Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Probably sounds like a silly inquiry as Buddhism is listed as one of the "world's great religions." But I've also seen it characterized as a philosophy. Despite my fervent atheism, I always found Buddhism attractive, at least until I read Russell's remarks about a (prior) Dahlai Lama encapsulating his feces and selling it. I find that story a bit far-fetched, but Russell did write about it, to my dismay. Russell is my hero and I tend to believe him.
So, questions:
1. Anyone know about this feces-pills story? and
2. What is it about Buddhism that is so attractive to otherwise non-believers?
This is what I'm finding so far:
Quote:
A hundred years ago, rumors that the feces of the Dalai Lama—the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhists—had beneficial properties prompted the UK’s Surgeon General to analyze them in the interests of science. They contained nothing remarkable, he concluded. Just as well: According to a spokesperson at the UK-based Tibet Foundation, “These days you can’t even buy the Dalai Lama’s used clothes, never mind his excrement.” http://thepoopproject.org/blog/the-poop-of-the-pious
Last edited by KaraZetterberg153; 11-17-2018 at 11:35 AM..
The appeal might be the same as with other religions...a prepackaged way to think about the cosmos, one which saves the subscriber the effort of formulating a view. The cosmos is overwhelming, some of us require an immediate explanation, others are content with the mystery and will wait until a more substantial explanation is offered before considering it.
Probably sounds like a silly inquiry as Buddhism is listed as one of the "world's great religions." But I've also seen it characterized as a philosophy. Despite my fervent atheism, I always found Buddhism attractive, at least until I read Russell's remarks about a (prior) Dahlai Lama encapsulating his feces and selling it. I find that story a bit far-fetched, but Russell did write about it, to my dismay. Russell is my hero and I tend to believe him.
So, questions:
1. Anyone know about this feces-pills story? and
2. What is it about Buddhism that is so attractive to otherwise non-believers?
The overwhelming majority of Buddhists attribute certain supernatural powers to the Buddha and ascribe some form of supernatural aspects into their beliefs. Buddhism is therefore a religion. There exists within Buddhism a minority of Buddhists who do not attribute supernatural powers to the Buddha or ascribe some form of supernatural aspects into their beliefs. For this minority Buddhism may fairly be considered a philosophy.
I think that Buddhism can be a religion (but isn't supposed to be), or it can be a philosophy (which it is supposed to be). I was actually talking about just this topic a month ago with a Thai Buddhist monk that I tutor in English. He pretty much agreed with my viewpoint...which is:
Some Buddhists are all wrapped up in the rituals. The chanting (even when they don't understand Pali at all), the ceremonies, etc. I see it when I go to the temple on Sundays (which is rarely). That's when, in my view, it's a religion.
Other Buddhists actually contemplate the writings in the Tipitaka, think about how to incorporate things like the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path.
And, of course, there's not a hard line in the sand. It's not either/or. But there are many -- particularly some who were born into Buddhism -- that never get past the religion concept.
What did I find attractive about Buddhism? If there is one most simple thing that I like about Buddhism, it's that no one tells me what I must believe or do. It's my responsibility to consider the teachings, see what I can incorporate into my life, and then got on with being a compassionate person.
What did I find attractive about Buddhism? If there is one most simple thing that I like about Buddhism, it's that no one tells me what I must believe or do. It's my responsibility to consider the teachings, see what I can incorporate into my life, and then got on with being a compassionate person.
Same thing comes with atheism and you don't even have to learn how to spell Booda.
Good posts. (what's the faeces -pills? sounds awful). I won't go into all the reasons I Did Buddhism, including becoming a monk in Burma for a fortnight which allowed me to tour The 'Brown areas' in the south, all off -limits to tourists in the 90's, swanning around in a purple robe being offered money in exchange for Blessings ( I felt a complete fraud) though Mrs. Arq saw that I donated the loot to the Kyaik-hti-yo in enough gold leaf to cover 20 sq feet of rock.
But all the above - not the guilt - trip (turn or burn) but ..yeah...if you don't want to work too hard at it this life, try harder next time..and it was more enjoyable. But because of this conclusion I came to, that Karma was a god (sorta) because it had to be omni -cognisant (or at least aware) in order to know whether you'd racked up good or bad Karma because it was a crap system to rely on whether the perpetrator thought it was a good deed or not that made it a religion according to the definition I concocted to fit my own person views
"The belief in an entity that can affect human fortune in this life and possible others, and which can be propitiated by actions, rites, prayers and gifts (covers everything from human sacrifice to tithing) in order to secure desired outcomes."
In that respect Buddhism and indeed scientology qualifies as a religion. Astrology does not as you can't bribe the stars, only predict the results. Astrology is thus a pseudo -science.
Probably sounds like a silly inquiry as Buddhism is listed as one of the "world's great religions." But I've also seen it characterized as a philosophy.
True Buddhism is a philosophy, not a religion.
There is no god, no cosmogony, no scriptural texts, no prophecies, no miracles and no eschatology, which are the hallmarks of religions.
The fact that one of Dali lamas corrupted Buddhism doesn't make it a religion.
You don't pray to Buddha, you meditate with Buddha, who serves as an example of what one might possibly achieve (enlightenment), which is quite a difference.
I think that Buddhism can be a religion (but isn't supposed to be), or it can be a philosophy (which it is supposed to be).
...[snip]...
Technically, Christianity is supposed to be a different philosophy of Judaism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
