What Makes a Good Buddhist?

*laugh*

You know I've even been accused of being a "bad atheist" from time to time?

It's an interesting thing.

I'm not perfect. I'm simply a human who is trying to walk the Buddhist path. Yes, I fail sometimes. Yes, I get emotional, yes I get angry...like I said, I'm human. Does that make me a 'bad' Buddhist? I don't know. I guess by some people's standards it does. I'm not enlightened, and I would never be so vain as to even consider myself close to enlightenment. I have a long, long way to go yet....and I honestly doubt that I'll ever get there. The best I can do in the meantime is walk a dharma path and try to learn from everyone and everything.

I find it interesting, though, that the accusations of being a 'bad' Buddhist are being leveled at me by someone who's not even a practicing Buddhist.

I believe that as long as I can recognize my imperfections and flaws, acknowledge them and try to change myself....then I'm on the right path. I never said I was perfect...I know that I'm not. I know that I can't change the world....but I can change me.

As long as somebody follows the fundamentals of whatever they claim to be, then I'll accept their sincerity. However, there are actually people who claim to be one thing, and don't really show any signs of it. I read this one response on a Christian site from a Christian who said that the Bible is "just a book written thousands of years ago," "should be taken with a grain of salt," and should not be believed, "word for word." I doubt that person's sincerity to their Christianity.

You know I've even been accused of being a "bad atheist" from time to time?

That's happened to me when I was an atheist. Some atheists apparently want to turn atheism into a dogmatic religion.

I find it interesting, though, that the accusations of being a 'bad' Buddhist are being leveled at me by someone who's not even a practicing Buddhist.

I've noticed that it usually is like that, or it's by some self-righteous person who wants to use others as stepping stones up the tower of arrogance. When people say such things, including when I've done it, it's just intended as a cheap shot.

I think the opinions of those who aren't members of a religion regarding the correct practice of that religion should usually be ignored.

I always find it amusing when people who have never been Christians use their learned-it-on-the-street misperceptions to start telling Christian how they should act.

I'm not perfect. I'm simply a human who is trying to walk the Buddhist path. Yes, I fail sometimes. Yes, I get emotional, yes I get angry...like I said, I'm human. Does that make me a 'bad' Buddhist?

I don’t think it makes you a bad Buddhist, Dharma. It makes you a good one. It's part of being human, and Buddhism teaches acceptance of ourself and others, just as we are. As you said, to be aware of our flaws and imperfections is the key, because self-knowledge is the first step to self-correction.

Even if we think we’re too critical or judgemental of ourself or others, or if we think we’re a ‘bad’ person, then we can be aware of it, and accept it. (This itself will be enough to make us do something about it if we feel sufficiently impelled. But even if we can’t do anything about it, we can learn to accept it, and be at peace with it.) I think there’s great wisdom in this Buddhist principle, because it provides us with a great sense of liberation and peace.

In my walk as a Christian, I have found there's no such thing as a "perfect" Christian

That’s so true, and it goes for all walks of life. To me, walking the Christian path isn’t a case of being ‘goody-goody’, or artificially perfect. Rather, it’s about accepting the grace of Christ. Romans 7.14-25 is fantastic, because St. Paul describes his struggles between his base-nature desires and his higher spiritual desires. We can all relate to this, but I believe that in the eyes of God, we are perfect, just as we are. For a Christian, to accept this enables us to find better self-acceptance and inner peace. What's more, once we learn to love ourself unconditionally, we can begin to love others as ourself.

But regardless of our beliefs, I think the spiritual path is an authentic path, because it doesn’t involve playing a false role, or trying to please others. It deals first and foremost with our inner, spiritual side. Once we can achieve a better degree of inner harmony, then our outer-life will follow suit. It doesn’t have to be the other way round. As Jesus said, “Seek first the Kingdom of God, and all other things will be provided for you. . . . The Kingdom of God is within you” etc.

In my view, our degree of inner peace doesn’t depend on the amount of material wealth we possess, or upon our upbringing, or our external conditions. Rather, it depends on our level of spiritual growth. The more spiritually developed we are, the more we can retain a sense of inner peace, regardless of our external surroundings, and regardless of other people’s opinions. (Of course, this implies that the younger we are in the Spirit, the more our inner-state will be governed by our external conditions and by other people’s views. In this sense, we don’t really have a great amount of choice in the matter. But as long as we’re aware of our feelings or our level of development, then that itself is a sure sign of growth.)

I’ve found that a good analogy for this ‘growth’ thing is to think about a three-year old, who dribbles food down his chin, or falls over when learning to walk. Compare this with a sixteen-year-old, who eats with knife and fork and runs in good stead. Which one is more “perfect” than the other? The answer is neither. They’re just at different levels of growth. This same principle can apply to our level of spiritual development. Dribbling food down our chin, or falling over when learning to walk can be analogous to our tendencies to feel jealous, or judgemental, or to give in to base nature desires. In the eyes of God, or to an enlightened Buddha, everything is seen as it is – “perfect”. God accepts us just as we are, and we can do the same, to whatever degree suits our own level of growth.

Anyway, I’m waffling so you’ll have to excuse me. It’s a good article Gideon, and I couldn’t help but respond.

In the first place, I never called dharma (or anyone else, for that matter) a "bad Buddhist."

Oh, I must have missed something. Has there been an argument? Dharma, in that last post, when I said "if we think we’re a ‘bad’ person", I wasn't talking about you. I was talking about human beings in general, outside the context of whatever has happened here. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

No one is a "bad" this or that, good and bad are subjective terms anyway

That's very true little whip.

Sure, nobody is perfect, but what I've found to be a major turn-off about many 'people of faith' is hypocrisy. You know, the preacher who rails against adultery on Sunday morning and then buys himself a Sunday night blowjob from the local crack-whore. The staunch "pro-lifers" that later arrange an abortion for their 13 year old daughter in secret. The people who praise and promote peace and tolerance yet spread hatred and venom behind the scenes via mean-spirited gossip and innuendo.

little whip I think we all can appreciate your frustration or "major turn-off" with such hypocrisy but as long as religion has been around there has been hypocrisy. In fact hypocrisy is older than religion Genesis chpt-3. Sadly enough the hypocrisy that is evidenced in many lives has it orgin in man's heart. I have found this to be true by both men and women who both go and don't go to church. My point is the church is not the problem. And we know what the Word of God says about man's heart, "it is decietful above all things and desperately wicked". The only real hope of eliminating hypocrisy is to have the heart born anew byt the Spirit of God. Even then we are not talking perfection, but man it amazing the difference the haeart takes on when it is quickened by the Spirit of God.

preacherman

I find it interesting, though, that the accusations of being a 'bad' Buddhist are being leveled at me by someone who's not even a practicing Buddhist.

Welcome to the club. Most accusations of "bad" Christianity come from nonChristians as well

In the first place, I never called dharma (or anyone else, for that matter) a "bad Buddhist." I've never called a Christian a "bad Christian" either.

LW,

It's not a huge deal to me anyway, it was just food for thought, mainly. Like I said, I don't know enough of either side to say one way or another, just commenting on something I had quickly perused.

Did I say it was you? No. You just assumed.
You really ought to look into being a criminal defense attorney, you always manage to put a spin on things to make yourself look blameless.

Now, now, let's not poison gid's thread about this, ladies. You're both pure as the driven snow with motivations to match. We get the point.

anyway

I think the only time people really want to throw that "good/bad whatever" label at you is when you've exhibited a holier-than-thou attitude and then done something screwy -- people are going to gig you for it. And we've all been guilty of taking the high stance and then soiling ourselves, so to speak.

As a small example, when I was still in the church, I never made a point of condemning alcohol use, becuase I didn't think it was a sin. If I HAD made a point of condemning it, and drank anyway, then that "bad Christian" thing would have come into play for sure. Of course, many would have thought me a "bad Christian" for not being against alcohol use in the first place.

They've been using one of those $10 words lately -- schadenfruede -- but it's really just what we used to call "gettin' yours." There's a perverse satisfaction in seeing the high and mighty get theirs, and while I admit that it probably isn't the most positive of emotions, I'd be a liar to say that I am free of it.

Whew, long post, sorry. We're all bad people. Except for me

and while I admit that it probably isn't the most positive of emotions, I'd be a liar to say that I am free of it.

That's the case with us all. If we can be at peace with it then we're on the path to Buddhahood. That was the point I was trying to make, not very succincly, mind.

Whew, long post, sorry

No, yours was okay. Mine was too long. Do I ever come across as preaching? If so, shoot me I hate the principle of preaching.

You see, I never talk about this religious stuff out there in the real world. I've always tried to walk the path rather than talk it. But I have so much of this shite swilling around in my head, I need to give vent to it somewhere. What better place than JU? So you'll have to excuse me if I churn out a load of dribbling spiritual verbiage. It's just my inner-psyche popping up to say "hello!"

that was the whole point, sabrina, geez -- a bit of opening irony and then defining it...too subtle for you, I suppose...it's okay, I'll speak slower and use smaller words in the future...

You girls are so much fun. You're like kittens on meth, all claws and no reservations.

Do I ever come across as preaching? If so, shoot me I hate the principle of preaching

Andy, what's wrong with preaching?

preacherman

Preacherman, everyone has their own views, and are usually settled in them. Preaching often comes in the form of imposing one’s views on another, uninvited and dogmatic. It can be a bit like getting an annoying housefly in the room, which buzzes around and doesn’t go away.

That’s not always the case, mind, and I don’t mind your preaching, preacherman. You wear it on your sleeve, and you have compassion and integrity. You have good circles, and people accept you for it, so stay with it. It’s a question of personal taste and preference anyway. Preaching wouldn’t suit me, though. I'm so set in my views I'd come across as arrogant.

One of the things I love about Buddhism is that its philosophy is so sublime and deep, there is nothing to preach, in the traditional sense at least. Buddhism is about embodying your beliefs, and doesn’t require verbally imposing anything. This is power, in my view. It's liberating, because Buddhism accepts the ‘is-ness’ of reality, and of others, and doesn’t attempt to change anyone’s views. If it does succeed in changing others, then this would be a by-product of the Buddhist’s peaceful or compassionate energy. Well that’s what I’ve gathered from Buddhism, anyway.

I think it would benefit Western religionists to incorporate these Eastern practices into their model of the world. Whilst Western religion is chock-full of rigid rules, regulations and dogma, Eastern wisdom has none of it. A balance is a good thing, and I believe that if the Buddhist scope was widened, (which would be a wide scope indeed), then we would see that there is a rigid, Mindful Master Plan in progress, which transcends the universe and our finite human awareness. Most Buddhist philosophy is agnostic, and I believe that if we merged Eastern and Western wisdom, the full picture of Ultimate Reality would be disclosed. Whilst Buddhist philosophy describes the Ground of Being, (and Buddhist practice demonstrates that our souls are intricately connected to It), Western revelation describes the structure and nature of the Plan, devised intentionally by the Creator.

Anyway, I hope to God this doesn't come across as preaching. (This paranoia must be coming from a past life, you know.) Preacherman, there’s a time and a season for everything, and your preaching has a fine place in life’s rich pageant. Keep it up dude.