Are all forms of Buddhism Monistic?

[mattityahu]

Originally Posted by earl

Actually, Buddhism has a highly developed ethical schema referred to in Sanskrit as sila. Most schools of Buddhism encourage the adherence to such of core importance in the development of wisdom. But, they point out that these modes of operating are the innate way an enlightened person behaves. So, pre-enlightenment they are essentially standards to which the Buddhist aspires. Post-enlightenment, no "standards." Just a natural way to respond. by the way, love the Stones' Sympathy For The Devil. earl

Not sure I follow. The standard surely still exists independent of whether you've gotten yourself enlightened or not? Just post-enlightenment you become unaware of this standard.

[I am so out of my depth here...thank you all kindly for your patience and taking the time to answer my questions. ]

ETA: That smiley looks like a smug cheese puff.

[earl]

Originally Posted by mattityahu

Not sure I follow. The standard surely still exists independent of whether you've gotten yourself enlightened or not? Just post-enlightenment you become unaware of this standard.

[I am so out of my depth here...thank you all kindly for your patience and taking the time to answer my questions. ]

ETA: That smiley looks like a smug cheese puff.

Pre-enlightenment, you attempt to flower. Post-enlightenment, you simply flower. earl

[mattityahu]

I'm afraid my pre-enlightened mind doesn't have a clue what you're on about.

[earl]

Originally Posted by mattityahu

I'm afraid my pre-enlightened mind doesn't have a clue what you're on about.

OK, just go with this then:
Netscape Search
earl

[mattityahu]

What is "the good" that becomes internalized?

[earl]

Originally Posted by mattityahu

What is "the good" that becomes internalized?

Actions beneficial to all beings and ourselves. Once one is enlightened, they are automatic. Sort of like learning how to ride a bike. At first one is highly conscious of all actions taken to keep one's balance. After you learn, you just ride. earl

[mattityahu]

Even when such actions become automatic, there is a very real an obvious extent to which these actions are good as opposed to bad.

Are enlightened Buddhists aware of whether non-enlightened folk are doing good or bad deeds?

[nativeastral]

Originally Posted by mattityahu

Even when such actions become automatic, there is a very real an obvious extent to which these actions are good as opposed to bad.

Are enlightened Buddhists aware of whether non-enlightened folk are doing good or bad deeds?

not at all buddhist but perhaps kants categorical imperative may broaden?
Categorical imperative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[earl]

Originally Posted by mattityahu

Even when such actions become automatic, there is a very real an obvious extent to which these actions are good as opposed to bad.

Are enlightened Buddhists aware of whether non-enlightened folk are doing good or bad deeds?

Even quite unenlightened ones are. earl

[mattityahu]

Originally Posted by earl

Even quite unenlightened ones are. earl

So there is a difference (between good and bad) whether you're enlightened or not then?

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by mattityahu

So there is a difference (between good and bad) whether you're enlightened or not then?

Yes.
Kalama Sutta

Greed, hate, and delusion

5. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does greed appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to greed, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by greed, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
6. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does hate appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to hate, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by hate, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
7. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does delusion appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to delusion, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by delusion, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
8. "What do you think, Kalamas? Are these things good or bad?" — "Bad, venerable sir" — "Blamable or not blamable?" — "Blamable, venerable sir." — "Censured or praised by the wise?" — "Censured, venerable sir." — "Undertaken and observed, do these things lead to harm and ill, or not? Or how does it strike you?" — "Undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill. Thus it strikes us here."

[mattityahu]

So Reality isn't whole then? As good and bad aren't whole.

[earl]

Originally Posted by mattityahu

So Reality isn't whole then? As good and bad aren't whole.

Are day and night whole? Are life and death whole? earl

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by mattityahu

So Reality isn't whole then? As good and bad aren't whole.

Greed, hate, and delusion are products of the mind. Keeping this in mind, go back and read Dhammapada 1:1-5 in post #6 of this thread. The unifying factor in this is the mind. {Look for how everything is interconnected in order to see the wholeness of reality.}

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by earl

Are day and night whole? Are life and death whole? earl

They are connected, though.