Is Buddhism also dialectical?

Buddhism is a dialectic, not a dead rule, for example, the problem of vegetarianism, if there is no vegetarian living environment, only meat, if you don't eat it, you will starve to death, then you must eat...

Also, monks are not allowed to drink alcohol but it is allowed to be prescribed for the purpose of healing.

In Article 47 of the Excerpts from the Novice Vinaya, the Buddha said, "If you are a teacher according to me, you must not drink alcohol, nor drink with him." No stockpiling.

For those who are seriously ill, the medical education uses alcohol as medicine, which is a temporary right to listen, not a long-distance meal. If there is no illness, the minor illness will be serious. This means that as a novice, you cannot drink alcohol yourself, nor can you give it to others to drink, nor can you store wine.

If you are seriously ill and the doctor says that you need to use alcohol as medicine, you can drink alcohol in this case, which is the opening edge. When you are cured, you can no longer drink alcohol, and if you are cured, you will break your vows. To use wine to heal the sick is to open, not to break.

In traditional Chinese medicine, there are many medicines that are to be used as a dispensing medicine, or as a medicine introduction, which can be used. So the Buddha's precepts were also very human.

Hahaha Buddhism Buddhism Buddhism.

A Buddha is not a person, nor is it anything else.

Check the vocabulary of ancient India.

Buddha is a verb.

Later schools are all prejudices.

It is enough to read the Diamond Sutra carefully, read the book, and understand it.

Obsessed with something, it's the way.

The Four Voids This is translated.

At least there is only one person on this earth who has a well-documented record of becoming a Buddha.

The other Buddhas are too old to guess.

The old man Shakyamuni said, "Don't live at all."

The four are the things that make up our world, and in science, you are also made up of the four elements, and there is no independent "being".

A grain of sand at the bottom of a big river What is the emptiness?

Finally, none of the enlightened ancestors established their own organizations, and the sects were founded by others.

If you look at the Diamond Sutra, you will know that the Buddha is very down-to-earth, a person of great wisdom, and has great magical powers, so he is called the Buddha.

Buddha = Enlightenment, that is, the ancestor of enlightenment, is great.

It's not that if you study Buddhism all your life, you're still unlucky, and the Buddha is useless.

That's because you have accumulated too much karma in your previous life, and you haven't paid it enough.

A lot of people think that when people die, they die, and that the world is too naïve.

What is dialectic? Dharma is one dharma, not two dharmas. When you see that you have become a Buddha, there is nothing to say about dialectical or non-dialectical. Before you understand it, you still need to understand the Dharma with the help of dialectical means.

In addition, there is no contradiction between the four emptiness and dialectic. Emptiness refers to the emptiness of all laws, not to say nothing.

In fact, Buddhism is higher than dialectic, because Buddhism talks about "non-duality" and absoluteness.

Buddhism also has schools, different schools of thought have different views, divided into several sects, Buddhism in modern society emphasizes the combination of Buddhism and people's livelihood, dialectically promote Buddhism.

Yes, Einstein also borrowed from the dialectics of Buddhism and wrote the theory of relativity, which has a long history.

Well, if you want to do this, I recommend going to the Confucian Academy Buddhist Culture Training School for further study.

Buddhists are at an advanced stage of rational thinking, and it was only in the time of Shakyamuni Buddha that mankind matured in dialectical thinking. Dialectics was originally developed in Buddhism. Dialectics has reached a very fine level in Buddhism, and Shakyamuni is really a great sage.

Shakyamuni is the embodiment of all the virtues he advocated. During his 45-year career of preaching, which was remarkable and profound, he interpreted his words and teachings with practical actions. There is not a single human weakness and inferiority to be found in him.

Shakyamuni's moral code is the most perfect known in the world. - Marx.

Marxist dialectics.

Because Marxist dialectics is a dialectic based on materialism, while Buddhist dialectics is idealistic, Marxist dialectics is a more thorough dialectic.

I believe that scientific theorems are only described by human beings in human language after finding scientific laws, not made up by human beings, and fabrications that do not conform to scientific laws are not scientific theorems at all. Consciousness and thinking can reflect objective reality, and the expression of words may also have limitations, but after all, they can also describe objective existence. If dialectics can't use conscious thinking, I think it's an idealist point of view - a personal point of view, maybe not professional enough, hehe.

I am dizzy, and my personal understanding is the dialectic of Buddhism, because the horse's is a dialectic of development, not a dialectic that does not contain planes.

However, I cannot agree with the following statement, that is, it is completely irrelevant to associate dialectics with communism, and besides, to say that Marx's theory is a theorem made up by man, but how can I know that Buddhism is not made up by man?

The dialectics of Marxism is inferior to the dialectics of Buddhism in some areas, but it is stronger than Buddhism in a systematic way.

As far as dialectics itself is concerned, there is no such thing as materialism or idealism.

Relative and comparative can never be thorough and complete.

Marx's dialectic was used for analysis, and he established relative views. The Buddhist dialectic is used to break the relative, and he breaks all relative perceptions.

It is the dialectic of Buddhism that is more thorough and complete.

Buddhism was founded by Shakyamuni Buddha, and our later scientific proof proved that Shakyamuni Buddha had been enlightened thousands of years ago, and now Shakyamuni Buddha has been enlightened, and the progress of science is far from reaching that level, so Buddhism is broad and profound!