Pretty obvious that no one is interested. But another cut and paste (as promised.....or threatened...馃榾 ) spelling out the fundamental Pure Land perspective....
According to Shinran (one of the "Fathers" of Pure Land Buddhism) salvation is entirely a matter of the Vow (Grace). It does not hang on events and conditions of time and space, or the imposition of man and society. Salvation cannot rest on chance factors. Shinran makes it clear that the reality of Grace requires nothing from the side of man, including the act of faith, as the [b]causal basis [/b]for birth in the Pure Land. Otherwise the emphasis on the Vow (Grace) would be devoid of meaning and significance. Our residual karmic bondage may influence the point in our experience when we become aware of Amida's compassion, but it is not a factor in determining whether or not we actually receive that compassion.
We are suggesting that from the standpoint of Grace (the Vow) all are equally saved even now, despite the presence or absence of the experience of faith itself. The reason for this is that salvation depends on Grace and not on any finite condition.
Someone may ask then what is the point of being religious, if we are saved in any case? This is an important question. However, it reflects the virtually universal notion that religion is a means to an end. We get the benefit of salvation from being religious. For Shinran, however, religion becomes the way to express gratitude for the compassion that supports all our life. It is not a tool for ego advancement or gaining benefits.
The point of being religious for Shinran is that when we come to have faith in the Original Vow (Grace) and live in its light, we truly become free to live a full and meaningful existence in this life.
Shinran's perspective permits a person to see deeply into their life to detect the springs of compassion which sustains it; it allows them to participate and associate with all types of people despite their unattractiveness or difficulty because they understand the potentiality that works in their very being. In perceiving the compassion that embraces all life, the person of faith can themselves become an expression of that compassion touching the lives of others.
(From "Shinran's Vision of Absolute Compassion" by Alfred Bloom, contained within "Living Within Amida's Universal Vow")
Back again, continuing. Recently on another forum I was in debate with yet another "committed Christian". The usual stuff, that all "non-christians" were to be "tormented by demons" eternally. His words. To be honest, I'm sick of it. The guy said that he never knew any "buddha people". No, maybe he didn't.
I've had the fortune to know some in my travels who welcomed me and one "buddha person" on a train once in Myanmar (then Burma) actually shared what little food he had with me, saying he would not eat himself unless I shared it.
In Japan, the home of Pure Land Buddhism, they do not worship the Christian God, but speak of [i]oya sama[/i]. A explanation of this term, this is D.T.Suzuki:-
[i]we believe in Amida Buddha as our Oya-sama, or Oya-san, as it is sometimes called. It is the term used to express love and compassion. Oya means parent, but not either parent, rather both mother and father; not separate personalities, but both fatherly and motherly qualities united in one personality. The honorific san is the familiar form of sama. The latter, Oya-sama, is the standard form. In Christianity, God is addressed as the Father - "Our father who art in Heaven" - but Oya-sama is not in Heaven, nor is Oya-sama Father. It is incorrect to say "he" or "she," for no gender distinction is found. I don't like to say "it," so I don't know what to say. Oya-sama is a unique word, deeply endearing and at the same time rich with religious significance and warmth.[/i]
Whatever is thought of that, for much of Christian history the main idea is of " the heathen who bow down to wood and stone" (as a well known hymn has it)
Let "the heathen" speak for themselves, in the Vedas for instance, written prior to some of the Old Testament. In speaking of the ultimate, this:- [i]Thou art formless. Your only form is our knowledge of You. [/i]
Wood and stone!
One can only speak of arrogance and ignorance when reading some of the posts here by so called "christians" speaking of the "only truth"...i.e. Theirs.
I will continue. With a few "cut and paste" jobs. The first an extract from the book "Tariki:Embracing Despair,Discovering Peace" by Hiroyuki Itsuki. Itsuki was a Japanese guy who lived through some tough times, as a refugee of war and much more. His testimony is not born of an easy life.
[i]The Other Power (Tariki) derives from the true and full acceptance of the reality that is within us and surrounds us. It is not a philosophy of passivity or iresponsibility, but one of radical spiritual activity, of personal, existential revolution. Its essence is the spontaneous wondrous force that gives us the will to act, to "do what man can do and then wait for heaven's will." Importantly, Other Power is a power that flows from the fundamental realization that, in the lives we live, we are already enlightened. This enlightenment does not come easily. It is born of the unwelcome understanding that, despite our protestations, we are insignificant, imperfect beings, born to a hell of suffering that defines human existence. But in this hell, we sometimes encounter small joys, friendship, the kind acts of strangers, and the miracle of love. We experience moments when we are filled with courage, when the world sparkles with hopes and dreams. There are even times when we are deeply grateful to have been born. These moments are paradise. But paradise is not another realm; it is here, in the very midst of the hell of this world. Other Power, a power that transcends theological distinctions, avails us of these moments. In the endless uncertainties of contemporary life, Other Power confers upon us a flexibility of spirit, an energy to feel joy, and the respite of peace.[/i]
Two more later, I have been called away.......retirement is not all it's cracked up to be.
I said in a previous post about speaking of my own experience with dementia, after quoting a poem by another. The lady of that poem seems to have coped far better than myself, with greater equanimity.
I had three years of caring for my mum as she descended into dementia. She was already as good as "gone" when my dad died. No real time to grieve. Mum became like a little six year old girl and spoke to me as if I was her sister. Without knowing it at the time I "coped" by suppressing any deep concern. Others told me to take it more easy, but I rushed around and it was - at the time - just like water off a ducks back. It was after she died, when the weight of it all was lifted, that a deep depression hit me. Before then I never knew what depression was - I had thought about it like just feeling a bit "down" after coming back from a good holiday!
Questions stay with me. During those years mum was struck by a car and broke her leg. She spent a few months in hospital. One evening I got a phone call telling me that they thought she had had a stroke and might not see the night out. When I got to the hospital I found her sitting up in bed with this silly little woolen hat on. I just held her hand and she said to me in her little girl voice:- "Why is this happening to me, I've been a good girl?" Heartbreaking. There are no words, there is no "answer" as such, you just sit beside someone and hold them. Maybe I said "I love you" but I really can't remember. Haunting.
To be honest I see all "answers" as virtually blasphemous. The "answer" is not in creed or formula or in personal testimony. It is more a matter of growth, deepening, and of an ever greater surrender to the creative action of love and grace in our hearts. A surrender of "self" with its "answers".
Well, it seems not. It's a long story with many a winding road but the Pure Land is where I have ended up. Not a bad place to be.
I mentioned on another thread about a Christian guy who advocated "passing over" into another Faith, walking in another's shoes, look at the scenery through new eyes, then to come back and see what has changed, if anything. Well, I tried it, I passed over (as opposed to passing out) and never came back. In truth, the whole story is more multifaceted but those bare bones will do.
My "screen name" Tariki is a Pure Land term. It is the Japanese word for "Other Power", this as opposed to Jariki, which is self-power. The interplay of [i]tariki[/i] and [i]jiriki[/i] plays itself out in Pure Land Buddhology. The Christian equivalent would be the interplay of "faith" and "works".
Enough for now. There seems little interest here, where 6ft rabbits rule the day.....馃榾
This is drawn from a post I made on another forum. It concerned a painting by Rembrandt, the "Return of the Prodigal". The most significant figure in the picture - rather than the prodigal son himself - could be seen to be the son who stayed at home and "fulfilled all righteousness". He looks on upon the reconciliation between the Father and the prodigal with a certain degree of incomprehension. It just seems to me that sometimes the "christian life" becomes not a self-emptying/sanctification, but often a transformation back into the incomprehension of the son who stayed at home. The "choice" for God, the "seeking" for God, have become "works", works which are then thrown in the face of those who have made no such choice, who have not sought with quite the same degree of endeavour that we ourselves have made.
Well, ten views so far. If the counter counts me, then basically no one.....馃榾
But I am not really an evangelist. I love the words of Thomas Merton....
[i]I hate proselytizing. This awful buisness of making others just like oneself so that one is thereby "justified" and under no obligation to change himself. What a terrible thing this can be. The source of how many sicknesses in the world. The true Christian apostolate is nothing of this sort, a fact that Christians themselves have largely forgotten. I think it was......Tauler (or maybe Eckhart) who said in a sermon that even if the church were empty he would preach the sermon to the four walls because he had to. That is the true apostolic spirit, based not on the desire to make others conform, but in the desire to proclaim and announce the good tidings of God's infinite love. In this context the preacher is not a "converter" but merely a herald, a voice, and the Spirit of the Lord is left free to act as He pleases. But this has degenerated into a doctrine and fashion of "convert-makers" in which man exerts pressure and techniques (this awful business of "modern techniques of propaganda") upon his fellow man in order to make him, force him, bring him under a kind of charm that compels him to abandon his own integrity and his own freedom and yield to another man or another institution. Little do men realize that in such a situation the Holy Spirit is silent and inactive, or perhaps active against the insolence of man. Hence the multitude of honest and sincere men who "cannot accept" a message that is preached without respect for the Spirit of God or for the spirit of man.[/i]
At risk of being seen as a heathen "bowing down to wood and stone" ( 馃榾 ) here is a representation of Amida, the Buddha of Infinite Light, central to Pure Land Buddhism....
The full title is "Amida Looking Back". Her hands are in the mudra of teaching, of exhortation to come to her, yet her head is turned, her first thought for those who do not, or cannot, come. For whatever reason.
As Shinran said:- "Amida saves even the good person, how much more the evil person"
@Elevatorpitches Maybe a "dharma" talk by Pema Chodrun (not a Pure Land Buddhist, but hey we don't have a monopoly on [i]anything[/i]!)
[i]When people start to meditate or to work with any kind of spiritual discipline, they often think that somehow they're going to improve, which is a sort of subtle aggression against who they really are. It's a bit like saying, "If I jog, I'll be a much better person." "If I could only get a nicer house, I'd be a better person." "If I could meditate and calm down, I'd be a better person." Or the scenario may be that they find fault with others; they might say, "If it weren't for my husband, I'd have a perfect marriage." "If it weren't for the fact that my boss and I don't get on, my job would be just great." And "If it weren't for my mind, my meditation would be excellent."
But loving-kindness - "maitri" - towards ourselves doesn't mean getting rid of anything. "Maitri" means we can still be crazy after all these years. We can still be angry after all these years. We can still be timid or jealous or full of feelings of unworthiness. The point is not to try to change ourselves. Meditation practice is not about trying to throw ourselves away and become something better. It's about befriending who we are already. The ground of practice is you or me or whoever we are right now, just as we are. That's the ground, that's what we study, that's what we come to know with tremendous curiosity and interest.
Sometimes among Buddhists the word "ego" is used in a derogatory sense, with a different connotation than the Freudian term. As Buddhists, we might say, "Well, then, we're supposed to get rid of it, right? Then there'd be no problem." On the contrary, the idea isn't to get rid of the ego but actually to begin to take an interest in ourselves, to investigate and be inquisitive about ourselves.[/i]
@Elevatorpitches I really do think it is all about acceptance. It is why I see much Christian proclamation as a corruption of the Gospel.
The proclamation:- "If you accept Me, then I will accept you". I know many "born againers" here will object, but there is simply no disguising the heart of their theology. Pure corruption.
