Dear @Rosie, I see this post was started 4 years ago (which I failed to notice on my first reading). And which may go some way to explaining why it is a bit disjointed. It’s great that you have found something that helps on the Path
The Dalai Lama is not spoken about much here, simply because this is an EBT forum, and the Dalai Lama is from the Tibetan tradition, the focus is on their own traditions texts. This is not to say that he is not a great Teacher All teachings are based upon what the Buddha taught. But you have been part of the forum here for a long time, so I’m sure you are familiar with all the arguments It’s great you have found a resource that works well for you
Indeed, Mindfulness (sati) is the gateway to the ability to see the arising, changing and ceasing of physical and mental phenomena, and thus impermanence and un-satisfactoriness. By seeing these clearly, one can see the cause and effect and conditional arising of all things, including ones own thoughts, feelings and choices, and that there is no permanent essence of Self.
May you achieve peace and equanimity, and be liberated from suffering
Regarding “clearest and most articulate direction for successful application of the Dharma,” I noticed some of the comments:
“Too technical. He doesn’t define his terms. Plus there is no definitive path explained.”
“I guess I was looking for a more concrete path.”
I think the Buddha taught the development of the Noble Eightfold Path in his Dhamma-Vinaya as the way to happiness.
I can’t speak for all users, but I think the Buddha himself holds the foremost standing around here.
I personally try to respect the Dalai Lama and other pop culture famous figures of Buddhism to the degree that they are not contrary to and in accordance with the Dhamma-Vinaya, no less, no more.
I don’t think his (or anyone else’s) fame increases their standing by much in EBT-oriented forums.
I think that in Buddhism, any and all problems are sort of contextualized as “dukkha” - the successful application of the Dhamma would be the end of dukkha.
Each being may experience dukkha in their own way, and in a sense “have their own set of problems.” This is not to minimize anyone’s problems. To the contrary, it brings it to the forefront even, but perhaps in a more impersonal and objective way to enable one to effectively address and solve this problem of dukkha, I think.
I think the Buddha seems to claim definitively that all beings are capable of achieving the end goal of unconditional happiness, and the Dhamma is universally applicable regardless of each being’s background external factors, I think.
Those of us who came to the Dhamma as a lived experience find a lot of value in personal interaction, so a local community is very important to us.
I understand that some approach the Dhamma by reading and analysis, but that was not my experience, and so I find it difficult to identify with. For me, the reading came much later, after I had a grounding in a community.
How exactly did you find “grounding in a community” independent of say “reading and analyzing the Dhamma”?
I ask out of curiosity because it seems difficult for me to relate to the concept of being able “find grounding in a community” whose views and actions I am not sure accord with truth/Buddhism/etc.
Instead, even now, I find myself more drawn to say “finding grounding in the Dhamma-Vinaya” as opposed to say, “finding grounding in a community.”
I am using it in a general sense, as it is used today among Western Buddhists.
Its not a tall order, just some basic research. Reading EBTs is great, but actually going to a real community in meatspace is also important for people. Learning about those traditions is useful.
Sure, that is your view. But for most people looking to find a Buddhist community, there are numerous other concerns, many of them personal and practical. I will let you in on a little secret, when looking for a spiritual community, most people don’t do extensive doctrinal study and historical research and then compare this with the teachings of the various communities available to them to see how close they are to what they consider to be the true and real Dhamma-Vinaya as taught by the real historical Buddha in the earliest and most authentic EBTs (and I say this with my tongue firmly in cheek). The real concerns are much more practical and personal, how well do they fit in, do they have friends who go there, is it close their home, do they have english language services, and so on. There is nothing wrong with this and it is absolutely normal and human.
I didn’t say it was necessary. Also, all Buddhist traditions have culty organizations.
Sure. I define it as I believe it is possible to attain awakening practicing any of them.
I roughly believe so, because I believe they maintain the main/core ideas of the Dhamma alive, even if the outer trappings and practices differ. Now, I am referring to the main three traditions one is likely to find in the West and I am making a big generalization which does not take into account outliers. For example, in all three traditions (Theravada, Indo-Tibetan, East Asian), there are cults and there are quite strange groups that have veered way off the mark (Dhammakaya, Shambala, Sokka Gakkai etc.).
The best accurate and reliable source for the Dhamma Vinaya is one’s own experience of practicing the path and seeing how it ends suffering. “Accordance with Dhamma-Vinaya” is much more about the experience of ending suffering than about how exactly one’s practice matches ancient texts word by word. Texts are important and it is great to study them, but they are not the essence of the Dhamma. Sorry, but I am just not coming from the same place you are coming from. I don’t think someone looking for a group to practice in has to do a bunch of textual study before finding a group and starting to practice Dharma. Its just not something that most people are into. The vast majority of seekers out there looking for a spiritual community are not going to follow that kind of advice (as in, telling them that only your books have the true teaching, and everyone else is wrong). They’ve heard that line before, so good luck selling it.
I turned up at a Monastery, people were welcoming and seemed happy. So I stuck around. I joined in with chanting and helped out with things. After a few months I learned some basic Dhamma and meditation. It was only later that I started reading suttas.
So, I don’t have any experience with a “read texts and decide what Path to take” approach. Obviously, there are people, like you, who take that approach. But for me, I don’t think it would have worked. Personal connection was the doorway.
And, having read the suttas, I can, of course justify my starting point by reference to various suttas…
“Bhāradvāja, take the case of a mendicant living supported by a town or village. A householder or their child approaches and scrutinizes them for three kinds of things: things that arouse greed, things that provoke hate, and things that promote delusion. ‘Does this venerable have any qualities that arouse greed? Such qualities that, were their mind to be overwhelmed by them, they might say that they know, even though they don’t know, or that they see, even though they don’t see; or that they might encourage others to do what is for their lasting harm and suffering?’ Scrutinizing them they find: ‘This venerable has no such qualities that arouse greed. Rather, that venerable has bodily and verbal behavior like that of someone without greed. And the principle that they teach is deep, hard to see, hard to understand, peaceful, sublime, beyond the scope of reason, subtle, comprehensible to the astute. It’s not easy for someone with greed to teach this.’ SuttaCentral
The Buddha doesn’t suggest that the student analyse the teachers talks, he suggests looking for good qualities.
I ran into this Ajahn Chah passage today, sharing because it is relevant.
Q: Is it advisable to read a lot or study the scriptures as a part of practice?
A: The Dhamma of the Buddha is not found in books. If you want to really see for yourself what the Buddha was talking about, you don’t need to bother with books. Watch your own mind. Examine to see how feelings come and go, how thoughts come and go. Don’t be attached to anything. Just be mindful of whatever there is to see. This is the way to the truths of the Buddha. Be natural. Everything you do in your life here is a chance to practice. It is all Dhamma.
Of course, ideally you do both, study and practice. Study informs the practice. But no one said you need to do a bunch of study before hand.
Dear Friend, I am full of gratitude for your kind support and direction to these sites which I will definitely peruse. Regarding my comments about inclusion, I was referring to some of the EBT that categorized sex and gender variation as taboo or as a lower caste of people. I am not an expert on these texts but I did encounter many references by other posters regarding some of the rules about people whose sex and gender expression made them seem less valuable. Much of this is my own interpretation, but the implications seem clear.
And there was also the time last year when in search of a Buddhist community, I reached out to the spokesperson of what was ironically called ‘The Rainbow Sangha’, and was tethered to the approval of some Buddhist folk who were considering forming a sangha in my area. But when I mentioned my trans-ness my inclusion was held up for inspection. Here is the link to my description of the event and the ensuing discussion which was not entirely supported of my discourse.
I hope that my emoting is not perceived as self victimization as I really feel supported and welcome here among some of the wisest people I have ever encountered, and I have benefited much from their collective wisdom. Yet as I perceive them, the early writings of Buddha set the context for a large segment of the global Buddhist community to discriminate.
I have always thought of humans as spirit whose physical presence is merely the clothes we wear as we wander through this material world. Others apparently do not share this vision.
Mucho Metta to you for your compassion and wisdom. Your support is invaluable. Namaste!
I personally do not think this is the case, unless by “early writings” you mean “later Buddhist texts” that were written a really long time ago, and thus “seem early or old.”
I think it is difficult to discern what the Buddha’s position was on a number of issues based on the views held by self-identified Buddhists today.
Not at all, at least not to me.
I think the problem is probably not with you in this case, but those who identify and call themselves Buddhist but do not take the time to learn the Dhamma-Vinaya, yet misrepresent the Buddha on such issues.
They might even be gaslighting you into thinking the Buddha/Buddhism agrees with them on positions that he may not.
I think the comes back to the difference between “self-identified Buddhists” and “Buddha/Buddhism.”
As you might notice, there are beings on this forum that advise a “personal, personable, and practical approach” to figuring out which Sangha to follow, emphasizing the immediacy of personal experience, which I will reply to later.
I think this approach overlooks significant dangers, due to which I am wary and try to steer clear of this approach.
I think the problem you mentioned is one of the many dangers that such an approach overlooks.
I think there is no scope at all in the Dhamma-Vinaya for any form of harmfulness, unbeneficalness, unfairness, etc. - and I think the early texts heavily support this position.
However, those who approach Buddhism from a more social perspective often end up having a harder time discerning what parts were “actually taught by the Buddha” and what parts are “the personal beliefs, opinions, perspectives, practices, etc. of the people who joined that particular social group.”
As such, they may find themselves holding views that do no accord with the Dhamma-Vinaya…even if they call themselves Buddhist. They may be confused about what the Buddha actually said.
Even though I try to (but don’t necessarily) take the study first fully, then practice (so that I know what it is that I should be practicing in the first place - something I learned the hard way), even then I still have a lot of trouble discerning what the Buddha actually said.
So the social approach is all good and well…until it isn’t. I don’t think discrimination, against trans or any other being on the basis of their external background, could be blamed on the early sources nor on the Buddha.
Instead, I think it could be blamed on both individuals and groups who call themselves and identify as “Buddhist,” yet do not try to actually study and practice the Dhamma-Vinaya taught by the Buddha.
What I think ends up happening is that from their limited understanding, they misrepresent and mis-portray Buddhism as being a certain way or holding certain positions.
Those who dogmatically cling to the “ideal of tolerance” seem to often overlook the “lack of adherence to the Dhamma-Vinaya, yet portrayal of oneself as ‘being Buddhist’ to the world.” It’s ironic when they call those who make some kind of attempt to determine what the Buddha actually said to be “dogmatic,” when in reality, they themselves may dogmatically cling the “philosophical relativism” - a position rejected by the Buddha.
I am not sure how else to make distinctions between what “the Buddha actually taught” and what “social groups who call themselves Buddhist say that Buddhism is” (for example, with regard to topics relevant trans beings) than to investigate, examine, look into, learn, etc. the early sources of Dhamma-Vinaya.
I think your own efforts to examine these might help you to protect yourself from “self-identified Buddhists” who might gaslight, mislead, or misrepresent Buddhism to you. Because that that point, you wouldn’t be as easily swayed by their misrepresentations of Buddhism since you wouldn’t be dependent on them to learn/know what the Buddha taught.
I think this seems to be the sense in the early Buddhist sources too, I think.
I think I might be speculating or oversimplifying here, but a trans person might be understood as a being who was female/woman or male/man in their previous lifetime(s) and was reborn as female/man or male/woman.
From my understanding of Buddhism, this seems to be an impersonal process.
I met a nun who told me that she felt like she was a man in a previous lifetime and she thinks that she might have purposely been reborn as a woman in order to help other nuns as one of the nuns.
Even though, she was a Mahayana nun, she cited Theravada (and maybe EBT) examples of beings who get reborn into a different sex.
I think it matters more whether a being holds true views and does harmless and beneficial actions than what their social/external background factors are.
To make it clear who we’re replying to use the Reply button at the bottom extreme right of the post in question. Using the Reply button in the line of buttons below the most recent post replies either to the thread in general.
Namaste @Rosie ,
I am comparatively new to this forum, considering that the thread is almost 4 years old. There are already excellent replies by the Venerables and other lay friends here, and because this discussion is old, I assume that, hopefully, in these 4 years or so, you might be well over your doubts that prompted you to formulate the OP.
Even then, I thought of sharing with you these wonderful essays on our ability and skills of judgement when looking out for a teacher. Lost in Quotation | Beyond All Directions
and The Power of Judgment | Head & Heart Together
Personally, I would suggest an EBT-oriented approach when starting out, but I have learned different people find solace and are inclined to different traditions. Hence I shared these essays for you to get a good headstart.
They provide some valuable insights into how we can grow in this dhamma as a beginner, no matter which tradition you follow.
If you haven’t read them, they may be able to provide you some guidance on your path. If you have read them already, then hopefully I might have prompted you to reread them !
May you find the inclusive sangha of wise, compassionate and dedicated dhamma-friends you have been looking for, and may you experience the bliss of Dhamma!
Metta
Thank you so much for he time and compassion required to write this helpful post. It provided excellent clarification.
Yes, that is indeed what I meant.
Yes, that’s what I ran into at that ‘Rainbow Sangha’ I linked in the previous post.
Yeah…me too!
Yes, and now we get to the meat. I have heard so many hypotheticals about this incarnation of mine even to the point that perhaps I am being punished for something I did in a past life? And of course this is where I get stuck wondering if that could be true…if it is some lesson that I can not decipher…or if Buddha ever described such a thing. And then to have it reinforced by Western Buddhists who use their authority to create distance between us…it just gets overwhelming! But thank you so much again. I appreciate your compassionate comments, and wish you peace and happiness. With Metta, FRIEND
This line of speculation is not helpful at all, in my opinion. Why does it matter how or why we got where we are? We’re here and all we have any influence over is how we conduct ourselves right now; the training we do with our mind right this very moment.
I have a small number of propensities that have been lifelong burrs in my saddle and the question has arisen in my mind “What happened in a previous life that has influenced me so profoundly?” I’ve found it’s important to not define karma as any kind of punishment for deeds of a past life, that’s not what karma is. As Ven. Sujato has put it, if I throw a stone into the air, it goes up and falls to earth, maybe hitting me on the head, that’s just what stones do when thrown into the air. Deeds have natural consequences which don’t include retribution. I don’t (yet) know what my past lives behavior was and I don’t recall that as part the Buddha’s path, until perhaps I get to the brink of full awakening!
I guess what I’m saying is that I’ve found it to be better to not consider what I did last life but rather what I’m doing now.
Well that is a comforting approach. So I guess I need more education because I thought that is what karma literally meant…even thought that I read it somewhere here. I think maybe a new thread would help? Thank you!
This – Kamma and its Fruit – is one of the first resources I’ve read on kamma and it has stuck with me. Near the start it quotes AN 3.110:
"If one says that in whatever way a person performs a kammic action, in that very same way he will experience the result — in that case there will be no (possibility for a) religious life and no opportunity would appear for the complete ending of suffering.
“But if one says that a person who performs a kammic action (with a result) that is variably experienceable, will reap its results accordingly — in that case there will be (a possibility for) a religious life and an opportunity for making a complete end of suffering.”
This is an example of how I see one aspect of kamma. I might be wrong, so I invite any correction.
I have two businesses, one being sewing machine repair. I have a standard full service rate but some jobs are more complex, some less. I was repairing a sewing machine yesterday and came upon a decision that I had to make: how much do I charge this person? Since I’m self employed and can charge what I wish, I could charge what I think is a reasonable amount or increase it some. Sometimes this choice is easy, sometimes it’s a complicated equation and needs some consideration for both my time and expertise and the customers well being.
What occurred to me that if I were to take advantage of the situation and charge too much just to get more money, the customer would likely not even notice. However, if I act out of greed, it springs from a defilement of my mind, greed. There is no being or agency that will hold me accountable and mete out my punishment. Rather, it’s that my mind is defiled and my actions from my corrupted mind continue to hold fast to the roots of craving which naturally produce a continuous thirst for more.
If I continue on this path and don’t come to an end of craving and uproot the defilements of my mind, when my body breaks up at death the craving continues. The delusion and the craving naturally follow to the next life, not by the retribution of some judge sentencing me, but from a continuing thirst of my own making.
If I were to follow the example of the Buddha and completely uproot defilements and purify my mind, I would have no craving to continue trying to fulfill and rebirth would have no purpose.
“Now suppose a man throws a lump of salt into a small cup of water. What do you think, monks: would that small quantity of water in the cup become salty and undrinkable through that lump of salt?” — “It would, Lord.” — “And why so?” — “The water in the cup is so little that a lump of salt can make it salty and undrinkable.” — “But suppose, monks, that lump of salt is thrown into the river Ganges. Would it make the river Ganges salty and undrinkable?” — “Certainly not, Lord.” — “And why not?” — “Great, Lord, is the mass of water in the Ganges. It will not become salty and undrinkable by a lump of salt.”
All teachings are based upon what the Buddha taught. But you have been part of the forum here for a long time, so I’m sure you are familiar with all the arguments 
It’s great you have found a resource that works well for you 
