Printable View
HH The Dalai Lama will be giving some talks in London and Manchester in June. We've got tickets for Manchester, and I'll let you know what it was like.
We went to see him in Nottingham the last time he was here a few years ago.
http://dalailama.com/teachings/schedule
The teaching we'll be going to is on Lojong - Tibetan mind training with the aim of achieving Bodhicitta. :chillpill:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojong
It is the first time I've heard about the Lojong. The fourth one of the 59 seemed interesting:
Contemplate that as long as you are too focused on self-importance and too caught up in thinking about how you are good or bad, you will suffer. Obsessing about getting what you want and avoiding what you don't want does not result in happiness.
Good points in the last two lines. I'm not a Buddhist but they simply make sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Absolutely fascinating individual, even to us unwashed heathens.
J
I don't understand why people love the Dalai Lama so much. Didn't he own slaves? There's some other strange stories around about him too, but it's argued that it might be Chinese propaganda. On the other hand, it's argued that the argument that it's Chinese propaganda is Dalai Lama propaganda since neither regime has historically been very open to the press. I guess if it's a choice between the Dalai Lama or China ruling Tibet, I think I'd choose neither.
Is that a bad thing?
Note to self - must sell my slaves
The Dalai Lama went several rounds in a boxing match with Brian Blessed. I think that qualifies him as awesome, regardless of religion.
:lol:
I don't think the current Dalai Lama believes that he should be the authoritarian ruler of Tibet.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
I don't think the current, 14th Dalai Lama owned slaves. Have you any proof that he did? Since the early sixties he has certainly been pro-democracy - unlike China! United Nations resolutions, dating from the early sixties, called on China to respect the human rights of Tibetans. During 1963, he promulgated a democratic constitution which is based upon the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, creating an elected parliament and an administration to champion his cause. I think it his unceasing pursuit of human rights for the Tibetan people since the early sixties that makes him lovable. That, and the fact that he has always appeared happy and level headed across the decades. Buddhism has had a significant impact on psychology (and literature) since the sixties, and he has influenced that trend a great deal. On the religion side, he appears as liberal as recent Archbishops of Canterbury, while being much less fuddy duddy, more effective, and a lot more durable. And as a political leader, who is less tarnished or more appealing? He's up there with the Queen of England, surely, as 'lovable symbol of a state', while being so much more. Maybe he should be the next Director General of the UN? That would upset China :)
I tend to agree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
Although my wife is a US citizen, she was born in China and dislikes the Dalai Lama probably as much as any Chinese nationalist might. I can't bring a book into the house with the words "Dalai Lama" anywhere on it without risking family tension, and so I don't. There is plenty to read on the internet anyway. Books about Buddhism in general are fine since some of our relatives are Buddhists, but her attitude toward Buddhism is like a North American's attitude toward Christianity: she's too familiar with it to want to be one. I can see her point.
I'm glad Paulclem mentioned the Lojong. I hadn't heard of it before, but I have found that mantra recitation, regardless of what religious beliefs are involved, has been at least beneficial to me. The site I'm looking at now related to the Lojong is Ken McLeod's Unfettered Mind which I find informative: http://www.unfetteredmind.org/
I don't know why there are 59 of these sayings and not more or less. The way Ken McLeod uses them is to provide a link so you can select one at random. I like the randomness of that process.
The story of the invasion of Tibet by China is not simply political act. It's a widely held belief in Buddhist circles that Tibet's loss is the world's gain in that lamas who would have stayed within a feudal, backward and very traditionalist environment were dispersed into many countries.
Tibet was not the perfect Shangri La. Bandits were common. It was difficult to travel, and up until the British forced theri way to Lhasa, the country was closed to all foreigners. There was a lot of political power play, and though the Dalai Lamas were the nominal heads of state, there a few that died young in suspicious circumstances.
On the other hand, the Tibetan people were the victims of a famine, orchestrated, (yes - orchestrated), by Mao, that killed 1 and a half million Tibetans. This was after the Chinese invasion and their expansionist claims that Tibet has always been Chinese. Tibet has many natural resources, and is strataegically important in Asia. This is reason enough to take it over.
Along with this was the systematic destruction of many important Tibetan Monasteries, and their Buddhist treasures within. Texts, statues and Thankas have all been lost. Now, of course, with the interest that HH and other Tibetan Lamas have fostered in Tibet and its cultural heritage, Tibetan monasteries are open for the tourist trade, without the teaching and religious practices that they formerly had. Of course the Chinese government benefit.
The Chinese have pursued a systematic policy of attacking HH and tryng to foment probles within the Tibetan and Buddhist community. For his part, HH has stated that his wish is to work with the Chinese, and one day return to Tibet. He knows that it will never be independant from China.
HH's work since 1959 has always been in the pursuit of peace, and, as has been pointed out, supporting Tibetan's human rights. Given the effect of the Chinese occupation upon Tibetans and their culture, it would be reasonable to expect him to rage against them and support violent struggle. He won't do this though, and he has prevented Tibetans who wanted to resist from waging civil war. It was for this that he received the Nobel Peace Prize.
He tours many parts of the world giving teachings as a "Simple Buddhist Monk" as he says, and doesn't represent himself as a Tibetan freedom fighter as he could so easily have done.
Of course this could be propaganda, but I know who I'd choose. :lol:
Slogan 7. Sending and taking should be practiced alternately. These two should ride the breath.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
This one is called taking and giving.
The practice is to imagine breathing in the illness, suffering, bad Karma, etc of yourself, an individual, group, or all beings, and breathing out healing light.
I think the purpose is to train the mind into wishing for the well being of all beings. As with all practices, it takes time to transform our essentially selfish minds to truly compassionate ones, but who knows how strong wishes could become in time.
Is your wife ok with other Buddhist traditions? I can understand that if you are brought up to regard your country and leaders as excellent, then it would be difficult to change. :biggrin5:
Wow, brilliant. I imagine the Dalai Lama as one of the most awe-inspiring figures you are likely to meet. I have read several reports about people breaking down in tears after just being in his presence and I'm talking about non Buddhists as well, even total strangers. I certainly think he's got great charisma. I fail to understand the negative comments on this thread. Anyway I hope you gain a lot from the visit.
I've said before that I think that much of the basic philosophy that stands behind Buddhism makes a great deal of sense and could be potentially very rewarding for anybody regardless of religious thought. I'm talking in particular about the basic core principles like the four noble truths (found here for fellow Buddhist dummies like me: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/qanda02.htm) or the eightfold path of right thought, action, speech etc, etc (google it). I think that there is a great deal of wisdom even in these basic core principles and enough to last a lifetime. Of course it is easy to read and agree with it, but very difficult to put into practise.
-------
One of my favourite Buddhist fables is the one with the two monks by the river. Quickly, for anyone who doesn't know it - there were two monks by a river out for a walk. They spot a women who is trying to cross the other side but the water is too high for her. In this particular Buddhist order monks are absolutely forbidden to touch women, but seeing the woman struggle one of them goes over to help and lifts her across. On the way back, the other monk berates him for touching the woman reminding him that it is against orders to touch women. He can't leave it alone and throughout the walk back constantly reminds him that he has broke the order in regards to touching women, when the other turns around to him and says "brother, I put her down at the other side of the river, but you my friend, are still carrying her."
Brilliant. Like the basic concepts it makes perfect sense to let go of negative thought, but like the basic concepts it is very hard to let the things which bother us go. Now you don't have to believe in reincarnation or whatnot to see the basic wisdom behind that, same with all the core principles.
The sending and taking technique I've seen in other self-help manuals. One uses the breath and awareness to transform the mind. Here is McLeod's page on it: http://www.unfetteredmind.org/mindtraining/7.phpQuote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
Some practices that seem to work for me, regardless of religious intention, are the following:
1) Mantra recitation: I think this distracts the mind by getting it to repeat words that one finds positive rather than to jump to habits of anger or fear.
2) Paying attention while either walking or sitting with the back straight: I don't know why this works, but I think it has something to do with good posture and paying attention. Someone once complained to me that their eyesight was bad, but they rarely looked at anything, so what difference did it make?
3) Short readings on positive themes--religious or not.
These things work only if they reduce stress, make one's life more peaceful, etc, but it doesn't make sense to me that they should work at all. They are too easy.
I mentioned my wife's views because they offer a perspective that is likely different from what native English speakers have. We all think our countries and leaders are excellent or at least adequate enough to defend.
Easy for you!!:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Perhaps you've practiced these "easy" things before.
I half jest, but according to the Buddhist view of the world - reincarnation - this is a possibility. Someone is likely to say "some of us are good at some things, others at others - it's the way of the world", but in my view, that's just as specualtive. Anyway, none of us know the truth of it, but only you could find out.
I understand about your wife's perspective. I came across a chinese Lady in one of my English classes a few years ago. In my presumption, I though she would be aware of western views of Mao. When I was chatting with her, it quickly became clear that she was not, and, though she didn't say so, probably regarded him the same as every conventional Chinese does.
I felt quite bad about that because I felt I had insulted her - without of course changing my view of Mao - but at that moment what was important was respect.