Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What to teach a Shaolin Monk

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by LFJ
    ...and satan rules here.
    No shit. I'm da man here.

    BL, see you soon....

    Comment


    • #17
      yeh. as long as ppl know that I'm still the same and consistant person on the same mission I've always been on since they met me either here or at kfm or whereever else since, then I guess I'm okay with that running into you. better the devil you know, if you know what I mean..

      Originally posted by LFJ View Post
      btl,

      i'm not even going to get into your bullshit again with you. everyone's seen that. just shut up.

      you take these message boards way too f*cking serious! all these emotions. lmao! you're the only one who pours your real personal life out on here. and no one wants to hear it.

      you think you know something about me from this experience behind a computer screen. and i dont even talk about my real life on here or give you any sort of glimpse into it.

      thats bullshit.

      get a life.

      I'll tell you that we went through this here yrs ago... before we even had a stan here. of course you all say more about our lives and selves than realise, but unless you had an adult perspective, from being one mind you, then you mightn't be likely to understand that. you do talk about your life and do talk about your very private life, even if you're not even a real person but a characture of the same fractured consciousness daodejing refers to.
      which is no surprise coming from him, because he practices tcm and has a girlfriend who sees qigong demons. wtf planet do you get away with say things like that ( of which he believed her about mind you )and not get insanity carded for it? just because you pretend not to have emotions, LFJ, that doesn't mean that ppl can't see them in your tantrums.
      I kind of liken warriors to danger of running adry on robot planet..like Shi Heng Shan did and committed suicide..survival terms and love and actual flesh and blood company and reasons for doing that can be like that primally and a spiritual moral, doesn't always tell you how to make it happen or mean that it's going to end up realised. look at shakyamuni and his brahmin criticism. but I think there are things to do about it. we've spoken about this before. over and over for a cpl of yrsy ou and I. you know what I think your problem is. understand that that quantifies by that you have one inside of you prior emptiness. you think you can just be and deserve to be a loose cannon spinning top whirling around in your misery picking on anyone who doesn't suffer the same disposition until they notice that , "holy f*ck, he's in a disposition". if you're the one in protest of that I see that in you, then why fuel my attention to you by making deliberately negative remarks? or even any at all to me? yoga and qigong and even kungfu progression and skill is like that. the only way to progress is to run the position an negotiate and stretch and condition out of it. see that's growing up. no wonder it dwindles down to just buddha who gets that happened to at parinirvana as the cycle progresses and why the concept of samsara works as it does. and no wonder america is typecasted as it is. get the other side of balance and osmotic integration of that as a wholesome function of life. that iis what made shakyamuni the buddha. dont think he didn't hear comments like yours neither. no amount of tantrum is going to change how homeostatic balance works and why it iis the core principal of continuing existance.

      Anyway, for all intents and purposes, they might aswell be, though, Daodejing. it all washes the same spirit the same way imo and queitly, I barely even distinguish the differences between them. "this much to go" or " up to here on it" is juust that. that's why we have avatar. same b.s. really.

      Blooming tianshi lotus

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by daodejing View Post
        She's still here?

        Is happeh still running around?

        And furthermore are these posters different mentally ill people, or different personas of the same fractured consciousness?

        I hope you dont mind me doing this. this is a pm I received from you in march of 2005. I'm posting it because I want to demonstrate the logic of demons ( or rather qigong masters if you'd prefer to term it like that)arising and causes of that.

        [quote]


        Quote:
        Originally Posted by daodejing
        I wish this case were that simple, the patient was a patient and student of one of my qigong teachers, and after voicing the possession issue to that teacher, the teacher in question hired a very close girlfriend of mine to treat the patient. When she entered the house, the entity appeared to her a satyr, sitting in the corner, smoking his pipe and watching the entire time as she did the patient intake. He stared her down after the intake, and simply said "Why should I go when I'm perfectly welcome to stay?"

        She cleared the house, treated the woman, and sent the entity back to wherever it came from. Then, she was hired to clear the teacher's house, and saw the same hairy little goat legged man sitting in the teacher's house. It turns out, that he had been sent by someone in my sigong's family, Hong Liu's lineage to punish my teacher for becoming involved with with Hong Liu, a married man. When my friend realised how involved and nasty this situation really was, she dropped the job, told the teacher she couldn't help and walked out.

        Not all the folktales we grew up with are false. Sure, many of them are, and the ones that aren't are often massively embelished.

        And I do agree with you, most often cases of possesion involve a person who's let an aspect of their own mind take over to a radical degree. But there are darker things than lawyer's prowling the streets of LA. Ghosts are the easy ones to deal with.



        [end quote]




        Blooming tianshi lotus.

        Comment


        • #19
          LFJ, i am sorry i m in China and the net is too slow for me to see youtube.

          You say Peta is bullshit, i dont know about this, but i ve seen a lot of their videos and i believe the suffering of animals in it is true, it is not lucasfilms. Have you seen the one about chinese fur farms?

          I am a little aware about the vinaya for monks about eating meat. Now lets say you want to kill your exgirlfriend and you hire somebody for it. Zen you will not have killed her? A monks eats a fish, he didnt kill it? How does he know it wasnt killed for him?

          Laozi, Daodejing 36 said the fish should not go out of water and that the state should not show its weapons. Are shaolin monks more clever than Laozi or Gandhi?

          Last month i talked with a buddhist nun about Shaolin. She looked a bit disatisfied about it.

          Again, why to use force to catch a fish that does not want to go out the water? Answer this one please.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by liutangsanzang View Post
            Are shaolin monks more clever than Laozi or Gandhi?
            I haven't found many clever ones. Well, just a few...
            Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

            "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

            (more comments in my User Profile)
            russbo.com


            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by liutangsanzang View Post
              LFJ, i am sorry i m in China and the net is too slow for me to see youtube.

              You say Peta is bullshit, i dont know about this, but i ve seen a lot of their videos and i believe the suffering of animals in it is true, it is not lucasfilms. Have you seen the one about chinese fur farms?
              i'm not disagreeing with the horrific realities of animal abuse at locations around the world. nor am i supporting it. i do not eat meat myself.

              but the organization of peta is a little wacky. from bombing properties to killing 2/3 of the animals they rescue, and their unrealistic ideals. they're not quite my idea of "ethical".

              they are rather hypocritical.

              but again, i do not deny the realities nor do i support them. i just wouldnt support peta as the organization to run the protests.

              I am a little aware about the vinaya for monks about eating meat.
              here's where most people get confused. i'll try to clear it up:

              one thing to realize about the shaolin warrior monks is that they only take the five lay precepts (observe 10 while living in the temple). they are by all means secular, but in shaolin they are allowed to live as a monastic sangha. so the pratimoksha really doesnt apply to them. this is unique to shaolin.

              besides, the vinaya does not say anything about eating meat. that comes up in the bodhisattva precepts. which chinese monastics take both in order to become fully ordained.

              however, wuseng are secular and these do not apply to them unless they take those precepts. you have to look at shaolin warrior monks based on the level of precepts they take.

              Laozi, Daodejing 36 said the fish should not go out of water and that the state should not show its weapons. Are shaolin monks more clever than Laozi or Gandhi?
              this is not a statement of cleverness, but rather morality. shaolin warrior monks follow the morality guidelines of the buddhist five lay precepts and the martial ethics of shaolin.

              Last month i talked with a buddhist nun about Shaolin. She looked a bit disatisfied about it.
              most ordained monks and nuns have little to no experience or knowledge of the shaolin tradition, namely the warrior monk sect which causes them confusion. they're understanding comes from their experience with their ordination in their respective monasteries.

              but because they look at the warrior monks and hold the vinaya and bodhisattva precepts to them as if they are fully ordained monastics, which they are not, it creates all sorts of misunderstandings and disappointment. naturally they would feel let down by these monks breaking all the precepts.

              but they dont understand, shaolin warrior monks dont take those precepts against eating meat (bodhisattva precepts), or against recreational use of alcohol (pratimoksha), and all the other precepts the fully ordained monastics take.

              shaolin warrior monks only take the five lay precepts, and observe ten while in the temple. they are not fully ordained.

              perhaps next time you meet those monks or nuns you can clear the confusion they may have about shaolin. their experience is usually limited to the monastery where they live and of course the traditional chinese ordination requirements which combine the pratimoksha with the bodhisattva precepts, then assume this applies to shaolin warrior monks- not knowing the level of their ordination as secular.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by LFJ View Post
                i'm not disagreeing with the horrific realities of animal abuse at locations around the world. nor am i supporting it. i do not eat meat myself.

                but the organization of peta is a little wacky. from bombing properties to killing 2/3 of the animals they rescue, and their unrealistic ideals. they're not quite my idea of "ethical".

                they are rather hypocritical.

                but again, i do not deny the realities nor do i support them. i just wouldnt support peta as the organization to run the protests.



                here's where most people get confused. i'll try to clear it up:

                one thing to realize about the shaolin warrior monks is that they only take the five lay precepts (observe 10 while living in the temple). they are by all means secular, but in shaolin they are allowed to live as a monastic sangha. so the pratimoksha really doesnt apply to them. this is unique to shaolin.

                besides, the vinaya does not say anything about eating meat. that comes up in the bodhisattva precepts. which chinese monastics take both in order to become fully ordained.

                however, wuseng are secular and these do not apply to them unless they take those precepts. you have to look at shaolin warrior monks based on the level of precepts they take.



                this is not a statement of cleverness, but rather morality. shaolin warrior monks follow the morality guidelines of the buddhist five lay precepts and the martial ethics of shaolin.



                most ordained monks and nuns have little to no experience or knowledge of the shaolin tradition, namely the warrior monk sect which causes them confusion. they're understanding comes from their experience with their ordination in their respective monasteries.

                but because they look at the warrior monks and hold the vinaya and bodhisattva precepts to them as if they are fully ordained monastics, which they are not, it creates all sorts of misunderstandings and disappointment. naturally they would feel let down by these monks breaking all the precepts.

                but they dont understand, shaolin warrior monks dont take those precepts against eating meat (bodhisattva precepts), or against recreational use of alcohol (pratimoksha), and all the other precepts the fully ordained monastics take.

                shaolin warrior monks only take the five lay precepts, and observe ten while in the temple. they are not fully ordained.

                perhaps next time you meet those monks or nuns you can clear the confusion they may have about shaolin. their experience is usually limited to the monastery where they live and of course the traditional chinese ordination requirements which combine the pratimoksha with the bodhisattva precepts, then assume this applies to shaolin warrior monks- not knowing the level of their ordination as secular.
                As an ex-monk myself, I have always wondered about the moral code that some of these monks follow. Especially being well-familiar with Mahayana precepts, and a little with Thervadan, wuseng always befuddled me a little. Thanks for clearing up the confusion.
                "For some reason I'm in a good mood today. I haven't left the house yet, though. "

                "fa hui, you make buddhism sexy." -Zachsan

                "Friends don't let friends do Taekwondo." -Nancy Reagan

                Comment


                • #23
                  oh yes, and i forgot to add of course celibacy!

                  not found in the 5 lay precepts, but of course when living in the temple the 10 precepts are observed which then includes full celibacy. obviously. that would be a rather odd place to get down. but elsewhere celibacy is also not an issue for those who are not fully ordained.

                  thats why you often hear of shaolin warrior monks eating meat, drinking, getting married and having babies. whether agreeable to all or not, its not part of the deal they signed. they are secular monastics. which is an oxymoron but it works in shaolin- and shaolin only.

                  hence, those only familiar with traditional monastic practices getting confused/disappointed/disgusted by shaolin.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I knew I should have become a Shaolin Wuseng.
                    "For some reason I'm in a good mood today. I haven't left the house yet, though. "

                    "fa hui, you make buddhism sexy." -Zachsan

                    "Friends don't let friends do Taekwondo." -Nancy Reagan

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      [quote=LFJ;34283]i'm not disagreeing with the horrific realities of animal abuse at locations around the world. nor am i supporting it. i do not eat meat myself.

                      the vinaya does not say anything about eating meat. that comes up in the bodhisattva precepts. which chinese monastics take both in order to become fully ordained.

                      [quote]



                      Yan Long - 13 June 2006 03:17 PM
                      In Mahayana scriptures Buddha categorically prohibited consumption of the flesh of any animal that was “seen, heard or suspected” to have been killed specifically for the benefit of monks.
                      (Jivaka Sutra, Majjhima Nikaya 55).
                      What the Buddha said about eating meat?
                      The Buddha laid down several rules forbidding monks from asking for the food that they liked. As a result, they would receive just the sort of meals that ordinary people ate - and that was often meat.
                      Once, a rich and influential general by the name of Siha (meaning Lion) went to visit the Buddha. Siha had been a famous lay supporter of the Jain monks but he was so impressed and inspired by the Teachings he heard from the Buddha that he took refuge in the Triple Gem (i.e. he became a Buddhist). General Siha then invited the Buddha, together with the large number of monks accompanying Him, to a meal at his house in the city the following morning. In preparation for the meal, Siha told one of his servants to buy some meat from the market for the feast. When the Jain monks heard of their erstwhile patron’s conversion to Buddhism and the meal that he was preparing for the Buddha and the monks, they were somewhat peeved:

                      “Now at the time many Niganthas (Jain monks), waving their arms, were moaning from carriage road to carriage road, from cross road to cross road in the city: ‘Today a fat beast, killed by Siha the general, is made into a meal for the recluse Gotama (the Buddha), the recluse Gotama makes use of this meat knowing that it was killed on purpose for him, that the deed was done for his sake’...”.

                      Siha was making the ethical distinction between buying meat already prepared for sale and ordering a certain animal to be killed, a distinction which is not obvious to many westerners but which recurs throughout the Buddha’s own teachings. Then, to clarify the position on meat eating to the monks, the Buddha said:

                      “Monks, I allow you fish and meat that are quite pure in three respects: if they are not seen, heard or suspected to have been killed on purpose for a monk. But, you should not knowingly make use of meat killed on purpose for you.”

                      Towards the end of the Buddha’s life, his cousin Devadatta attempted to usurp the leadership of the Order of monks. In order to win support from other monks, Devadatta tried to be more strict than the Buddha and show Him up as indulgent. Devadatta proposed to the Buddha that all the monks should henceforth be vegetarians. The Buddha refused and repeated once again the regulation that he had established years before, that monks and nuns may eat fish or meat as long as it is not from an animal whose meat is specifically forbidden, and as long as they had no reason to believe that the animal was slaughtered specifically for them.
                      The Vinaya, then, is quite clear on this matter. Monks and nuns may eat meat. Even the Buddha ate meat. Unfortunately, meat eating is often seen by westerners as an indulgence on the part of the monks. Nothing could be further from the truth - I was a strict vegetarian for three years before I became a monk. In my first years as a monk in North-East Thailand, when I bravely faced many a meal of sticky rice and boiled frog (the whole body bones and all), or rubbery snails, red-ant curry or fried grasshoppers - I would have given ANYTHING to be a vegetarian again! On my first Christmas in N.E. Thailand an American came to visit the monastery a week or so before the 25th. It seemed too good to be true, he had a turkey farm and yes, he quickly understood how we lived and promised us a turkey for Christmas. He said that he would choose a nice fat one especially for us… and my heart sank. We cannot accept meat knowing it was killed especially for monks. We refused his offer. So I had to settle for part of the villager’s meal - frogs again.
                      Monks may not exercise choice when it comes to food and that is much harder than being a vegetarian. Nonetheless, we may encourage vegetarianism and if our lay supporters brought only vegetarian food and no meat, well… monks may not complain either!
                      However there are some meats which are specifically prohibited for monks to eat: human meat, for obvious reasons; meat from elephants and horses as these were then considered royal animals; dog meat - as this was considered by ordinary people to be disgusting; and meat from snakes, lions, tigers, panthers, bears and hyenas - because one who had just eaten the flesh of such dangerous jungle animals was thought to give forth such a smell as to draw forth revenge from the same species!
                      May you take the hint and be kind to animals.
                      :b:
                      [end quote]

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by LFJ View Post



                        most ordained monks and nuns have little to no experience or knowledge of the shaolin tradition, namely the warrior monk sect which causes them confusion. they're understanding comes from their experience with their ordination in their respective monasteries.

                        .

                        Please feel free to overlook the mispelled words. .

                        Blooming tianshi lotus.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by blooming tianshi lotus View Post
                          Please feel free to overlook the mispelled words. .

                          Blooming tianshi lotus.
                          lmao! "they're" isnt misspelled. but your "mispelled" is misspelled. lol, still salty.

                          anyhow, you can quote other people talking about the vinaya and meat eating all you want. fact is you dont know what you're talking about and cant quote the vinaya itself on the issue.

                          vegetarianism for chinese monastics comes up in the bodhisattva precepts, not the pratimoksha.

                          if you dont know what you're talking about dont join a conversation trying to prove something. cuz you'll only prove your ignorance.

                          but thats alright, go on with your enlightened self. lol

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by LFJ View Post
                            lmao! "they're" isnt misspelled. but your "mispelled" is misspelled. lol, still salty.

                            anyhow, you can quote other people talking about the vinaya and meat eating all you want. fact is you dont know what you're talking about and cant quote the vinaya itself on the issue.

                            vegetarianism for chinese monastics comes up in the bodhisattva precepts, not the pratimoksha.

                            if you dont know what you're talking about dont join a conversation trying to prove something. cuz you'll only prove your ignorance.

                            but thats alright, go on with your enlightened self. lol

                            ok. here you go. a present of dharma from the crypt..

                            firstly, if you didn't mean "their" and not "they're", then your sentence lacks a subject.

                            secondly, my pH and iron gristle and nulceic acid regulation and development is none of your business, so I hope you dont think that I might get offended or influenced that you notice how salty I am or not. it's not like you offer me an attractive alternative or that it's not all part of the sequence and karmic one at that.

                            and a lie lfj, isn't lie until the person holding it realises that. that's how you get way with it about myyself and come up innocent and hence the concept of having deeper realisation available to you.

                            thirdly, you're only angry and sweet ( alternatively dispositioned) because you reject yourself, as opposed to embrace and empty of it, and therefore
                            refuse to accept dharma of anything beyond your current point. I already said alot of you were masters at staying stupid. that's no mean feat. I dont know if I could do it personally. see, I respect that.

                            you also cannot claim the mastery unless you embrace the difference, so being that that's the case, I'll do it for you and all is well. there's nothing "wrong" with the other side of the river, because if it didn't exist then neither could it's counterpart. it's a goood thing to be where one is because it's all a part of the whole journey. thanks for reminding me ( and rather audaciously at that for dramatic spec fx from that place in case I wouldn't be as impressed or missed it or just because it cannot not have that luminosity to be there, ), that that place is doing that, I guess.
                            see, that's nice that you show me that. lest we forget.*koto*.


                            How can one claim to know the other side of the river unless you 've been there??? remember the boddhisttva concept of realisation of nirvana before letting it go... well, something like that.

                            Blooming tianshi lotus.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              ahhhh, secular monastics...and bl... i'll never understand this stuff.

                              is there a book for dummies out yet?
                              ZhongwenMovies.com

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                yeah, it was a typo not a misspelling. you're just dumb. lol

                                and i have not claimed mastery of anything, especially not enlightenment like you and your buddy li hongzhi.

                                i'm still wondering how you can say whether or not i am even buddhist and would care about that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X