I understood that Vicki Mackenzie and Jetsunma were the same person, which is unclear in the paragraph above. It has been some years since I read it, but it was written in the first person as I remember.
+mary mckinnon Hello and thanks for watching. Vicki Mackenzie is a different person. You can find more about her here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicki_Mackenzie
How disappointing to know that the entire basis of Buddhism is negated by monks that are more worried about themselves, i.e. threatened by nuns, instead of practicing for the sake of all sentient beings! I guess I will keep "searching" but someplace else.
@14:22 ".... and Buddhism is just a sub-sect of Hinduism." That's not the Indian Government's opinion; that's a fact. Buddha is considered by Hindus to be one of their own. Most people in Buddha's time were reluctant to take personal initiative to attain enlightenment. Buddha corrected this flaw in understanding by insisting that people take individual initiative. In all other respects, he was a Vedic master, like many other masters before him, and since. You could say that Buddha is to Hinduism (more specifically, Vedic culture), what Jesus is to Judaism. Neither of them broke with existing tradition nor did they try to start a "new" religion.
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, from the perspective of most Buddhists, modern Hindus more often than not see the Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu - this is the context in which how Hindus assert that the Buddha "belongs" to them. However, Buddhists categorically reject this understanding of the Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu. Also, while the Buddha didn't try to overturn Vedic culture, it is fairly evident in the texts that remain that he rejected the Vedic conception of the universe, the ritual culture, and the Vedic religious life. Furthermore, we need to make careful distinctions between the Buddhist and the Christian stories. The early Christians certainly saw themselves as Jews and Jesus himself never saw himself as founding anything new. However, mainstream Judaism categorically rejects the idea in the canonical gospels (and in Christianity afterwards) that Jesus "fulfils" the prophecies of the Torah, and would not call their own scripture the "Old Testament" - that is a Christian understanding of the Jewish text that Jews do not accept. Jews therefore do not see Jesus - or at least the Jesus of Christian faith that emerged after St. Paul - as "one with Judaism."
it's clear for me that buddhism is not the solution for women either. No need to change religion, everywhere is the same. Monks are mostly misoginous in all religions. I understand women who turn out to female traditions, such as wicca.
Wow!!!❤️❤️❤️❤️🙏🏼♥️♥️♥️♥️
Sadly, not just in the Tibetan tradition.
🙏
I understood that Vicki Mackenzie and Jetsunma were the same person, which is unclear in the paragraph above. It has been some years since I read it, but it was written in the first person as I remember.
+mary mckinnon Hello and thanks for watching. Vicki Mackenzie is a different person. You can find more about her here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicki_Mackenzie
+Buddhistdoor Global Now I am even more confused...
How disappointing to know that the entire basis of Buddhism is negated by monks that are more worried about themselves, i.e. threatened by nuns, instead of practicing for the sake of all sentient beings! I guess I will keep "searching" but someplace else.
@14:22 ".... and Buddhism is just a sub-sect of Hinduism."
That's not the Indian Government's opinion; that's a fact. Buddha is considered by Hindus to be one of their own.
Most people in Buddha's time were reluctant to take personal initiative to attain enlightenment. Buddha corrected this flaw in understanding by insisting that people take individual initiative. In all other respects, he was a Vedic master, like many other masters before him, and since.
You could say that Buddha is to Hinduism (more specifically, Vedic culture), what Jesus is to Judaism. Neither of them broke with existing tradition nor did they try to start a "new" religion.
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, from the perspective of most Buddhists, modern Hindus more often than not see the Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu - this is the context in which how Hindus assert that the Buddha "belongs" to them. However, Buddhists categorically reject this understanding of the Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu. Also, while the Buddha didn't try to overturn Vedic culture, it is fairly evident in the texts that remain that he rejected the Vedic conception of the universe, the ritual culture, and the Vedic religious life.
Furthermore, we need to make careful distinctions between the Buddhist and the Christian stories. The early Christians certainly saw themselves as Jews and Jesus himself never saw himself as founding anything new. However, mainstream Judaism categorically rejects the idea in the canonical gospels (and in Christianity afterwards) that Jesus "fulfils" the prophecies of the Torah, and would not call their own scripture the "Old Testament" - that is a Christian understanding of the Jewish text that Jews do not accept. Jews therefore do not see Jesus - or at least the Jesus of Christian faith that emerged after St. Paul - as "one with Judaism."
it's clear for me that buddhism is not the solution for women either. No need to change religion, everywhere is the same. Monks are mostly misoginous in all religions. I understand women who turn out to female traditions, such as wicca.