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.
1. Buddha was a man. Not a god. Just a man.
2. Since you are all knowledgeable about Buddhism...,,,surely you are aware that one of the debates within Buddhism is whether it is a religion or a philosophy.
only to the western mind which is bound up with Christianity. in Eastern thought , they are the same. and no conflict with science.
Buddha is an avatar, one who takes you across the river of trouble.
only to the western mind which is bound up with Christianity. in Eastern thought , they are the same. and no conflict with science.
Buddha is an avatar, one who takes you across the river of trouble.
Did I mention a conflict with science?
And no, "in Eastern thought" they are not the same. Some Buddhists conduct rote religious ceremonies, others discuss concepts.
In Hinduism Buddha may be considered an avatar. We Buddhists are not subservient to Hinduism. In Theravada Buddhism he is not an avatar. In Buddhism, Buddha is pretty much credited with being the only founder of a major world religion who did not claim to be other than an ordinary human being.
And no, "in Eastern thought" they are not the same. Some Buddhists conduct rote religious ceremonies, others discuss concepts.
In Hinduism Buddha may be considered an avatar. We Buddhists are not subservient to Hinduism. In Theravada Buddhism he is not an avatar. In Buddhism, Buddha is pretty much credited with being the only founder of a major world religion who did not claim to be other than an ordinary human being.
You did not but i added science for good measure, because there is no conflict.
Some Buddhists do both - conduct religious ceremonies, worship, offer flowers and incense to an idol or picture of Buddha that they invest with his spirit and their reverence. Buddha himself taught them there will be another spiritual leader to guide them. Some Buddhists await this avatar. They also can conduct philosophical discourses about anatma and rebirth. Philosophy and religion are closely related in Eastern thought, unlike the Weat where Philosophy lost it place. No conflict in Buddhism. Buddha himself was a philosopher, great thinker, a Buddha.
Yes some Hindus consider him an avatar.
Buddha did not consider himself anything, not even a teacher. He only asserted Dukkha exists, it is a product of unfulfilled desires, and showed the path to relief from Dukkha. He tread that path himself.
Buddhists take his instructions seriously.
I have seen you posts where you mocked some monks at their sincere attempts at non-violence. No i will not waste my time looking for it, you can dig it up yourself.
You did not but i added science for good measure, because there is no conflict. Some Buddhists do both - conduct religious ceremonies, worship, offer flowers and incense to an idol or picture of Buddha that they invest with his spirit and their reverence. Buddha himself taught them there will be another spiritual leader to guide them. Some Buddhists await this avatar. They also can conduct philosophical discourses about anatma and rebirth. Philosophy and religion are closely related in Eastern thought, unlike the Weat where Philosophy lost it place. No conflict in Buddhism. Buddha himself was a philosopher, great thinker, a Buddha.
Yes some Hindus consider him an avatar.
Buddha did not consider himself anything, not even a teacher. He only asserted Dukkha exists, it is a product of unfulfilled desires, and showed the path to relief from Dukkha. He tread that path himself.
Buddhists take his instructions seriously.
I have seen you posts where you mocked some monks at their sincere attempts at non-violence. No i will not waste my time looking for it, you can dig it up yourself.
I don't agree with your use of the word avatar, but I won't argue the point.
A future Buddha. This is to me a very suspect concept. Depending on the branch of Buddhism, there have been anywhere from 12-28 previous Buddhas. First problem -- show me even one piece of actual evidence for these previous Buddhas. There is no physical evidence whatsoever. Second problem, when you look at the time line for each of these Buddhas -- basically a period of time when the religion/philosophy was active until it TOTALLY disappeared -- for each of these Buddhas -- that would mean that some Buddha must have been Australopithecus or even before that. It just doesn't add up...as do many religious fables.
Have I mocked monks. Well, a couple of you ________ use the word 'mock' awfully easily. And here's an example. Yes, I have been critical of monks who, when digging a garden will carefully pick up every worm and move the worm to a new location. And then, those same monks, will -- at their morning and noon meal -- eat chicken, pork, beef, and seafood. And their justification is that the latter doesn't count because they didn't personally kill the animal or didn't personally cook the meat. Instead, a butcher killed the animal...and in Thailand that means that most butchers are Muslim. I don't think it's morally consistent to say you can't kill a sentient animals for food, but it's okay to eat the food after someone else has done the dirty work. Or then there was the Thai friend who didn't want us to kill a bee, but didn't mind putting down rat poison out in the yard. All these little games to try to justify inconsistent behavior. Is that mocking? No, it's critiquing behavior. But if we want to add to this, you are damn right that I am highly critical of what Buddhist monks are doing to Rohingya people in Burma.
And by the way -- these constant critiques of my posts by you...is that mocking me? Pot meet kettle.
I don't agree with your use of the word avatar, but I won't argue the point.
A future Buddha. This is to me a very suspect concept. Depending on the branch of Buddhism, there have been anywhere from 12-28 previous Buddhas. First problem -- show me even one piece of actual evidence for these previous Buddhas. There is no physical evidence whatsoever. Second problem, when you look at the time line for each of these Buddhas -- basically a period of time when the religion/philosophy was active until it TOTALLY disappeared -- for each of these Buddhas -- that would mean that some Buddha must have been Australopithecus or even before that. It just doesn't add up...as do many religious fables.
Have I mocked monks. Well, a couple of you ________ use the word 'mock' awfully easily. And here's an example. Yes, I have been critical of monks who, when digging a garden will carefully pick up every worm and move the worm to a new location. And then, those same monks, will -- at their morning and noon meal -- eat chicken, pork, beef, and seafood. And their justification is that the latter doesn't count because they didn't personally kill the animal or didn't personally cook the meat. Instead, a butcher killed the animal...and in Thailand that means that most butchers are Muslim. I don't think it's morally consistent to say you can't kill a sentient animals for food, but it's okay to eat the food after someone else has done the dirty work. Or then there was the Thai friend who didn't want us to kill a bee, but didn't mind putting down rat poison out in the yard. All these little games to try to justify inconsistent behavior. Is that mocking? No, it's critiquing behavior. But if we want to add to this, you are damn right that I am highly critical of what Buddhist monks are doing to Rohingya people in Burma.
And by the way -- these constant critiques of my posts by you...is that mocking me? Pot meet kettle.
Yes it is mocking. Ypur attempt to adopt Buddhism so it fits with your needs is the same thing that the monks are dong. They are trying to cause as little violence as possible in their own ways. Better to be critical of your own actions and thoughts before jumping on others. That should keep you plenty busy.
I am pointing out how disrespectful you are about a religion that you claim to have adopted. I am displaying shock and aversion, if that makes it any clearer.
Yes it is mocking. Ypur attempt to adopt Buddhism so it fits with your needs is the same thing that the monks are dong. They are trying to cause as little violence as possible in their own ways. Better to be critical of your own actions and thoughts before jumping on others. That should keep you plenty busy.
I am pointing out how disrespectful you are about a religion that you claim to have adopted. I am displaying shock and aversion, if that makes it any clearer.
When I consider the tone of your posts over a long period time, your critique of my views matters next to nothing.
Sitting in my chair with a bad back right now is " painful"
Reading the never ending bickering and gotcha comments will contribute to "suffering" ( if I let it )
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.
,,,surely you are aware that one of the debates within Buddhism is whether it is a religion or a philosophy.
