Comments by "Spiritual Psychotherapy Services" (@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices) on "The Buddhist Ideal: Very Wrong and Very Right | Fireside Chat | PragerU" video.

  1. dharma: a Sanskrit term (from the root “dhr-”, which means “to hold”, or “to support”), for any human function or concept, that is considered to be holy and righteous, based on the maxim “non-harm is the greatest law”, or “non-violence is the epitome of religion” (“ahiṃsā paramo dharmaḥ”, in Sanskrit). The term “(moral) law” simply refers to how any voluntary, intentional human action, contravenes the principle of avoiding harm to oneself, to another living creature, and avoiding undue harm to even the non-organic environment. So, for example, since unnecessarily consuming any animal product, is harmful to both the consumer and to the exploited animal, it is considered to be unlawful (“adharma”, in Sanskrit). Therefore, it is a moral imperative for every human being to become VEGAN. Dharma also refers to societal duties. For example, as the current World Teacher Himself, it is the sacred duty of this author to teach the world how to live according to dharma itself (see Chapter 20), whereas the dharma of any (human) female, for example, is to serve her masters (that is, any adult male in her nuclear family, as well as any adult male within her extended family, clan or tribe). Dharma is undoubtedly the most important concept of all, for a peaceful, successful and thriving society, depends on adherence to the law. There is no assurance that anybody will become a self-realized sage by studying this “Dharmaśāstra” (law book), but at least one will understand life as it is, and be able to distinguish between holiness and wickedness, even if one refuses to accept the truths explicated here. That is the main reason why the lengthiest chapter of “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, deals with morality. “Dharma eva hato hanti dharmo rakṣati rakṣitaḥ । tasmād dharmo na hantavyo mā no dharmo hato’vadhīt” (Manusmriti 8.15) states that when righteousness is destroyed, it destroys, but when the law is protected, it protects. Therefore, morality ought not be destroyed, lest its absence destroys us. Unfortunately, most persons (that is, leftists) are unable to comprehend this obvious truism. N.B. Obviously, based on the definition of the term, given above, dharma is not a sectarian concept. All religious traditions embody genuine dharma/law/morality to varying degrees. The explication of morality provided in this Holiest of All Holy Scriptures (or to be even more blunt, the ONLY truly holy and righteous work of literature ever composed), especially in the all-important twelfth chapter, is the topmost understanding of dharma. However, in Bhārata (the Indian subcontinent), the terms “Hindu Dharma” and “Buddhist Dharma” are not uncommon, and refer more so to the distinctive sectarian teachings of those two spiritual traditions. dhamma: the Pāli cognate of “dharma”. However, in this case, it invariably refers to the teachings of Gautama Buddha, rather than the eternal law (“sanātana dharma”, in Sanskrit). In this book, it is used in the former sense, that is, of “holy and righteous concepts and deeds”. Therefore, the term “Buddhist dhamma/dharma” is somewhat nonsensical, since dhamma/dharma is fundamentally non-sectarian. Despite being the most atheistic human being to have ever existed, I often PRAY that I am not in the process of consuming a meal whenever I hear a Buddhist monk or lay teacher referring to his or her lecture as being a “dhamma talk”. If you have carefully read the entirety of this Holy Scripture, “F.I.S.H”, and you have listened to many Buddhist sermons, you may have already guessed the reason for my fervent prayer. This is because the assertion that the overwhelming majority of Buddhist monks are teaching authentic dharma, is so excruciatingly cringe-worthy and laughable, I am genuinely fearful of choking on my food upon hearing such silly claims! First of all, the founder of Buddhism himself, Siddhārtha Gautama was hardly a paragon of virtue, having abandoned his family in order to become a mendicant monk, being an animal-abusing carnist, and encouraging females to become loose women (so-called “nuns”). In my half a century of life, I have only ever encountered one or two Buddhists who adhered to (actual) dharma, so in that sense, they were factually SUPERIOR to Gautama himself! For instance, the abbot of the largest Buddhist society in my homeland, Australia, believes that it is dharmic (legitimate) for men to insert their reproductive organs inside the faeces holes of other men, and of course, like his idol, Gautama, he is a murderer of poor, innocent, defenceless animals, and a filthy feminist. Furthermore, despite being an indigenous Englishman, and a graduate of one of the most prestigious universities on earth, University of Cambridge, he is entirely unable to coherently speak his native tongue! Should not a supposed “spiritual leader” be an exemplar in at least his own language? Of course, no human being (including so-called “Avatars”) who has ever lived was morally perfect, but those who claim to be spiritual masters ought to be beyond reproach in respect to their own ethical practices. In the aforementioned case, Gautama should have returned to his family as soon as he understood the immorality of his actions, just as I, when I began adhering to dharma, repaid two persons from whom I had stolen goods and cash. Furthermore, assuming that Gautama was really a carnist (and knowing the typical diet of Bhārata, it would be safe to assume that he was at LEAST a lacto-vegetarian, and therefore an animal-abusing criminal), he was certainly sufficiently intelligent to understand that it is unnatural for an adult human to suckle the teats of a cow or a goat, and that human beings are fully herbivorous. Otherwise, how could he possibly be considered a member of the priestly class of society (“brāhmaṇa”, in Sanskrit) if he was not able to even comprehend some of the most basic facts of life? Make no mistake, carnism (see that entry in this Glossary) is a truly abominable, horrendous, wicked, hateful, evil, immoral, sinful, demonic ideology, as is feminism and unlawful divorce (in the case of Prince Gautama, the abandonment of his wife and son would be considered an act of divorce). When a so-called Zen Buddhist priest asks another MALE so-called Zen Buddhist priest (as occurred in a video interview I just watched on the Internet), "Do you and your husband have any kids?”, one can be fully assured that the lowest point in the history of humanity has been reached. The fact that both the aforementioned so-called priests are American men, is not coincidental, since the most decadent religionists seem to be of Western/first-world origin. I don't believe I have come across a single Western Buddhist monastic who is not at least slightly left-leaning (“leftism” being a common term in the English-speaking world for “adharmic”). If even 0.00001% of all Buddhists who have ever lived, were strict adherents to the teachings of the so-called “Buddha”, this would establish serious doubts regarding the holiness of Gautama’s precepts, because truth be told, hardly a single soul in human history has adhered to proper dharma/dhamma. 😇 सत्यमेव जयते! 😇
    1