His interpretation is very much similar to what we follow in india, called navayana buddhism. We here have systematic views on socio political issues from buddhist perspective.
Responding to life from a relationship with what actually is happening sounds like a proper response - a response based on courage, openess and listening without motive.
Mr. Bachelor, I can appreciate your point of view. However, you have arrived at a point on your path only because of your monastic underpinning. One can argue that what The Buddha framed as the Dharma over 2,000 years ago was "secular (of his age/time)". BTW, I am ordained in the Seon and Tien Traditions.
It should be dhamma of the Buddhist, not Dharma of the Hindus. Though dhamma has come from Dharma, it's meaning has changed after going to Buddhists side.
Unfortunately I can't watch past 3.5 minutes. Stephen mate, with all due respect you are (in my opinion) too close to the camera; it's very invasive. "Well, why not listen without watching?" one might ask. This is what I shall do.
You should find a real qualified teacher to practice Dharma otherwise if you follow such a person which is going completely astray from the real tradition by just babbling what he thinks is the real meaning of the Buddha's teaching, you might end up in more confusion and darkness.
Tradition by it's very definition is something humans will inevitably cling to. I suspect that Buddha had a pretty good idea that we as a species would be practicing and teaching the dharma in new practical ways that make sense in a world that's much different over 2500 years later.
4Noble Tasks! Great framing on practicing dhamma and living an Awakening path of life.
You guys lifted me up. Thanks.
His interpretation is very much similar to what we follow in india, called navayana buddhism. We here have systematic views on socio political issues from buddhist perspective.
Responding to life from a relationship with what actually is happening sounds like a proper response - a response based on courage, openess and listening without motive.
Mr. Bachelor, I can appreciate your point of view. However, you have arrived at a point on your path only because of your monastic underpinning. One can argue that what The Buddha framed as the Dharma over 2,000 years ago was "secular (of his age/time)". BTW, I am ordained in the Seon and Tien Traditions.
It should be dhamma of the Buddhist, not Dharma of the Hindus. Though dhamma has come from Dharma, it's meaning has changed after going to Buddhists side.
Unfortunately I can't watch past 3.5 minutes. Stephen mate, with all due respect you are (in my opinion) too close to the camera; it's very invasive. "Well, why not listen without watching?" one might ask. This is what I shall do.
You should find a real qualified teacher to practice Dharma otherwise if you follow such a person which is going completely astray from the real tradition by just babbling what he thinks is the real meaning of the Buddha's teaching, you might end up in more confusion and darkness.
i think you may have made stephen's point.
Read the Buddhist Atheist. In it you'll see that Stephen is quite qualified indeed.
th-cam.com/video/MuHi9Zpx7zo/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=HartmutVeitHartmutVeit
Tradition is the opposite of change.
Tradition by it's very definition is something humans will inevitably cling to. I suspect that Buddha had a pretty good idea that we as a species would be practicing and teaching the dharma in new practical ways that make sense in a world that's much different over 2500 years later.