yang mengambil sila" mahayana diberi nama "Bodhisattva Bhiksu"
Quote
kalo bisa di sangkal donk..
buktikan kalo Tibetan Buddhism itu bukan racun yg ingin menghancurkan Buddha Dhamma...LOL
wong teori-nya sama gitu...
dewa2-nya mirip pulak...cuma beda nama aja..~ LOL sembah dewa Hindu loe!
Sudah pernah aye bahas.... sana cari sendiri di forum Dhammacitta... males nyari.. terserah mau anda anggap apa... LOL
Quote
pertanyaannya..apakah mereka semua emanasi Buddha? kalo iya, berarti mereka Buddha donk!...kalo Buddha khan berarti sila mereka lebih tinggi dari gw, of course harus memberi hormat..! bahkan belajar dari mereka...
tapi buktine...teori gk logis itu sangat worthless...
Buakakakakkak ya memang sih... anda sendiri gak tahu sopan santun dalam berdiskusi dan tidak menghargai teman diskusi, ya terang saja sama hewan pun gak bisa menghargai...atau jangan" sama alam juga? hahahaha
Eehh sejak kapan aye bilang semua hewan itu Nirmanakaya Buddha? LOL
Kita menghargai dan menghormati karena sifat Buddha mereka yang inheren di dalam diri setiap makhluk, sehingga hewan" pun bisa berwelas asih toh... hahahahha
Quote
1. gw lage bahas tentang Boddhisatva yg welas asih dan sakti dengan semua emanasi2nya, yg konon-nya menolong seluruh makhluk...yg selalu siaga untuk membantu tapi ternyata hanya bullshit, karena di muka bumi ini masih banyak negara yg berperang...
2. ok, terbukti bahwa Boddhisatva itu cuma nongkrong di vihara sambil makan dupa...
Arahat itu tugasnya cuma 1, yakni merealisasikan Nibbana...I think you know this...mereka beda dengan Bodoh-satwa
3.gk bisa jawab yak?
4. gk bisa jawab yak? Bodoh-satwa mahayana gk guna yak? sutra2 Mahayana yg mengembar-gemborkan kehebatan bodoh-satwa dalam menolong orang yg meminta tolong itu cuma BOONG belaka ternyata..LOL
5.Jelas2 loe nyalahin karma, karena udah gk bisa jawab..makane salahin karma...
di teliti tuh logika loe...
dasar logika bias..!
Hahhahahahahaha anda ini mekso banget sih? Konyol.
Sesakti apapun Buddha, sesakti apapun Bodhisattva, semua ya BALIK KE HUKUM KARMA. Di mahayana tidak ada yang mengatakan Bodhisattva MAHASAKTI sehingga bisa mengubah karma seseorang.
The Siddha Wanderer
133
Buddhisme dengan Agama, Kepercayaan, Tradisi dan Filsafat Lain / From Buddhist to Catholic
« on: 12 October 2011, 03:14:53 AM »
http://whyimcatholic.com/index.php/conversion-stories/buddhist-converts/item/65-buddhist-convert-paul-williams
On converting from Buddhism to Catholicism – One convert's story
©Paul Williams, OP
Professor of Indian and Tibetan Philosophy
University of Bristol, UK
I am a Catholic, a convert. Indeed I am now a lay member of the Dominican Order. But I was a Buddhist for over twenty years, and what I want to concentrate on here is Buddhism and rebirth. In talking about Buddhism and rebirth, I shall really be telling you a little about my own conversion story, a conversion story that is of course one of change, wonderful welcome change, and I shall argue it was a change from very real hope-lessness to hope.
My journey to Buddhism
I wasn't always a Buddhist. As far as I recall our immediate family was not particularly religious, although on our father's side there were practising Anglicans and relatives had been Anglican vicars. On our mother's side I do not remember any especial interest in religion. I heard once that our maternal grandmother had said she would be a Buddhist if she were anything at all. I discovered fairly recently that in fact our maternal grandfather's family was traditionally Catholic, although he had abandoned the faith. I am not sure now why, but for some reason when I was really quite young I joined the local Anglican church choir. I loved singing church music. Unfortunately my voice broke rather early and, since I was thought to be too young to be a bass, as far as I recall I spent my entire time as Head Chorister miming. This perhaps gave me an early taste of the bluff necessary for an academic career.
At the appropriate age early in the 1960s I was confirmed in the Anglican Church by the Bishop of Dover. I became a server at Holy Communion. As the 60s wore on I became involved in the lifestyle and all the normal things that teenage boys get up to. As public examinations loomed larger, I left the choir, ceased to be a server, and lost contact with the Church. I grew long hair, and dressed strangely.
I went to the University of Sussex to read Philosophy. By that time, in common with many in the late 1960s, I had developed an interest in meditation and things Indian. I channelled this interest particularly into Indian philosophy. I subsequently took my doctorate in Buddhist philosophy at the University of Oxford.
By about 1973-ish I was already beginning to think of myself as a Buddhist. I finally 'Took Refuge', formally becoming a Buddhist, in the Dalai Lama's tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. When I found myself teaching at the University of Bristol in the early 1980s I set up with others a group in Bristol that also now has its own Buddhist Centre. I became involved in occasional teaching within the context of practising Buddhism at Buddhist Centres. As well as my academic work in Buddhist philosophy I wrote and spoke as a Tibetan Buddhist on television, the radio, and at conferences. I took part in public and private dialogue with Christians, including Hans Küng and Raimundo Pannikkar.
I was interested in philosophy, but also I was interested in meditation and the exotic East. Many of us found Buddhism attractive originally because among other things it seemed so much more rational than the alternatives (but also much, much more exotic). In particular Buddhism seemed much more sensible (and exotic) than a theistic religion like Christianity. Buddhists do not believe in God. Well, (we thought) there seemed no reason to believe in God, and the existence of evil presented for us a positive argument against the existence of God. Those of us who were brought up as Christians were fed up with defending the existence of God in an unsympathetic world against its detractors. When we stood back and tried to be as objective as possible God looked less and less likely. In Buddhism one has an immensely sophisticated (and exotic) system of morality, spirituality and philosophy which does not require God at all. At a stroke difficulties involved in accepting the existence of God were bypassed. Instead, in becoming a Buddhist, (we thought) one could be a meditator with Buddhists, the ones who really know about meditation.
Rebirth
However, over many, many years as a Buddhist I became more and more uneasy about my Buddhism. Absolutely central to my growing unease with Buddhist affiliation were worries about rebirth and associated worries about the doctrine of karma. Buddhists believe in rebirth, that is, as it is broadly understood, reincarnation. And, Buddhists claim, there is no chronological first beginning to the series of past lives. We have all of us been reborn an infinite number of times. No God is needed to start the series off – for there simply was no first beginning. Things have been around (somewhere) for all eternity.
Now, belief in rebirth (and indeed karma – I'll come that) seems to be quite common nowadays even among those who would not claim to be Buddhists or Hindus. One even finds Christians who say they believe in rebirth. But rebirth was well-known in ancient Greece and Rome, and it has never been part of Christian orthodoxy. And there are good reasons for this. Rebirth is incompatible with certain absolutely central Christian doctrines, including the inestimable value of each and every individual person, and the justice of God. If rebirth is true, realistically we really have no hope. It is a hope-less doctrine. As a Buddhist, it dawned on me that I had no hope. Let me explain.
Hands up who wants to be reborn as a cockroach?
I want you to imagine that you are told you are to be painlessly executed at dawn. You are terrified. You are not terrified because it will hurt, since it will be painless. So why are you terrified? Perhaps your fear lies in it being the end of all your projects for the future – the story is over. Or maybe you do not want to leave forever your friends and family. Or perhaps you fear just a great empty void, a nothingness. What is it, exactly, that frightens you?
Now I want you to imagine that your executioner gently puts his arm round you and tells you not to worry. It really isn't so bad. Although you are to be executed, it has been discovered without a shadow of a doubt that the Buddhists and Hindus were right after all. You are to be instantly reborn. In fact, you are to be reborn as a cockroach in South America.
Well - I suggest that you would still be terrified. Indeed you might be even more frightened. But why would you be so frightened? Being a cockroach answers all, or most, of the fears that first sprang to mind when you heard of your imminent execution. Cockroaches surely have projects for the future, to get enough food, poison humans, or whatever it is cockroaches happily spend their lives doing. It'll be fun, once you get used to it. Of course, being a cockroach still means you must leave your friends and family, but then in life we often leave our friends and family. Our family and friends may be separated from us by exile, war, quarrels or whatever. Or if they die, instead of you, it has the same effect. So why in this respect should we be more terrified of our own death, than of the deaths of our loved ones? Moreover as a cockroach you will have lots and lots of new friends and family, many, many cockroach friends and cockroach family to replace the ones you have lost. You'll get used to it. It's not so bad, not half as bad as you thought. And being a cockroach is not nothingness. It's not like a great empty void. It is a life, too. You will still live.
So why are we not consoled by all this? Why do we still not relish the idea of execution at dawn, followed by all the fun of being a cockroach in South America? Well, you might say, cockroaches are horrible, ugly, verminous creatures. Who wants to be one? But is that fair? Perhaps cockroaches are not horrible and ugly to themselves. After all, I expect their mummies love them.
Can you imagine being a cockroach? Can you imagine living that cockroachy life? Surely you cannot. We are not asking can you imagine waking up inside a cockroach's body (as Kafka tells us, in his story Metamorphosis). We are not asking you to imagine being you, somehow having to come to terms with being crammed inside a cockroach's body. That would not be much fun. You would have problems with all those legs, at least for a while, and you would hate your cockroach mummy getting anywhere near you. She is so creepy! But it wouldn't be like that, would it? You would love your cockroach mummy, because (I expect) cockroaches do love their mummies. For you would be a cockroach too. You cannot imagine what it would be like to be a cockroach, because you would not be you inside a cockroach body. You would be a cockroach. And who knows what the imaginations, the dreams, of a cockroach might be.
Rebirth means the end of me
What is my point here? My point is this: What is so terrifying about my being executed at dawn and reborn as a cockroach is that it is simply, quite straightforwardly, the end of me. I cannot imagine being reborn as a cockroach because there is nothing to imagine. I quite simply would not be there at all. If rebirth is true, neither I nor any of my loved ones survive death. With rebirth, for me – the actual person I am – the story really is over. There may be another being living its life in some sort of causal connection with the life that was me (influenced by my karma), but for me there is no more. That is it – end of it. There is no more to be said about me.
None of this in itself means the Buddhist position is wrong. But what it does mean is that, if the Buddhist position is correct, our death in this life is actually, really, the death of us. Death will be the end for us. Traditionally, at least on the day to day level, Buddhists and others who accept rebirth tend to obscure this fact in their choice of language by referring to 'my rebirth', and 'concern for one's future lives'. But actually any rebirth (say, as a cockroach in South America) would not be oneself, and there is a serious question therefore as to why one should care at all about 'one's' future rebirths.
I began to see that if Buddhism were correct then unless I attained enlightenment (nirvana) or something like it in this life, where the whole cycle of rebirth would finally come to a complete end, I would have no hope. Clearly, I was not going to attain enlightenment in this life. All Buddhists would be inclined to accept that as true concerning just about everyone. Enlightenment is a supreme and extremely rare achievement for spiritual heroes, not the likes of us – certainly not the likes of me. So I (and all my friends and family) have in themselves no hope. Not only that. Actually from a Buddhist perspective in the scale of infinite time the significance of each of us as such, as the person we are, converges on nothing. For each of us lives our life and perishes. Each one of us – the person we are - is lost forever. Buddhism for me was hope-less. But was I absolutely sure Buddhism was true? As St Paul knew so well, Christianity at least offers hope.
Karma
Let me say something now about the theory that usually goes along with that of rebirth, the theory of karma. This is the theory, broadly, that our virtuous and vicious actions have respectively pleasant and painful results for us. Thus if I stub and break my little toe, that painful experience is as such the result of a vicious deed done by me in the past. If what I have said so far is correct then the principles of karma when applied over lifetimes must mean that some persons escape altogether at least some of the results of their vicious deeds, and others receive unpleasant experiences that result from vicious deeds they did not do.
For consider the following: Supposing a horrible dictator gives orders on his deathbed for painfully executing a thousand people. That dictator dies, so that person – the dictator – never receives the nasty results due to him through karma. There no doubt will be another being, 'his rebirth' who will receive those horrible results. But, first, what is that to our dictator? And, second, clearly that other being (the rebirth) will be horribly hurt as a result of something he, she, or it, did not do. The idea that a baby, for example, suffers from a painful illness because of something another person did, even if the baby is in some sense a rebirth of that person, can scarcely be portrayed as satisfactory or just. It could certainly not be, as some have claimed, the most acceptable answer to the problem of evil. The baby simply is not that person who did the wicked deed, no more than a baby cockroach is me after my execution.
Buddhists do not hold that God exists, but if there were a God certainly the theory of karma would be quite incompatible with His justice. So, too, would be the throwing away of persons on the rubbish heap of history, that is entailed by rebirth.
The Christian has hope
It seems to me patently obvious that if I am reborn the person I am now in this life ceases to exist. This is blindingly obvious if I am reborn as a cockroach in South America. We could not say that I am the same person as a cockroach in South America. Could we anymore say I would be the same person if my rebirth involved a human embryo in Africa? Or in Bristol, in my own family? And the standard Buddhist position (correctly) explicitly denies that the rebirth is the same person as the one who died. Thus rebirth is incompatible with the infinite value of the person.
But Christianity is the religion of the infinite value of the person. The person we are, or can become, is not accidental to us, and is not unimportant. Each person is an individual creation of God, as such infinitely loved and valued by God. On this is based the whole of Christian morality, from the value of the family to the altruism and self-denial of the saints. Because we are infinitely valuable to God died to save each one of us. He did not die to save chains of rebirths, or reincarnating Selves. He died to save us. And we are the persons we are, as embodied individuals with our stories, families and friends. Contrary to the myth of the Christian hatred of the physical and the body, actually Christianity is also the religion of embodiment and the essential goodness of all physical creation.
It follows from all this that rebirth would be diametrically opposed to the whole direction of Christianity. If there is survival of death - and the faith of the Christian, originating in Christ's own resurrection, is based on that - it cannot be in terms of rebirth. Rebirth and the infinite value of the person are incompatible. The Christian view of death is one of hope, indeed of triumph, for (apart from anything else) it sees death not as an empty void, a nothingness. The story is not over for the persons we are, and we can hope that we do not part forever from our friends and family. But much, much more, our faith is that in God our deaths will be meaningful for each and every one of us – each individual person – in ways that exceed our imaginations but that even now excite our hope and draw-on our lives.
Conclusion
Well – it was thoughts like this that gradually led me away from Buddhism. Buddhism was for me hope-less. Christians have hope. I so wanted to be able to be a Christian. I returned, to look again at the things that I had rejected in my earlier Christian faith. I detail the stages of my journey in my book The Unexpected Way (T&T Clark/Continuum: 2002). Through grace I came again to God. I convinced myself that it was rational to believe in God, as rational – indeed I now think more rational – than to believe with the Buddhists that there is no God. Coming to believe in God, I could no longer be a Buddhist. I had to be a theist. I looked carefully at the evidence and was astonished to find that the literal resurrection of Our Lord from the dead after His crucifixion was the most rational explanation of what must have happened. That, I felt, made Christianity the most rational option out of theistic religions. And, as a Christian, I argued that priority has to be given to the Roman Catholic Church. I needed a good reason not to be received into the Catholic Church. In my book I examine various arguments that were given to me against becoming a Catholic, and I argue that as a reason for rejecting the Catholic Church they fail to convince. So I was received into the Catholic Church.
I now live in gratitude and hope. And I have never, ever, for one moment regretted my decision.
ADENDUM
If what I have argued here is correct, then it seems to me we are entitled theologically to say that we know rebirth is false. What I mean by this is:
i) Rebirth is incompatible with Christian belief.
ii) As Christian believers we are entitled to say that we know theologically that Christian belief is true.
iii) Whatever is incompatible with a truth is false.
iv) Hence we are entitled to say as Christian believers that we know theologically that rebirth is false.
Some further reading on Buddhism and Catholicism by Paul Williams:
The Unexpected Way, Continuum, 2002
The Siddha Wanderer
On converting from Buddhism to Catholicism – One convert's story
©Paul Williams, OP
Professor of Indian and Tibetan Philosophy
University of Bristol, UK
I am a Catholic, a convert. Indeed I am now a lay member of the Dominican Order. But I was a Buddhist for over twenty years, and what I want to concentrate on here is Buddhism and rebirth. In talking about Buddhism and rebirth, I shall really be telling you a little about my own conversion story, a conversion story that is of course one of change, wonderful welcome change, and I shall argue it was a change from very real hope-lessness to hope.
My journey to Buddhism
I wasn't always a Buddhist. As far as I recall our immediate family was not particularly religious, although on our father's side there were practising Anglicans and relatives had been Anglican vicars. On our mother's side I do not remember any especial interest in religion. I heard once that our maternal grandmother had said she would be a Buddhist if she were anything at all. I discovered fairly recently that in fact our maternal grandfather's family was traditionally Catholic, although he had abandoned the faith. I am not sure now why, but for some reason when I was really quite young I joined the local Anglican church choir. I loved singing church music. Unfortunately my voice broke rather early and, since I was thought to be too young to be a bass, as far as I recall I spent my entire time as Head Chorister miming. This perhaps gave me an early taste of the bluff necessary for an academic career.
At the appropriate age early in the 1960s I was confirmed in the Anglican Church by the Bishop of Dover. I became a server at Holy Communion. As the 60s wore on I became involved in the lifestyle and all the normal things that teenage boys get up to. As public examinations loomed larger, I left the choir, ceased to be a server, and lost contact with the Church. I grew long hair, and dressed strangely.
I went to the University of Sussex to read Philosophy. By that time, in common with many in the late 1960s, I had developed an interest in meditation and things Indian. I channelled this interest particularly into Indian philosophy. I subsequently took my doctorate in Buddhist philosophy at the University of Oxford.
By about 1973-ish I was already beginning to think of myself as a Buddhist. I finally 'Took Refuge', formally becoming a Buddhist, in the Dalai Lama's tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. When I found myself teaching at the University of Bristol in the early 1980s I set up with others a group in Bristol that also now has its own Buddhist Centre. I became involved in occasional teaching within the context of practising Buddhism at Buddhist Centres. As well as my academic work in Buddhist philosophy I wrote and spoke as a Tibetan Buddhist on television, the radio, and at conferences. I took part in public and private dialogue with Christians, including Hans Küng and Raimundo Pannikkar.
I was interested in philosophy, but also I was interested in meditation and the exotic East. Many of us found Buddhism attractive originally because among other things it seemed so much more rational than the alternatives (but also much, much more exotic). In particular Buddhism seemed much more sensible (and exotic) than a theistic religion like Christianity. Buddhists do not believe in God. Well, (we thought) there seemed no reason to believe in God, and the existence of evil presented for us a positive argument against the existence of God. Those of us who were brought up as Christians were fed up with defending the existence of God in an unsympathetic world against its detractors. When we stood back and tried to be as objective as possible God looked less and less likely. In Buddhism one has an immensely sophisticated (and exotic) system of morality, spirituality and philosophy which does not require God at all. At a stroke difficulties involved in accepting the existence of God were bypassed. Instead, in becoming a Buddhist, (we thought) one could be a meditator with Buddhists, the ones who really know about meditation.
Rebirth
However, over many, many years as a Buddhist I became more and more uneasy about my Buddhism. Absolutely central to my growing unease with Buddhist affiliation were worries about rebirth and associated worries about the doctrine of karma. Buddhists believe in rebirth, that is, as it is broadly understood, reincarnation. And, Buddhists claim, there is no chronological first beginning to the series of past lives. We have all of us been reborn an infinite number of times. No God is needed to start the series off – for there simply was no first beginning. Things have been around (somewhere) for all eternity.
Now, belief in rebirth (and indeed karma – I'll come that) seems to be quite common nowadays even among those who would not claim to be Buddhists or Hindus. One even finds Christians who say they believe in rebirth. But rebirth was well-known in ancient Greece and Rome, and it has never been part of Christian orthodoxy. And there are good reasons for this. Rebirth is incompatible with certain absolutely central Christian doctrines, including the inestimable value of each and every individual person, and the justice of God. If rebirth is true, realistically we really have no hope. It is a hope-less doctrine. As a Buddhist, it dawned on me that I had no hope. Let me explain.
Hands up who wants to be reborn as a cockroach?
I want you to imagine that you are told you are to be painlessly executed at dawn. You are terrified. You are not terrified because it will hurt, since it will be painless. So why are you terrified? Perhaps your fear lies in it being the end of all your projects for the future – the story is over. Or maybe you do not want to leave forever your friends and family. Or perhaps you fear just a great empty void, a nothingness. What is it, exactly, that frightens you?
Now I want you to imagine that your executioner gently puts his arm round you and tells you not to worry. It really isn't so bad. Although you are to be executed, it has been discovered without a shadow of a doubt that the Buddhists and Hindus were right after all. You are to be instantly reborn. In fact, you are to be reborn as a cockroach in South America.
Well - I suggest that you would still be terrified. Indeed you might be even more frightened. But why would you be so frightened? Being a cockroach answers all, or most, of the fears that first sprang to mind when you heard of your imminent execution. Cockroaches surely have projects for the future, to get enough food, poison humans, or whatever it is cockroaches happily spend their lives doing. It'll be fun, once you get used to it. Of course, being a cockroach still means you must leave your friends and family, but then in life we often leave our friends and family. Our family and friends may be separated from us by exile, war, quarrels or whatever. Or if they die, instead of you, it has the same effect. So why in this respect should we be more terrified of our own death, than of the deaths of our loved ones? Moreover as a cockroach you will have lots and lots of new friends and family, many, many cockroach friends and cockroach family to replace the ones you have lost. You'll get used to it. It's not so bad, not half as bad as you thought. And being a cockroach is not nothingness. It's not like a great empty void. It is a life, too. You will still live.
So why are we not consoled by all this? Why do we still not relish the idea of execution at dawn, followed by all the fun of being a cockroach in South America? Well, you might say, cockroaches are horrible, ugly, verminous creatures. Who wants to be one? But is that fair? Perhaps cockroaches are not horrible and ugly to themselves. After all, I expect their mummies love them.
Can you imagine being a cockroach? Can you imagine living that cockroachy life? Surely you cannot. We are not asking can you imagine waking up inside a cockroach's body (as Kafka tells us, in his story Metamorphosis). We are not asking you to imagine being you, somehow having to come to terms with being crammed inside a cockroach's body. That would not be much fun. You would have problems with all those legs, at least for a while, and you would hate your cockroach mummy getting anywhere near you. She is so creepy! But it wouldn't be like that, would it? You would love your cockroach mummy, because (I expect) cockroaches do love their mummies. For you would be a cockroach too. You cannot imagine what it would be like to be a cockroach, because you would not be you inside a cockroach body. You would be a cockroach. And who knows what the imaginations, the dreams, of a cockroach might be.
Rebirth means the end of me
What is my point here? My point is this: What is so terrifying about my being executed at dawn and reborn as a cockroach is that it is simply, quite straightforwardly, the end of me. I cannot imagine being reborn as a cockroach because there is nothing to imagine. I quite simply would not be there at all. If rebirth is true, neither I nor any of my loved ones survive death. With rebirth, for me – the actual person I am – the story really is over. There may be another being living its life in some sort of causal connection with the life that was me (influenced by my karma), but for me there is no more. That is it – end of it. There is no more to be said about me.
None of this in itself means the Buddhist position is wrong. But what it does mean is that, if the Buddhist position is correct, our death in this life is actually, really, the death of us. Death will be the end for us. Traditionally, at least on the day to day level, Buddhists and others who accept rebirth tend to obscure this fact in their choice of language by referring to 'my rebirth', and 'concern for one's future lives'. But actually any rebirth (say, as a cockroach in South America) would not be oneself, and there is a serious question therefore as to why one should care at all about 'one's' future rebirths.
I began to see that if Buddhism were correct then unless I attained enlightenment (nirvana) or something like it in this life, where the whole cycle of rebirth would finally come to a complete end, I would have no hope. Clearly, I was not going to attain enlightenment in this life. All Buddhists would be inclined to accept that as true concerning just about everyone. Enlightenment is a supreme and extremely rare achievement for spiritual heroes, not the likes of us – certainly not the likes of me. So I (and all my friends and family) have in themselves no hope. Not only that. Actually from a Buddhist perspective in the scale of infinite time the significance of each of us as such, as the person we are, converges on nothing. For each of us lives our life and perishes. Each one of us – the person we are - is lost forever. Buddhism for me was hope-less. But was I absolutely sure Buddhism was true? As St Paul knew so well, Christianity at least offers hope.
Karma
Let me say something now about the theory that usually goes along with that of rebirth, the theory of karma. This is the theory, broadly, that our virtuous and vicious actions have respectively pleasant and painful results for us. Thus if I stub and break my little toe, that painful experience is as such the result of a vicious deed done by me in the past. If what I have said so far is correct then the principles of karma when applied over lifetimes must mean that some persons escape altogether at least some of the results of their vicious deeds, and others receive unpleasant experiences that result from vicious deeds they did not do.
For consider the following: Supposing a horrible dictator gives orders on his deathbed for painfully executing a thousand people. That dictator dies, so that person – the dictator – never receives the nasty results due to him through karma. There no doubt will be another being, 'his rebirth' who will receive those horrible results. But, first, what is that to our dictator? And, second, clearly that other being (the rebirth) will be horribly hurt as a result of something he, she, or it, did not do. The idea that a baby, for example, suffers from a painful illness because of something another person did, even if the baby is in some sense a rebirth of that person, can scarcely be portrayed as satisfactory or just. It could certainly not be, as some have claimed, the most acceptable answer to the problem of evil. The baby simply is not that person who did the wicked deed, no more than a baby cockroach is me after my execution.
Buddhists do not hold that God exists, but if there were a God certainly the theory of karma would be quite incompatible with His justice. So, too, would be the throwing away of persons on the rubbish heap of history, that is entailed by rebirth.
The Christian has hope
It seems to me patently obvious that if I am reborn the person I am now in this life ceases to exist. This is blindingly obvious if I am reborn as a cockroach in South America. We could not say that I am the same person as a cockroach in South America. Could we anymore say I would be the same person if my rebirth involved a human embryo in Africa? Or in Bristol, in my own family? And the standard Buddhist position (correctly) explicitly denies that the rebirth is the same person as the one who died. Thus rebirth is incompatible with the infinite value of the person.
But Christianity is the religion of the infinite value of the person. The person we are, or can become, is not accidental to us, and is not unimportant. Each person is an individual creation of God, as such infinitely loved and valued by God. On this is based the whole of Christian morality, from the value of the family to the altruism and self-denial of the saints. Because we are infinitely valuable to God died to save each one of us. He did not die to save chains of rebirths, or reincarnating Selves. He died to save us. And we are the persons we are, as embodied individuals with our stories, families and friends. Contrary to the myth of the Christian hatred of the physical and the body, actually Christianity is also the religion of embodiment and the essential goodness of all physical creation.
It follows from all this that rebirth would be diametrically opposed to the whole direction of Christianity. If there is survival of death - and the faith of the Christian, originating in Christ's own resurrection, is based on that - it cannot be in terms of rebirth. Rebirth and the infinite value of the person are incompatible. The Christian view of death is one of hope, indeed of triumph, for (apart from anything else) it sees death not as an empty void, a nothingness. The story is not over for the persons we are, and we can hope that we do not part forever from our friends and family. But much, much more, our faith is that in God our deaths will be meaningful for each and every one of us – each individual person – in ways that exceed our imaginations but that even now excite our hope and draw-on our lives.
Conclusion
Well – it was thoughts like this that gradually led me away from Buddhism. Buddhism was for me hope-less. Christians have hope. I so wanted to be able to be a Christian. I returned, to look again at the things that I had rejected in my earlier Christian faith. I detail the stages of my journey in my book The Unexpected Way (T&T Clark/Continuum: 2002). Through grace I came again to God. I convinced myself that it was rational to believe in God, as rational – indeed I now think more rational – than to believe with the Buddhists that there is no God. Coming to believe in God, I could no longer be a Buddhist. I had to be a theist. I looked carefully at the evidence and was astonished to find that the literal resurrection of Our Lord from the dead after His crucifixion was the most rational explanation of what must have happened. That, I felt, made Christianity the most rational option out of theistic religions. And, as a Christian, I argued that priority has to be given to the Roman Catholic Church. I needed a good reason not to be received into the Catholic Church. In my book I examine various arguments that were given to me against becoming a Catholic, and I argue that as a reason for rejecting the Catholic Church they fail to convince. So I was received into the Catholic Church.
I now live in gratitude and hope. And I have never, ever, for one moment regretted my decision.
ADENDUM
If what I have argued here is correct, then it seems to me we are entitled theologically to say that we know rebirth is false. What I mean by this is:
i) Rebirth is incompatible with Christian belief.
ii) As Christian believers we are entitled to say that we know theologically that Christian belief is true.
iii) Whatever is incompatible with a truth is false.
iv) Hence we are entitled to say as Christian believers that we know theologically that rebirth is false.
Some further reading on Buddhism and Catholicism by Paul Williams:
The Unexpected Way, Continuum, 2002
The Siddha Wanderer
134
Diskusi Umum / Re: Asal Muasal Manusia
« on: 12 October 2011, 02:48:37 AM »Quote
dalam sengketa sungai Rohini, Buddha tidak menghentikan secara langsung, tetapi Buddha memberikan wejangan, para pihak yang bertikai sendirilah yang menghentikan pertikaian...
Dalam semua aspek, sebenarnya tidak ada yang bisa menghentikan perbuatan buruk kita, kecuali kita sendiri. Bahkan buddha sendiri... Kita sendiri-lah yang bisa merubah kita sendiri.
So?? Emg Bodhisattva kaga?
Quote
saya jadi bingung soal urutan perjalanan waktu dalam Tantrayana, apakah waktu bisa berjalan mundur sehingga sesosok bakal bisa muncul belakangan daripada sosok yg dibakalinya? Buddha Sakyamuni muncul ribuan tahun lebih dulu daripada anjingnya Sol Capoera si calon Buddha?
Hahahahahahha.....gampang aja deh... maksud saya adalah seorang hewan bisa memiliki sifta mulia buktinya Bodhisattva ketika terlahir jadi hewan. So kenapa kita tidak bisa menghormati dan belajar dari hewan juga, yang memiliki kemungkinan nyata memiliki sifat mulia seperti Bodhisattva yang menjadi hewan?
The Siddha Wanderer
135
Diskusi Umum / Re: Asal Muasal Manusia
« on: 12 October 2011, 02:44:47 AM »Quote
dalam sengketa sungai Rohini, Buddha tidak menghentikan secara langsung, tetapi Buddha memberikan wejangan, para pihak yang bertikai sendirilah yang menghentikan pertikaian...
Dalam semua aspek, sebenarnya tidak ada yang bisa menghentikan perbuatan buruk kita, kecuali kita sendiri. Bahkan buddha sendiri... Kita sendiri-lah yang bisa merubah kita sendiri.
Ya... Dalai Lama sendiri juag banyak memberi wejangan Dharma. Ya benar, di dalam buku "Pembebasan di Tangan Kita" karya Pabongkha Rinpoche, dikutip salah satu sutra: "Para Buddha menyebrangkan para makhluk bukan dengan menghapuskan penderitaan karma buruk, tetapi dengan memberikan wejangan Dharma."
Quote
Kalo prioritas Boddhisatva itu buat mengajar Dhamma, kenapa Dalai lama dan konco2nya masuk politik...?? kenapa mereka selalu gagal untuk menyebarkan Dhamma di tanah mereka sendiri?!..kenapa mereka selalu gagal untuk meng-convert Komunis jadi Buddhist?..bukankah Boddhisatva2 Mahayana banyak tuh?...gitu banyak Boddhisatva tapi semuanya gk bisa apa2...ckckckckckk...
kontribusi Boddhisatva2 Mahayana apa?...duduk di Vihara jadi objek puja?...
kalo loe bilang semuanya berdasarkan karma...berarti Boddhisatva2 Mahayana cuma bengong aja..karena mereka tidak bertindak..!! kalo bertindak pasti ada hasil...!! kekuatan Boddhisatva2 yg kuat gk bisa mengoyangkan pemerintahan komunis?!....gk bisa nge-influence orang2 komunis?!...
Woi mr. Matahari yg keblinger!
Buakakakkaka anda tahu kagak Mao Zedong itu selalu bawa Sutra-sutra Buddhis ke mana"? Anda tahu ia belajar Buddhis gak? Anda tahu gak presiden Jiang Zemin itu juga banyak appreciate dan berdevosi pada Buddhism?
Jadi ga usah berkhayal Dalai Lama mengconvert Komunis menjadi Buddhis, karena mereka cukup tahu dengan baik apa Buddhisme itu, makanya sekarang Buddhisme membludak dan banyak para tokoh" budayawan dan politisi di Tiongkok sono yang mendukung Buddhisme, bedanya adalah mereka menggunakan Buddhisme sebagai alat politik toh! hahahahaha... lihat sono Vihara Famen yang guedeee sebagai bukti g usah Dalai Lama pun, sekarang di negara Komunis udah buanyaaakkk yang Buddhis.
Hey sadar ya... justru karena peran politik Dalai Lama, maka beliau bisa mengadakan event Dharmadesana yang buesarr dan menyentuh hati banyak orang di Eropa dan Amrik, serta banyak diliput oleh media-media massa! Serta membantu ketertarikan orang" Barat terhadap agama Buddha, mulai dari selebritis sampai yang lain...xixixixixixiix....daripada di Tiongkok yang tertutup, mending Dalai Lama menyebarkan Dharma di Eropa dan Amrik yang terbuka dengan bahasa Inggrisnya yang banyak dipahami di sleuruh dunia, menyebabkan Dharma sungguh-sungguh merata di berbagai belahan dunia dan kekaguman thd Dalai lama serta Buddhisme menjangkau seluruh dunia.
Ckckckckckckckck.... di tanah sendiri mmg gak bisa, tapi IMPACT dan influence Dalai Lama di BARAT sono SANGAT luar biasa dan Dalai Lama rajin berkeliling memberikan Dharmadesana di negara" Eropa dan Amrik. Demikian juga para Rinpoche yang lain. Dan banyak juga Rinpoche Kagyu yang aktif dalam membantu pembangunan kembali vihara Vajrayana di TIONGKOK KOMUNIS dan mereka diizinkan. Mananya yang duduk diam? huahahahhaha....
Aahh pertanyaan kasar pura" bodo anda ini pancet ae....buakakakak.. sana belajar di Kechara!
Quote
LOL
skarang salahin hukum karma..LOL jangan2 loe menyamakan karma = takdir yak?...
Tibet yg konon tempat suci dan diisi oleh MAKHLUK2 SUCI..!! yg diisi oleh para Samyaksambuddha yg hidup...emanasi-emanasi para Buddha kok bisa dijajah seh?..mo ketawa gw..!! LOL...
Pemerintahan, orang2 Tibet dan Bhikkhu2 Tibet dulu buat karma buruk apa sampe dijajah sama komunis?!...
penyebaran Dharma ke barat itu karena immigrant, bukan karena Boddhisatva...please deh jangan dodol..!!
Buakakakakakak....
Karma berbuah pada waktunya, para Bodhisattva juga adalah makhluk hidup yang punya utang karma, semuanya mengalami karma dan semuanya juga berusaha semaksimal mungkin mengatasi karma, tetapi apabila karma dominan seperti penyerangan kaum Sakya oleh Raja Virudhaka, maka layaknya Sang Buddha yang mencoba menghindarkan pembunuhan dengan memberikan wejangan Dharma, tetap saja tidak berhasil.
Buakakakakaka mohon tanya deh.... banyak dari para Rinpoche dan Lhama yang menyebarkan Dharma di Barat sono... kan mereka JUGA IMIGRAN.... kok bisa bukan karena Bodhisattva?
Quote
seluruh makhluk dari inti yg sama, yaitu Brahma...
yahhH~~ Di tantra diganti aja nama Brahma-nya....jadi nama Buddha
Penjabaran cuma segini? LOL..... Paling diketawain baik para scholar Buddhis ataupun Hindu. Semua orang mah bisa! Belajar lagi mr. Matahari!
Quote
Jadi menghormati dan menggap anjing gw itu adalah hal yg PATUT di Tantrayana?...jadi inisiasi buat apa donk kalo gitu? jadi belajar dari anjing sama belajar dari Bhikkhu Tantra itu gk beda yak? karena loe terkesan bahwa dua2-nya bakal jadi Samyaksambuddha juga, dan semua makhluk itu emanasi dari Buddha...??
Anda ini kocak ya... buakakakakka
Jelas" belajar terhadap suatu objek makhluk itu ya beda-beda. Apa anda menghormati teman anda dan sahabat anda dengan cara bernamaskara pada mereka layaknya anda bernamaskara pada Buddha atau orang tua?
Apa anda menghargai dan belajar dari teman, guru, Buddha serta orangtua dengan cara yang sama, penerimaan yang sama dll semuanya sama? Kalau semuanya sama, anda memang benar-benar aneh.
Bahkan ada orang yang belajar dari air, menghormati, menghargai dan belajar dari alam. Mereka adalah para pecinta lingkungan. Yah kalau anda sih anggap saja mereka edan karena belajar sama benda mati yak? wakaka
Demikian juga belajar sama anjing dan bhiksu Tantra ya beda! la wong satu hewan satu menungso! hahahaha... Emang anda mau ngajak ngobrol anjing kaya ngajak ngobrol sama Rinpoche? hahahahahaha...
Quote
1. Perang terus berlanjut?
2. Buddhism masih kalah sama Selam dan Karesten dalam jumlah umat? karma baek apa yg mereka buat sehingga umat mereka gitu banyak? 911? perang salib?
3. kenapa Indonesia yg dulu-nya Buddhism Mahayana jadi selam?...mana boddhisatva2-nya?...tidur? ato lage di starbucks?
4. kenapa pusat2 Mahayana banyak yg dijajah? China dijajah oleh komunis, Tibet dijajah oleh komunis....!! Vietnam juga dijajah komunis?...ohlala..jangan tanya kenapa negara Theravada gk berkembang ato bla bla shit, karena di Theravada kita gk percaya mr.penolong/Boddhisatva versi Mahayana...
5. kenapa LYS bisa berkembang pesat?...apakah Boddhisatva2 Tantrayana membiarkan beliau berkembang pesat?....jangan salahkan karma lage please...dari itu makhluk gk ada yg baek...
1. Perang apa yak? Emg Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso pernah perang? wakaka.. g pernah tuh
2. Yah tanya balik ke anda aja deh... karma baik apa yang mereka perbuat... mungkin saja: usaha sosial dan niat tulus mereka serta terus inovatif dalam penyebaran ajaran mereka! hahahhahaa... pertanyakan lagi kenapa ya para Arahat juga kok pada duduk diam ngeliat umat agama lain terus bertambah? Padahal dulu pada masa Sang Buddha mereka aktif membabarkan Dharma dan banyak umat agama lain yang ngikut mereka jd Buddhis? hahahahhaha... bukankah mereka mampu memberikan wejangan Dharma yang pas dan mengena bagi kapasitas serta kcenderungan masing" orang sehingga yakin pada Triratna. layaknya Buddha Gotama yang membabarkan Dharma di waktu dan tempat yang tepat?
3. Hahahahah... sungguh anda masih IGNORANT terhadap konsep Bodhisattva dan Karma dalam Mahayana. Sengaja mencari-cari sensasi... padahal jelas" Bodhisattva tunduk oleh kaidah hukum karma.
4. Oh lalalalala...perbaiki IGNORANCE anda... emang Bodhisattva itu MAHA KUASA kaya Tuhan?
3. Buakakakakka saya tidak nyalahin karma, justru anda dari awal yang nyalahin karma terus menerus anda yg g sadar!
Yang pasti semua yang ada di dunia ini adalah hasil SEBAB AKIBAT alias KARMA. Mau disalahin atau dibener"in, kenyataannya ya memang begitu. hahahahah....The Siddha wanderer