Thank you, JM, :-) One of the things that appeals to me about Buddhism is that it is non-judgemental.
I'm also glad to have you say that knowledge isn't Buddhism's emphasis - there seems to be an awful lot of it about different types of Buddhism. (I already decided that I'm not going to make any effort to pick up what I don't need to know, or when I don't feel I can take anything else new on - unfortunately, being a newbie Buddhist, I don't know what I really need to know to be a Buddhist. I'm just focussing on mindfulness at the moment and hoping / trusting that other information will come to me as I'm ready to receive it.) :-) Beverley. ________________________________ From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, 16 May, 2011 17:47:27 Subject: Re: [Zen] Newbie - hello & question Hello Beverly, Having your non-comparing mindset is the essence of Chan. Comparing is always relative and reincarnates itself into endless hell. Also for your information... Long Shu Bodhisatva (龍樹） brought Chan to Tibet way back then. In China, Chan is nick named The Grand "Secret Lineage"/Vajrayana/Mizong (大密宗）, while Tibetan practice is just Secret Lineage（密宗）. Some knowledge for your non-Buddhist friend, though knowledge is never our emphasis. FYI, JM Learn to de-stress, energize and awaken http://www.chan-meditation.com Learn to live with Health, Happiness and Harmony http://www.chanliving.org Learn to reach enlightenment http://www.heartchan.org To save the world http://www.universal-oneness.org On 5/16/2011 8:38 AM, Beverley Huish wrote: >Hi, > >I'm a newbie in this group, and to Buddhism. I sincerely don't want to upset >anyone or start an argument. I want to join in this discussion, and this has >cropped up so I'm asking the question. > >I told a friend today that I feel Buddhism is for me, and I'm looking into >Zen. >My friend replied that Tibetan Buddhism is a more spiritual type of Buddhism >because they believe in God. Having looked into various types of >Buddhism, he believes that the Buddha communicated higher information, >including >the existence of God, to Tibetan Buddhists because they were more spiritually >evolved at that point - Tibetan Buddhists claim this is the case and my friend >agrees with them, he says. My response was to say that different things >appeal >to different people and I don't think it's a matter of one being more >'spiritual' or more 'true' than another. (I really don't care what >might considered 'higher' or more 'spiritual' - at the moment that is >irrelevant >to me. However, it did seem a kind of un-Buddhist thing to claim that oneself >is better than another person? My friend is not a Buddhist.) > >What do other people think? > >Thank you. :-) > >Beverley.
