Buddha Mind is Chief – I –

On whatever issue in the Buddha religion, the perspective presented, determined or implied by the Buddha on any issue, is the only true, lawful and legal Buddhist perspective, and as such can be called.  Otherwise, it is not Buddhist.  It is not Buddhism.  It is not the religion of the Buddha.  

On whatever issue in the Buddha religion, any perspective not presented, not determined, not implied by the Buddha on any issue, is not any true, lawful and legal Buddhist perspective, as such cannot be called, and therefore it can only be called schism, because it is schism.

It is schism as in the case of Sujato.  And precisely at the beginning of his schism statement of principles, Sujato wrote:  “Marriage equality is one of the key social and legal issues of our time. I’d like to offer a Buddhist perspective.” 

Sujato, in bad faith from the very first beginning in that initial sentence of his, presents his lesbic and homosexuality perspective as a Buddhist perspective on the issue.  And therefore he induces the reader to suppose, or to think, that [and here enters his bad-faith]  it is a perspective that would had been presented by the Buddha. 

It isn’t. It is not any of the perspectives of the Buddha on the issue.  On the contrary.  The Buddha perspective on the issue, and therefore a true, lawful, legal Buddhist perspective,  is precisely the opposite. To begin with, it is the third precept issued by the Buddha, which anyone willing to become Buddhist must make the oath to practice, otherwise cannot take refuge in the Buddha, in the Buddha Dhamma-Vinaya, in the Buddha Sangha, cannot become a member of the Buddhist religion, cannot be Buddhist:

“I UNDERTAKE THE PRECEPT TO REFRAIN FROM UNLAWFUL SEXUAL INTERCOURSE.  A TRAINING TO BE OBSERVED.”

Advertisements