Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[counting]

I always preferred Buddhists over all the other religions. Primarily because they least resemble a religion and more like a peaceful way of life and thought (or maybe it's because I don't know much about the subject).

Oh, and also, it could be because they haven't been trying to kill everyone else on this planet for the last thousand years in the name of their imaginary friend. (But then again.. maybe they have, and I just don't know about it. Pulling the strings of Muslims, Jews and Christians from their underground lairs scattered all around the world )

But no, I won't be joining their ranks, even though they have my sympathy

Actually there is a difference between, Buddhism the religion, and the Buddhist philosophy. As I mention before, if a doctrines talks too much about abstract none-useful concepts to the public, it won't work. The same thing happens in Buddhism. When Buddha first spread his believes they are not that complicated, and it's when the time Northern India are in chaos of wars, and people are suffering in castes system due to the nature of Brahmanism. And there is no way for a member of a certain caste to climb up the caste ladder (Brahman requires everyone plays their own roles, over and over in the eternal cycle of life, imagine that pain). And Buddha gives the answer that the cycle of life can be broken, by just admitting Brahman is a illusion as well as everything else, so no suffering as long as you can accept his philosophy, and gain peace after death (beyond cycle of life). And you can place Christian God in the place of Brahman, and you get an atheist. It's such a rebellious idea, that there are many don't believe in his idea. And many less aggressive views are formed, and Hinduism are created(evolved) from Brahmanism to replaced the out dated one. (Which still contained caste ideologies), and Buddhism flourished for a limit of time, than died out in India. (Later revived but not much)

And during the time in India, Buddhism is well spread into nobles and kings, since its very tempting for the poor people, and the rulers have to accept the faith for the public to follow him. And this king still wage wars, not in the name of Buddhism, (You CAN’T there is just nothing, how can you carried a flag of nothing), but more like an after pill after a one night stand. The king will seek guides from monks and asking the punishment of bad karma, and Brahmanism priests will tell them not to fear, as long as your good karma > bad, so donate more money to us, you will be fine, and you won't drop the ladder of caste in next life.

The same as early Buddhism, since they still carried the baggage of karma, and its a sure for money income, why not. However since you can also go beyond the cycle of life, so another option is to let yourself believes in that there is nothing to fear and its just a glory for yourself on this life only. And its not caring attitude will causing not the problem of next life, but this life. Anyone who don't care that will become morally questionable, so the King has to act like he cares, and secretly do what he want. The King(nobles, higher castes members) just don't care since there is no next life to expect. So a new moral concept is added to deter this : Since karma is such powerful force, once you committed something, it will follow you FOREVER, and it will only go away till the debt is paid, and works as a force of nature. If you still have karma in you (good or bad), you will stock in cycle of life, even if you already see through the path of enlightenment. A little like when you are declared bankrupt, until you paid full with interests, you can't move on even if you know how the system is work. And we already carried our karma to this world since we are already born. (A little like the original sin, but I think Brahmanism carried this idea a long time before that), So you need to do more good than bad in this life, and wait for the bad/good results from your previous life to fulfill. Same logic as Brahmanism just different goals.

But its not that useful to promote the people to fight with you, and the promise may take too long for anyone to care whether it will ever be, so when Islamic believes invade India, its quickly replaced Buddhism, since God is more generous as giving instant havens soon after death. However the story didn't end, since Buddhism is spread to China, during the time of also an era in China when wars are raging and people are dying due to collapse of the empire and invaders from the north. People seek refuge of peace in mind, and asking why they are suffered. So the Buddhism carried its baggage of karma, cycle of life (Chinese people originally didn't believe that), and its philosophy. Which is influenced by Greek logic and philosophy, believe or not, since Alexanders invade northern India in 4 century BC, and create a series of Greek-India Kingdoms when his empire collapse. And its a perfect match for China, since we get a philosophy of Tao, similar with Brahmanism,its many deities and spirits becomes lost souls of who seeking the enlightenment, and its likeness in believes in topic about the 'dao' or karma. And also the philosophical discuss of existences (Famous story about butterfly and dreams). And Buddhism as a religion reverses back to become more like Brahmanism, monks requires people to donate money for good karma, (good priests and monks all think alike).

But this time Buddhism is more complete to add the concept of heaven and hell borrowed from Taoism, (Hell before Buddhism isn't a bad place, just for those ranks lower than human, a lot like animal shelter for the homeless to raise backup, and possible to deities). So the new ranks of caste is born borrowed those from Brahmanism to form not just 3 (heaven, earth, hell), but 6 realms into the cycle of life, and human world is just on of them. And adding another new sets(up to 33 or more) of realms beyond these 6, as the land of Buddha, where people can go there and keeps studying Buddhism after pass the cycle of life. The concept piles up and more and more complex idea is created. But the core philosophy is still there, regardless the common practice of people.

However since its philosophy is not easily understand by people, but those of high educations. So new branches is born, some concentrated on practices and rituals, some introduce the idea of not helping yourself, but waiting for those who has already cross, and comeback to save them. (More acceptable to people), all you need to do is called his name (觀世音菩薩). And although its a HE, but he transsexual into SHE, after sometimes, since he can change to any form, like a deities, another concept borrow from Taoism, and once you are on your way to enlightenment, you can gain deity-like abilities (神通), I think the transform is due to the believers are mostly are woman, and there are influence when a time woman are powerful in political plays (He transform about the same time, in the dynasty with the only female emperor)

So in a way Buddhism religion is more a divided concepts from Brahmanism view of cycle of life, and karma, with Taoism believes of many deities who can come back and save you, also the salvation by helping yourself. Its no longer and philosophical debates, thus the Zenist, is forming to let all that decorated concepts striped into its raw form. We accept that since all can be happen is already happening, and everything even oneself is a illusion, and the concept of see through this, thus granting into enlightenment is just a state of one's mind, not in some distance realm, but right here, and right now. And you can understand it fairly quickly. The difficult part is to keeping in that state of mind. And one can achieve that through meditation, from observing the nature, from every little details of everything, since its basically just nothingness, but from nothingness it creates everything. One must capture that and look back oneself for answers are within everything. Questioning while never asked. Hearing answers while nothing there.

Urist McAnderson looks at the spoon find there is no spoon.
Urist McSmith while being nothing but codes, becomes everyone.

A Zenist kills Urist McArchitect, same way as I killed Urist McBudda

[Hiiri]

That was interesting, thank you. And, oh boy, you sure love to write.

Buddhism/Zenism sound a lot like stoicism in philosophy, with some poetic elements on top. Can't help but wonder, if it's passed down all the way from Alexander's times.

And the more practical side... Why hasn't it tainted over the years (by politicians, crooked monks etc..)? Why isn't killing "infidels" improving your karma, like in the Abrahamic religions..? I honestly think that western religions would have much to learn from the east; but we all know that's impossible, it should have had happened 6000 years ago.

[G-Flex]

Why hasn't it tainted over the years (by politicians, crooked monks etc..)? Why isn't killing "infidels" improving your karma, like in the Abrahamic religions..? I honestly think that western religions would have much to learn from the east; but we all know that's impossible, it should have had happened 6000 years ago.

You assume that no Eastern religion has ever done this? I don't know much about the region's history myself, but that sounds a little naive. If there were never corruption, there would never have been reforms.

In the case of Buddhism, it probably helps that there was never any real Buddhist state or empire to my knowledge, on par with Judeo-Christian ones that have existed.

[Hiiri]

Yes, it might be a bit naive, as I have a lot to be naive about.

But just by reading the news & somewhat knowing the general global history, the corruption can't have been at the same scale as we have had during the history. I'm pretty sure I'd know.

[G-Flex]

Corruption is easiest when political power is involved, though, hence my statement.

[Montague]

Tibet was/is a Buddhist state and the Communist Chinese gov't hates it because it's monks are basically beggars/ hobos with uniforms that ask for handouts from an already impoverished population and have always done so. So was Laos, Cambodia and others, which were eliminated by communist governments for these reasons.

I don't know why you'd get all sentimental about Buddhism if you are an atheist. It might not resemble traditional western religion, because it is more of a philosophy, but like any other vast number of philosophies it is deeply flawed and tragically disconnected from reality.

You might as well hold respect for Nihilism or the Church of Beer as a reasonable religious alternative to your own atheistic views.

[G-Flex]

I don't know why you'd get all sentimental about Buddhism if you are an atheist. It might not resemble traditional western religion, because it is more of a philosophy, but like any other vast number of philosophies it is deeply flawed and tragically disconnected from reality.

You might as well hold respect for Nihilism or the Church of Beer as a reasonable religious alternative to your own atheistic views.

There are a lot of things I disagree with about Buddhism, particularly in its premises (obviously, if you don't believe in something like reincarnation, Buddhism's spiritual/religious conclusions and practices cease to make sense to you), but much of its philosophical underpinnings regarding things like perception, identity of objects and the self, and the nature of the world are still very interesting and insightful even to someone who has no interest in any of the supernatural aspects of the religion.

[Hiiri]

I don't know why you'd get all sentimental about Buddhism if you are an atheist. It might not resemble traditional western religion, because it is more of a philosophy, but like any other vast number of philosophies it is deeply flawed and tragically disconnected from reality.

You might as well hold respect for Nihilism or the Church of Beer as a reasonable religious alternative to your own atheistic views.

Learning new stuff is always intriguing. I don't buy the spirituality, but I can be more sympathetic and interested of it and the history. But most of all, because they do not constantly spread hate.

Edit: I could be wrong, but that's the image their PR-office has given me.

[Criptfeind]

But most of all, because they do not constantly spread hate.

As opposed too?

[Hiiri]

But most of all, because they do not constantly spread hate.

As opposed too?

Issues of...
... homosexuality (Because.. who knows?).
... inequality of women and slaves (Bible has a chapter on slaves. Women are not equal in any religious sense).
... pro-violence and death (Killing infidels. Capital punishment).
... abortion and stem cell research (Human well-being is secondary to God's will).
... advocating ignorance (Science and proper education is bad. Ignorance generates hate).
... teaching children that they will burn in hell (Child abuse).
... condemning sex & birth control (Overpopulation of the globe. STD's).
... generally opposing humanism in favor of the invisible king in the heavens.

There's a few for starters. Did you even have to ask?

[counting]

About the influence of Greek Logic here is a translation I made earlier. It's a case in Zen, I called them the Zen X-files, since the teaching of Zen best not be told literally. Its a don't tell, don't say, but you just know something is in there thing, and there is always extra surprises when you dig more into it. So Zenist Masters in history acting in these X-files, hoping one can see, one can see through illusions.

---------------------------------------------------

Case #1 : The way of eats and sleeps in Zen

A Buddhist Vinaya[1] master asked a Zen master : “Are you still practicing the way of enlightenment?”

Zen master answered : “Yes.”

Vinaya master : “How?”

Zen master : “Eat, when I am hungry. Rest, when I am tired.”

Vinaya master : “Everyone does these same things. Is your way different than others?”

Zen master: ”Different.”

Vinaya master : “Different how?”

Zen master : “When people eat, they do not eat because they are hungry, but craving. And when people are tired, they do not just rest, but desiring all sorts of entertainments. That’s the difference.”

Vinaya master pondered.


[1] Buddhist Monks in Vinaya school (faction) focus their efforts on monastery discipline. They can trace their origins to the birth place of Buddhism from ancient India.

[2]Both Vinaya master and Zen master have their monk’s names in the original text. But during my translation, I think it is best not to translate them, either through pronunciations or meanings. Since the content is more important than the context.

---------------------------------------------------

Case #12 : Questions and Answers

King Menander I [1] asked Master Nagasena [2] : “I want to ask a question.”

Master Nagasena replied : “What’s the question, Your majesty.”

The King said : “I have already asked.”

Master Nagasena : “I have already answerd.”

The King : “What is THE answer?”

Master Nagasena : “What is THE question?”

The King : “I have no question.”

Master Nagasena : “There is no answer.”[3]

[1] King Menander I was a king of one of the Indo-Greek Kingdoms from 2nd century BCE in today northern India. They are descendent from the most eastern part of Alexander’s Empire in 4th century BCE.

[2] Master Nagasena is a Buddhist sage and a Brahmin. And his answers to the questions from King Menander I (also known as Milinda) are recorded in the book – Milinda Panha. It was translated and brought to China in 4th century CE.

[3] As you may have already familiar with the techniques used by Zen teachings. This is one of the examples of how Ancient Greek philosophy affected Buddhism teachings. And the teachings of Buddhism extract this philosophical thinking and later become one the foundations of Mahayana Buddhism. It was strengthen even further when combining with Taoism in China, and becoming Zen Buddhism. Thus the teaching of Zen becomes cryptic, but also means more than just superficial words. It focuses one’s mind, and digs deeper into the core of every thought, then comes a conclusion than even mind itself is an illusion.

---------------------------------------------------

The basic idea about Zen is not about how difficult it is, but how easy you can forget everything is just that simple, yet not that simple as one ponders more. And in its original form as in Case #12, its more of a philosophical debates than actual practice, hence the king from that era, like to have monks as scholars in their courts as well as mentors.

And there are many Buddhist kingdoms from that time, and as I said the monks and temples are often expect payments for nobles as they demand good karma, and then the monks will used them to buy food for the poor. However, as you can understand, not always monks are using this contribute money/goods/lands from the lords(nobles) in good deeds, many becomes land lords and rich merchants. And kings/emperor will let them, it doesn't hurt him, and can give him good names. However when there is a need for extra cash/goods during financial problems/war time needed, or the monks doing things too far (in a time during history, the monks in China even get married and had kids), the rulers will confiscated the property of the temples, and cash-in, and people will still cheer for him, because the ruler punished the corrupted one. It's a good system of symbiotic. So yes, Buddhism did get used and corrupted in the past, even now.

About Tibet Buddhism.it is a lot different. they are branches from Tantric Buddhism (Secret Mantra), as the name implies, their ritual are secret and they believe in the power of the "words". And it combine with a religious leader and political leader, much powerful than mostly religious leader like Pope, as they are effective ruler. The tulku/guru/lama with the highest ranking like Dalai Lama as we all know of, is a system of master-apprentice / and backup by a 'counsel like' high-ranking lama groups. The next ruler will be like choosing new puppet with certain characters, but the system works base on the collective recognition from monks closer to the previous rules recognized the next one as next reincarnation.

However anyone with 'high-enough' status can have his own reincarnation, so each sects will have one of the rulers, and they are protected by the military might of Mongolian military at 14th century and evolved from religious figure head to become political, and transform for rulers by bloodline to "selections" for the benefit of the "affective ruler" control the area. It easy to see why they need to be in good relationship with their neighbors, and as long as their powerful neighbors recognized the status of this religious figure head, it will be working. And their neighbors often interfere the process of "re-elect"/re-select of the next reincarnation. And support a divided Tibet political maps, so the process of recognized reincarnation finally become "legalize", not to be chosen by "wishes", but need to be registered, and legit by the government.

However the Tibetan Buddhism although bare the name of Buddhism, it's deeply affected by its southern neighbor's Hinduism. It only follow some doctrines not to gain enlightenment from within, but without. It's a master-apprentice system from head to toe. People seeking knowledge of the enlightenment, must join and select a master, so he can carried you into the the right pass. Best think of it as a form of people devote money/faith to a head monk in the temple, and seeking the promise of redemption/salvation. Reminding any similarity with something? Something works in a society in the west, also works in the east. But the gift a master can give is mostly his word, his act as been wise and kind, and he will promise when he crossing over, he will bring all his followers with him also. Better acting, more followers, more $$, build better temple, attract more followers. A very good feedback as long as he act as he said. And due to its easy of entry and promises, also since they believe in the power of words. They are good speakers too. Deadly combinations. Talking about abusing Buddhism. Many Buddhist thinks in the spectrum of Buddhism it's on the very edge of it, way to far to be considered as mainstream. Hence granting it a unique status, as it's own right of hybrid between Buddhism/Tibet folk religion/Hinduism.

And yes since one of the doctrine Buddhism inherited from Brahmanism, the cycle of life, and karma, is so embedded with the religious system, it becomes a irrational pre-required believes in order for it to work towards general populations. Hardly anyone who practice them notice that Buddha is first against this believes, and encourage others to break free of the illusions it bring. But in order for this breaking of pre-existed doctrines, you need to introduce it first to a place where it didn't have such believes. Hence creating a dilemma that it has to tell people to believe in something and than disprove it. But the system works in Brahmanism isn't breaking the rules, but salvation through the good/bad karma balance and climbing up, hence in reality people remembered this as Buddhism most noticeable features. And many branches of the Buddhism (sadly most popular one) hence deduce to this reverted state like Tibet Buddhism. So in functionalism point of view, Buddhism religion is a religion sugar-coated by Buddhist philosophy in practices for general populations.

The master-apprentice lineage is also a crucial part of Buddhism, since most of the Buddhist philosophy are so difficult for people to understand, it needs a way of telling people its legit, and the best way in pre-internet ages is by telling people who your master is. The more you can trace back to Buddha and his direct apprentices, the more you are recognized (People even divided those original apprentices in to different roles like the wisdom one, the one carried doctrines, the one get the most core belief, etc, so each branches can trace back its linage. And has ground to say they are legit. And also if an emperor choose to believe in Buddhism, a religious teacher for the king is selected from this sects, and emperors will spend massive resourced to build temples and showing people that he cares. And a symbiotic relationship will form. They most often don't end well.

[counting]

But most of all, because they do not constantly spread hate.

As opposed too?

Issues of...
... homosexuality (Because.. who knows?).
... inequality of women and slaves (Bible has a chapter on slaves. Women are not equal in any religious sense).
... pro-violence and death (Killing infidels. Capital punishment).
... abortion and stem cell research (Human well-being is secondary to God's will).
... advocating ignorance (Science and proper education is bad. Ignorance generates hate).
... teaching children that they will burn in hell (Child abuse).
... condemning sex & birth control (Overpopulation of the globe. STD's).
... generally opposing humanism in favor of the invisible king in the heavens.

There's a few for starters. Did you even have to ask?

There is a pre-defined property makes killing enemy or any human being not practical as good karma, since karma is originated on balancing in Brahmanism, everything is in balance. And this transfered to Buddhism. In Brahmanism you may do good deeds to "delete" the bad ones, But you can't in Buddhism, its a force of nature. So the balance becomes like an eye for an eye. If you killed someone, in the future some next life, you will be killed by your victims at least once, since people don't actually die, they went into the cycle of life.

And you might argue that your victim kill your first, but when you killed more than one people, it's hard for yourself to believe so many people have killed you in the past, it either means you are a bad/annoying person to cause it, or you just lying to yourself. And you can't be sure about that either, no one can answer that questions. And a good chance you are the first one to take action. So better no to act first. (Alternate chicken game).

And this apply to ALL creatures (Thus support the vegans), and you might as well killing a lot of innocent in your stomachs. It's better stop creating more bad karma. And by defining a lot of bad karma, it effectively promote good behavior. It didn't define what you are allow to do, but define a lot of things you shouldn't do. Killing is one of them. Hence Buddhism becomes the religion about negative motives. It's effective as a law system.

Buddhism doesn't constrain your believes, so most Buddhist as general populations believe more than 1 religion doctrine can be right. As long as you still called the slogan of Buddhism - "阿彌陀佛" Amitābha. Sounds the same in Chinese as well, its a form of the power of words can not be translated, or it will lose its charms, its said that THIS Buddha has wishes to save anyone called his name for help, so much like calling God to help, Buddhism is as practical as other religion. And its probably a recent "inventions", since not all sects in Buddhism share this believes, its rooted later THE Buddha founded Buddhism.

[Criptfeind]

I was just wondering what religion you were talking about that promoted hate.

You know what. Screw it. I was trying to write a big long specific rebuttal, but I could not find any groups of people that were more then something like 5% Buddhist. I can't make a comparison between them because there is nothing to use as the Buddhist side of it.

Anyway, instead of a in-depth comparison I am just going to leave you with what were going to be my closing thoughts on it.

If you are using a a seven (or two depending on what part you read) thousand year book to build your arguments, how are you any better then the fundamentalist bible thumpers that you seem to think all Christians are?

[Bohandas]

Issues of...
... abortion and stem cell research (Human well-being is secondary to God's will).
There's a few for starters. Did you even have to ask?

These two are more about how you define "human" than an inherently religious question.



Edit: Also, There are some who would arue that decrying mainstream religion for being pro-violence and then also decrying it for being anti-abortion is a hypocritical stance.

[G-Flex]

Issues of...
... abortion and stem cell research (Human well-being is secondary to God's will).
There's a few for starters. Did you even have to ask?

These two are more about how you define "human" than an inherently religious question.

Yes, but some choose to define "human" in religious terms, so it becomes one.