Wow, it has been forever since I've blogged.
School has been taking up most of my life. Which is fun at times, but I haven't been keeping up with a lot of fellow Buddhist bloggers, and that's makes me a little sad. You guys are so awesome. Sorry for losing touch.
And of course, last night I had an awesome thought that I knew I should post in this blog. But of course, I forgot it this morning. Oh well.
I realized these past few months that the hardest thing I've ever had to learn, and something I still struggle with, is to just sit.
College is all about running around and trying to get everything accomplished, so to take time out to just sit is hard for me. But also important for me. It's the thing we do most in Zen Buddhism. And I still struggle with it.
Oh well. Life is about learning.
Also, a friend of mine brought up an interesting topic: What is the Buddhist view-point of sin? How does a Buddhist atone for sin, or do they at all?
Any comments?
4 hours ago
4 comments:
Good questions.
A bit beyond me but this is what I know.
From a buddhist view point I think they say that before you commit a wrongful act you feel the emotions that will fuel that act. To attack someone you must first feel anger... The feeling of the anger is your punishment. You have been punished before you even commit the act.
I could get you some quotes reflecting this but I'm very short on time.
The meditation that I learnt that is supposed to trace a direct line back to buddha is supposed to bring up and erradicate this stuff.
That's all I know.
Hello,
I have heard that the word, "sin" really means, "to miss the mark." The way many religions use it now is different from its original meaning, it seems. So, I don't know if their versions of the word fits in with Buddhism. "Missing the mark," probably would fit in well though,imo. Personally I think the word, "sin" has been used as negative reinforcement in many traditions...which leaves people feeling more oppressed & confused.....in my opinion. :)
Remember that awesome thought soon!! :DDD
Here's a little more to go along with the comment I made before.
A comparison of stories.
Story 1.
Their is a man and a robber. The robber wants to steal the man's money so the robber stabs the man in the stomach and as a result the man dies.
Story 2.
Their is a man and a doctor. The doctor wants to heal the man of a stomach cancer so the doctor stabs the man in the stomach and as a result the man dies.
Both the doctor and the robber have preformed the same act. Stabbing a man in the stomach so that the man dies.
It's not about what they have done but why they have done it.
http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/B-E-S/Buddha/Buddha4.gif
http://i622.photobucket.com/albums/tt304/davidaffiliates/buddha/Buddha-1-1.jpg
That's the way I understand it.
Hope that helps.
All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with an evil mind, 'dukkha'*follows him just as the wheel follows the hoof-print of the ox that draws the cart.
All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with a pure mind, happiness (sukha)** follows him like a shadow that never leaves him.
Post a Comment